> The statement did not detail why it thought the firm's operations were risky. A spokesperson for the minister of economic affairs told the BBC there was no further information to share.
It is asserted, on trust, that the NL government are acting within the terms of the contract, but there is no transparency at all about the basis for this happening.
> The Hague said it took the decision due to "serious governance shortcomings" and to prevent the chips from becoming unavailable in an emergency.
This strongly implies they think some event will occur involving them cutting supplies.
I half wonder if this is a similar situation to that which unfolded at that steel plant in the UK. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg17g39x41o
Or does it? You seem closer to the action.
The fact that this is a mechanism that has been only extremely reluctantly used is proof positive that NL is open for business, and I'm pretty sure this will have immediate consequences for further acquisitions of EU tech by Chinese companies.
Dutch credibility took a hit when they sold it in the first place, imo that should have never happened. This is damage control, there were some pretty strict rules put in place around the acquisition and there were - strong - signals that these rules were not respected.