chip

It has been more than four years since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, expanding its occupation of Ukrainian lands, which started in 2014. In the chaos and violence of the first months of the invasion, families were separated, and childcare institutions were cut off from the control of the central authorities in Kyiv. As a result, the occupation forces forcibly transferred more than 20,000 Ukrainian children to Russia.

Russian officials claimed that they did not abduct Ukrainian children, but “saved” them through humanitarian evacuations. However, international investigations have since found that many such transfers were unlawful under international humanitarian law. In many documented cases, transfers were carried out without the consent of the living parent or legal guardians of the child.

International humanitarian law prohibits all forcible transfers and deportations of protected people from occupied territory, except for evacuations strictly required to ensure the population’s safety. Even then, evacuation must happen within occupied territory, be temporary, preserve family unity and return evacuees home as soon as hostilities cease.

Today, the lives of thousands of Ukrainian children are devastated by this forcible transfer. Instead of abiding by international legal obligations and returning them to their homeland, Russia has transformed the issue into yet another bargaining chip against the Ukrainian people.

But Ukraine refuses to abandon its children. For the past four years, there have been intense efforts from families, NGOs and the Ukrainian government to bring them back.

Take the case of Lesya (the name has been changed to protect her identity), whose testimony was recorded by The Reckoning Project— a global team of journalists and lawyers documenting and publicising atrocities committed in the war. Lesya was 15 years old when Russian forces occupied her village in the Kherson region in 2022. When the occupation authorities imposed a mandatory evacuation, she was put on a truck with more than 30 other children and was sent to a rehabilitation centre in Feodosia, Crimea. A woman accompanying the children told her that her mother would join her shortly.

At the facility, Lesya and other Ukrainian children were subjected to a strict routine, forced to do chores and study in Russian, using Russian textbooks. They were kept under surveillance indoors most of the time in a building with windows that could not be opened. Two days a week, the children underwent military training.

Eventually, a relative located her, and with the help of Save Ukraine, a Ukrainian NGO facilitating children’s return, her mother managed to bring her back.

But Lesya’s case is the exception rather than the rule. More than 2,000 Ukrainian children have been brought back thanks to efforts by NGOs, the government and foreign mediators.

Pressure through international institutions has also been pursued, but that has not accelerated the process of return.

In March 2023, the International Criminal Court issued warrants of arrest for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova for the unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children.

In July 2025, the European Court of Human Rights, in Ukraine and the Netherlands v Russia, found Russia responsible for a number of human rights violations, including the organised removal of children. The court also required Russia to cooperate in establishing a mechanism to find and safely return children.

In March this year, the United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine concluded that Russia’s deportation and forcible transfer of Ukrainian children amount to crimes against humanity. The report identifies the removal of Ukrainian children as a part of a well-planned and systematically executed policy, conceived at the highest level.

On May 11, the European Union sanctioned 16 individuals and seven entities, while the United Kingdom sanctioned 29 individuals and entities responsible for the deportation, forced transfer, forced assimilation, indoctrination, militarisation and unlawful adoption of Ukrainian children. Overall, the EU has sanctioned more than 130 people and organisations for these actions. The United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, Switzerland and several other countries have introduced similar measures.

The lack of progress on this issue has driven families to desperation. Some have tried to bring their children back on their own or through often-daring missions by Save Ukraine and five other Ukrainian NGOs.

There should be no need for these risky missions. Under international humanitarian law, Russia is obligated to identify and register Ukrainian children in their care, facilitate family reunification, and permit access to neutral actors assisting Ukrainian children.

As negotiations for the end of the war have stalled and other global events have displaced Ukraine from global headlines, we urgently need to put the issue of the abducted Ukrainian children back in the spotlight.

There are several areas in which existing efforts can expand.

First, a comprehensive tracing mechanism needs to be established and financed to track abducted Ukrainian children and prevent their disappearance into dispersed care and adoption systems.

