ASML’s dominance in advanced chipmaking has put the Dutch company at the centre of a dispute over how far to restrict exports to China. A new RUSI commentary argues that the Netherlands should resist further US-led curbs, weighing their security case against the commercial and strategic leverage Europe could lose.
ASML Watch analysis
What happened
Lasse de Graaf’s commentary for the Royal United Services Institute says the Netherlands has pushed back against the proposed US MATCH Act, which would further limit ASML’s exports to China. The piece says Prime Minister Rob Jetten raised the issue with US President Donald Trump.
De Graaf describes ASML as the world’s only maker of extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, essential equipment for manufacturing the most advanced chips. He argues that restrictions might slow Chinese chipmaking in the short term but could also spur Beijing to invest harder in domestic alternatives. The commentary notes that China is forecast to account for 20% of ASML’s total revenue in 2026, mainly from less advanced lithography tools.
Why it matters
This is not just a dispute over one company’s sales. ASML’s equipment sits deep in the supply chain for advanced chips used in AI and other industries, giving export decisions consequences well beyond the Netherlands. De Graaf argues that Europe’s dependence on ASML’s technological lead also gives it leverage in dealings with China.
That leverage cuts both ways. The commentary points to Beijing’s sanctions on Sindlhauser Materials, an ASML supplier, as an example of how export-control disputes can bring commercial pressure back along the supply chain. The choice is not simply between security and business; it is also about who gets to set the terms when those interests collide.
Our read
De Graaf makes a case for caution, not for treating ASML’s market position as a veto on export controls. The useful point is that restrictions can have costs as well as benefits, including incentives for China to build alternatives and risks to suppliers caught in the crossfire. RUSI’s argument is an attributed policy view, not proof that further controls would fail.
What to watch
- Whether the Netherlands takes a firmer public position on the proposed MATCH Act.
- How Washington and The Hague handle export licensing and coordination.
- Whether pressure on ASML’s suppliers grows as the policy dispute continues.
Discussion spark: Should the Netherlands resist tighter US export controls to preserve Europe’s leverage, or accept the commercial cost to limit China’s access to advanced chipmaking technology?
Sources and evidence
- Why the Netherlands Must Hold the Line on ASML – Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) (27 October 2026, 12:10 UTC)
- Source update (27 October 2026, 12:10 UTC)
Independent WittyWires tracker for public updates about ASML. Not affiliated with or endorsed by ASML; this is not an official account.