After flooding took out most of the world's magnetic hard drive manufacturing capacity, it seemed clear that absolute efficiency in the immediate sense was the enemy of a robust long term manufacturer. I'm not sure why human v human threats are being heeded when nature v human ones were not, but diversifying your locations absolutely makes sense. There are some geographic constraints to where locating fabs make sense. And cost of living has to be balanced with the need for knowledge workers.
If you ran TSMC and you wanted to be sure no single disaster or war destroyed your whole manufacturing capability, where would you put the fabs? China's coast seems too close disaster wise and the same war that would dust your TW masks might destroy those too. Middle east maybe for climate and shipping logistics? Then one in the EU, perhaps spain? North america is probably third choice, and between climate and cartels that probably means the US. If third pick is paying you to go there, maybe it does make good sense.
I think you are certainly right, but why focus on Asia exclusively as a second fab location? One earthquake could flood all of them. As I said, oil giants in the middle east trying to diversify seems pretty ideal. I only suggested EU for the knowledge workers and it faces a different ocean.
From a geopolitical standpoint, US investment in Vietnam’s manufacturing capability would put pressure on China. China is trying to move up the value chain with Vietnam already eating their lunch on the low end.
Your post looks like a rationalization of your own purchasing decisions. If this is a correct observation I would self reflect on your own biases.