Second, ongoing legal efforts to hold to account Russian officials involved in the abduction should be intensified. This means coordinated prosecutions in states where the universal jurisdiction principle can be applied, as well as joint investigation strategies supported by Eurojust, the EU’s judicial hub. Ukraine’s partners should support its judicial processes launched against Russian officials and cooperate where needed, including through extraditions where legally applicable and other lawful transfer mechanisms. While justice may be slow, the prospect of accountability can have a deterrent effect.

Third, states can and should fully implement sanctions, trade restrictions and other obligations they assumed but did not consistently observe in practice. The sanctions regime on Russia has severely hurt its economy, but it has also seen continuous evasion. A strict implementation can help put more pressure on the regime in Moscow.

While stories of family reunions are heartening, they are just a drop in a bucket compared with the number of children who continue to be separated from their families and absorbed into a system of indoctrination and militarisation.

We must not allow the issue of returning Ukrainian children to be yet another negotiating chip for Moscow. It cannot be put on hold because negotiations have stalled or because other priorities have captured the world’s attention.

Four years is a long time in a child’s life. Each passing day further erodes their national identity and deepens the pain of separation, as they grow up in a hostile environment. There is no principle more universal than the belief that children belong with their parents and loved ones, and Ukrainian children deserve this basic human right today, not at some point in the future.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Department of Commerce issues guidance on chip restrictions amid concerns about loopholes in export control regime.

The United States has issued a notice affirming its restrictions on shipments of semiconductors to subsidiaries of Chinese companies located outside China amid concerns about loopholes in Washington’s export control regime.

The Department of Commerce said in the guidance issued on Sunday that its licensing requirements for the export of advanced AI chips applied to all businesses with headquarters or a parent company in China.

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), which falls under the Commerce Department, said it issued the clarification in response to questions about whether it was enforcing preexisting licence requirements after it had overturned former President Joe Biden’s AI Diffusion Framework.

“The answer is yes,” the BIS said in the notice.

Unveiled in the final days of the Biden administration, the AI Diffusion proposed the implementation of a globe-spanning framework to control access to AI chips, including export caps for all but the closest US allies.

The framework drew backlash from tech firms, including Nvidia, the world’s most valuable chip company, which cast the proposal as a threat to innovation and cross-border collaboration.

President Donald Trump’s administration scrapped the framework last May, ahead of its implementation, citing the “burdensome new regulatory requirements” and the harm it would do to Washington’s diplomatic relations with other countries.

Chip giant Nvidia, whose top-of-the-line Blackwell GPUs are banned for export to China, said it had already been operating in keeping with the clarified rules.

“The guidance reaffirms that NVIDIA’s sales and vetting process is correct – consistent with our existing approach, licences are required to ship controlled products to PRC headquartered companies,” a Nvidia spokesperson told Al Jazeera, using the acronym for the People’s Republic of China.

AMD and Intel, Nvidia’s main competitors in the GPU space, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

TSMC, which manufactures the most advanced chips on behalf of clients such as Nvidia, did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The BIS also did not respond to inquiries.

Chris McGuire, a former State Department official who worked on technology policy in the Biden administration, accused the Trump administration of providing Chinese companies a loophole to buy export-controlled chips.

“Chinese companies have been buying these chips, very likely at scale. And because BIS has not updated export control regulations to clearly state what it IS enforcing, all of this was legal,” McGuire said in a post on X.

“This clarification does make clear that Blackwell shipments to China-headquartered companies outside of China are now illegal again – which is good, although obviously we have to see how many shipments have already gone to assess how much damage was done,” McGuire said.

“BIS’ statement acknowledges these shipments have been happening when it says companies who bought chips under this loophole don’t have to stop using them.”

The US has rolled out numerous restrictions on the supply of high-end technology to China, as Washington and Beijing battle for dominance in AI.

In December, Trump announced that he would allow Nvidia to sell its H200 chip to China, in a major loosening of Washington’s export controls.

While not Nvidia’s most advanced chip, the H200 is about six times as powerful as the H20, the most advanced chip previously allowed for export to China.

The latest developments surrounding Nvidia’s H200 chip sales to China highlight the growing complexity of the technological rivalry between the United States and China. Although Washington has reportedly approved several major Chinese firms to purchase Nvidia’s advanced artificial intelligence chips, no deliveries have taken place so far.

The situation reflects how geopolitical competition is increasingly disrupting even officially approved commercial agreements in the semiconductor sector.

Nvidia, the world’s leading artificial intelligence chip manufacturer, now finds itself caught between United States export control policies and China’s push for technological self reliance.

What Is the H200 Chip?

The H200 is Nvidia’s second most powerful artificial intelligence chip and is designed for advanced AI model training and data center operations.

The chip is particularly valuable for companies developing large language models, cloud computing systems, and next generation AI applications.

Before export restrictions tightened, Nvidia dominated China’s advanced AI chip market with an estimated market share of around 95 percent.

China also represented a major source of revenue for Nvidia, making access to the Chinese market strategically important for the company’s long term growth.

Which Chinese Companies Were Approved?

According to reports, the United States Commerce Department approved around ten Chinese firms to purchase H200 chips.

These reportedly include major Chinese technology companies such as:

• Alibaba
• Tencent
• ByteDance
• JD.com

Several distributors were also reportedly approved, including:

Under the licensing terms, each approved customer could reportedly purchase up to 75,000 chips.

However, despite these approvals, no actual sales or deliveries have yet been completed.

Why Have the Sales Stalled?

The delays appear to stem from concerns on both the United States and Chinese sides.

Chinese Concerns

Chinese authorities reportedly fear that reliance on Nvidia chips could undermine Beijing’s efforts to strengthen its domestic semiconductor industry.

China has invested heavily in local AI chip development, particularly through companies such as Huawei.

Beijing increasingly sees semiconductor self sufficiency as a national security priority amid escalating technological competition with Washington.

There are also concerns within China regarding supply chain security and possible vulnerabilities linked to imported American technology.

Recent Chinese regulations aimed at reducing foreign dependence in critical technology sectors have reportedly intensified scrutiny of these chip purchases.

United States Restrictions

The United States has simultaneously imposed strict export control requirements on advanced semiconductor sales to China.

Chinese buyers must reportedly prove that the chips will not be used for military purposes and that adequate security procedures are in place.

Nvidia must also satisfy inventory and compliance conditions under American export laws.

Additionally, reports suggest the Trump administration negotiated an unusual arrangement in which the United States would receive a portion of revenue generated from the chip sales. This reportedly requires the chips to pass through American territory before shipment to China.

Such conditions have further complicated the transaction process.

Jensen Huang’s Diplomatic Push

Nvidia Chief Executive Officer Jensen Huang has emerged as a key figure in efforts to preserve Nvidia’s access to the Chinese market.

Huang reportedly joined President Donald Trump during a diplomatic visit linked to talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

His participation underscores the economic significance of the semiconductor dispute and the importance of China to Nvidia’s business strategy.

Huang has repeatedly warned that export controls risk permanently weakening Nvidia’s position in China while encouraging Chinese firms to accelerate domestic alternatives.

The Larger Strategic Battle

The Nvidia dispute reflects a broader struggle between the United States and China over technological dominance in artificial intelligence.

Washington increasingly views advanced semiconductor technology as a strategic national security asset. American policymakers fear that unrestricted access to advanced AI chips could strengthen China’s military and technological capabilities.

China, meanwhile, sees semiconductor independence as essential to reducing vulnerability to foreign pressure and sanctions.

As a result, both sides are attempting to balance economic interests with long term strategic competition.

Implications for the Global AI Industry

The uncertainty surrounding Nvidia’s China business could have major implications for the global artificial intelligence industry.

If Chinese companies lose access to Nvidia chips, they may accelerate investment in domestic alternatives, potentially reshaping the global semiconductor market over time.

At the same time, restrictions on AI chip trade risk fragmenting the global technology ecosystem into competing American and Chinese spheres.

This could reduce international collaboration, disrupt supply chains, and intensify geopolitical competition over emerging technologies.

Future Outlook

Despite current delays, neither the United States nor China appears willing to completely sever technological and commercial ties.

However, the Nvidia case demonstrates that semiconductor trade between the two powers is becoming increasingly politicized and strategically sensitive.

The future of AI competition may ultimately depend not only on innovation, but also on which country can build the most resilient and independent technology ecosystem.

For Nvidia, maintaining its position between the world’s two largest economies will likely remain one of its greatest strategic challenges.

Conclusion

The stalled Nvidia H200 deal illustrates how deeply geopolitical tensions now shape the global technology industry.

Although the United States has approved limited chip exports to China, political distrust, national security concerns, and strategic competition continue to obstruct implementation.

As artificial intelligence becomes central to economic and military power, semiconductor trade is no longer simply a commercial issue. It has become a defining arena in the broader contest between Washington and Beijing for technological leadership in the twenty first century.

With information from Reuters,

South Korean stocks shot up nearly 6.5 percent Wednesday, extending a record-breaking run to top the 7,300-point mark, driven by a semiconductor rally and optimism for a potential peace deal in the Middle East. The local currency also strengthened against the U.S. dollar.

The benchmark Korea Composite Stock Price Index (KOSPI) added 447.57 points, or 6.45 percent, to a fresh record high of 7,384.56.

It marked the second-largest daily gain in terms of points following 490.36 points reached on March 5.

Trade volume was heavy at 984.4 million shares worth 58.2 trillion won (US$40 billion), with losers outnumbering winners 199 to 677.

Foreigners bought 3.1 trillion won worth of local shares, while institutions and individuals dumped a net 2.3 trillion won and 571.2 billion won, respectively.

Overnight, U.S. President Donald Trump said he would pause operations to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz as part of efforts to reach a final agreement with Iran.

The KOSPI opened 2.25 percent higher to surpass the landmark 7,000-point threshold for the first time and extended the gains throughout the session.

The main index has been on a bullish run in recent months, surpassing the 5,000-point mark in late January and topping another milestone of 6,000 points in February.

After recouping its losses in March following the outbreak of the U.S.-Iran war in late February, the KOSPI breached the 7,000-point level on continued optimism over the artificial intelligence (AI) boom and hopes for the reopening of the key waterway.

“Global tech giants’ strong performances and the strengthened value chain for AI data centers boosted the AI-related shares,” Lee Kyung-min, an analyst at Daishin Securities, said. “In particular, the market’s top-three shares of Samsung Electronics, SK hynix and SK Square led the rally.”

Top-cap Samsung Electronics surged 14.41 percent to close at 266,000 won, pushing its market capitalization above 1.5 quadrillion won and becoming the second Asian company to surpass the $1 trillion milestone after Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.

SK hynix soared 10.64 percent to 1.6 million won, and AI investment firm SK Square jumped 9.89 percent to 1.1 million won.

Hanmi Semiconductor, a chip manufacturing company, rose 4.37 percent to 394,500 won, and LG Electronics vaulted 8.17 percent to 154,900 won.

However, shipbuilding and defense shares dropped. Major shipyard HD Hyundai Heavy Industries fell 4.71 percent to 648,000 won, and defense giant Hanwha Aerospace lost 2.18 percent to 1.4 million won.

Leading biotech firm Samsung Biologics declined 0.34 percent to 1.48 million won, and top mobile carrier SK Telecom backtracked 1.95 percent to 95,500 won.

The Korean won was quoted at 1,455.1 won against the U.S. dollar at 3:30 p.m., up 7.7 won from the previous session.

The quotation marks the highest since February 27, when the currency closed at 1,439.7 to the greenback.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

South Korean stocks shot up by more than 5 percent to close at a fresh high Monday, approaching the 7,000-point mark, as investors scooped up semiconductor shares while awaiting developments in U.S.-Iran peace talks. The Korean won rose sharply against the U.S. dollar.

The benchmark Korea Composite Stock Price Index (KOSPI) added 338.12 points, or 5.12 percent, to a fresh record high of 6,936.99.

Trade volume was heavy at 864.3 million shares worth 41.3 trillion won (US$28.2 billion), with losers outnumbering winners 473 to 392.

Foreigners bought 3 trillion won worth of local shares, and institutions purchased a net 1.9 trillion won, while retail investors dumped a net 4.8 trillion won.

The index opened 2.79 percent higher after U.S. President Donald Trump announced a plan to guide ships not involved in the Iran conflict through the Strait of Hormuz as a “humanitarian gesture” starting this week.

Later, a senior Iranian official warned that Tehran would consider any U.S. interference in the strait a ceasefire breach.

However, the KOSPI extended its gains in the afternoon, supported by foreign and institutional buying.

“Tech shares were driven by gains on Wall Street over the weekend,” Lee Kyung-min, an analyst at Daishin Securities, said. “Also, foreign investors expanded their net purchase ahead of the market closure for Children’s Day on Tuesday.”

The main index surpassed the 5,000-point mark in late January and topped another milestone of the 6,000-point level in February.

After recouping its losses in March following the outbreak of the U.S.-Iran war in late February, the KOSPI is now approaching the uncharted 7,000-point level on continued optimism over the AI boom and hopes for the reopening of the key waterway.

Semiconductor stocks led the rally.

Chip giant Samsung Electronics jumped 5.44 percent to 232,500 won, and its chipmaking rival SK hynix surged 12.52 percent to a fresh record high of 1.4 million won, surpassing 10 trillion won in market capitalization for the first time.

Hanmi Semiconductor, a chip equipment manufacturer, rose 2.72 percent to 378,000 won, and Samsung Electro-Mechanics, an electronic components affiliate of Samsung Electronics Co., soared 10.34 percent to 918,000 won.

Defense shares were also strong as industry leader Hanwha Aerospace advanced 3.39 percent to 1.4 million won and LIG D&A gained 4.46 percent to 983,000 won.

Top carmaker Hyundai Motor climbed 1.51 percent to 539,000 won, and leading battery maker LG Energy Solution increased 2.5 percent to 472,000 won.

However, bio shares went south as Celltrion fell 1.35 percent to 197,800 won, and Samsung Biologics dropped 2.58 percent to 1.4 million won.

The Korean won was quoted at 1,462.8 won against the U.S. dollar at 3:30 p.m., up 20.5 won from the previous session.

The quotation marks the highest since February 27, when the currency closed at 1,439.7 to the greenback.

Bond prices, which move inversely to yields, closed lower. The yield on three-year Treasurys added 2 basis points to 3.615 percent, while the return on the benchmark five-year government bonds gained 1.7 basis points to 3.797 percent.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

April 23 (Asia Today) — A former Samsung Electronics manager was sentenced to 6 years and 4 months in prison on Thursday in a retrial over charges that he leaked key semiconductor technology to a Chinese competitor.

The Seoul High Court also fined the former manager, identified by his surname Kim, 200 million won ($145,000).

The ruling came after South Korea’s Supreme Court sent the case back for a new trial, saying lower courts had wrongly treated some acts involving trade secret disclosure as part of a single offense rather than separate crimes.

Kim was accused of illegally leaking Samsung Electronics’ 18-nanometer DRAM process technology, classified as a national core technology, to Chinese memory chipmaker ChangXin Memory Technologies, also known as CXMT. He was indicted and detained in 2024. He was also accused of leaking technical data belonging to another company.

The appeals court said Kim had illegally acquired Samsung trade secrets and used them in China, calling the offense extremely serious.

The court said violations involving industrial technology, trade secrets and national core technologies waste the massive time and money invested in developing DRAM technology, severely undermine fair business order and could damage national competitiveness.

Two other defendants tried in the same case also received sentences after parts of the earlier acquittals were overturned. A former executive at a partner company was sentenced to three months in prison, while a company employee received a two-month prison term suspended for one year.

In the first trial, Kim was sentenced to seven years in prison after the court found him guilty on most charges related to trade secret leaks. The second trial upheld much of that reasoning but reduced the sentence to six years, citing findings that he had not directly participated in leaking some of Samsung’s core technology.

The Supreme Court later reversed that judgment and ordered a retrial. It said obtaining or disclosing trade secrets among accomplices during the process of leaking technology overseas should be treated as distinct crimes.

The court said South Korea’s unfair competition law defines the acquisition, use and disclosure of trade secrets to third parties as independent offenses, and separately punishes the knowing use of such secrets.

On Tuesday, another former Samsung employee charged in a related case was sentenced to seven years in prison. Authorities said that case was uncovered during an additional investigation into Kim.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260423010007596

ASML occupies a critical position in the global semiconductor supply chain as the sole producer of extreme ultraviolet lithography systems. These machines are essential for manufacturing the most advanced chips used in artificial intelligence applications. As demand for AI computing has surged, driven by data centre expansion and high performance processing needs, the semiconductor industry has entered a new investment cycle focused on capacity growth.

Strong earnings and upgraded forecast

ASML reported first quarter earnings that exceeded expectations and raised its 2026 revenue outlook to between 36 billion and 40 billion euros. This revision signals stronger than anticipated order inflows and reinforces the scale of demand emerging from the AI sector.

The company’s performance reflects a broader trend in which chip demand is outpacing supply. According to CEO Christophe Fouquet, customers are accelerating expansion plans well beyond the near term, indicating confidence in sustained AI driven growth.

ASML as a strategic enabler of AI growth

Investors increasingly view ASML as a foundational player in the AI ecosystem rather than a conventional manufacturer. Its tools are used by leading chipmakers such as TSMC, which produces advanced processors for firms like Nvidia and Apple.

This positioning places ASML at the upstream end of the value chain. Instead of competing in chip design or production, it supplies the essential infrastructure that enables both. As a result, its growth is tied to the entire semiconductor sector rather than any single company.

Supply constraints and industrial limits

Despite strong demand, structural constraints remain significant. Semiconductor fabrication plants require years to build and involve complex global supply chains. ASML itself faces production bottlenecks due to the precision and cost of its machines, which can reach hundreds of millions of dollars per unit.

Even with plans to increase shipments of its leading systems in 2026 and 2027, capacity expansion is gradual. This creates a persistent imbalance where demand continues to exceed supply, reinforcing pricing power across the industry.

Geopolitical and regulatory risks

A key uncertainty for ASML lies in export controls, particularly regarding sales to China. Proposed restrictions in the United States, including the MATCH Act, could limit the company’s ability to supply Chinese customers. Currently, China represents a significant portion of ASML’s revenue.

However, the global shortage of advanced chips may mitigate this risk. Reduced access to one market could be offset by demand from others, especially as countries and companies compete to secure semiconductor supply chains.

Market response and valuation concerns

ASML’s share price has risen sharply, reflecting investor optimism around AI driven growth. The company is often described as a “picks and shovels” investment, benefiting from the broader expansion of the industry regardless of which firms dominate end products.

At the same time, analysts caution that valuations are elevated. The current pricing assumes sustained high growth, leaving limited room for setbacks related to supply constraints or regulatory changes.

Analysis

The upgrade in ASML’s forecast highlights a structural shift rather than a temporary cycle. AI is not only increasing demand for chips but also reshaping the entire semiconductor value chain. ASML’s monopoly in EUV technology gives it a unique strategic advantage, effectively making it a gatekeeper for next generation chip production.

However, this dominance also exposes the company to geopolitical pressures and operational challenges. The interplay between technological leadership, supply limitations, and regulatory dynamics will determine whether current growth trajectories can be maintained.

ASML’s stronger outlook underscores the depth of the AI driven semiconductor boom. While demand momentum remains robust, the company operates within a constrained and politically sensitive environment. Its future performance will depend on balancing rapid industry expansion with the physical and geopolitical limits shaping the global chip ecosystem.

With information from Reuters.