only if that military power is _used_. During WW2, the USA had to use that power of manufacture to win the war.
So unless you're suggesting that china is willing to go to a hot war with the US, and out manufacture military products to win it, this argument holds no water. and this isn't even taking into account nukes.
The only time you have wars is if either the military powers are nearly equal, or the demands are over-the-top unreasonable.
* China won't take over Taiwan while the US is defending Taiwan if the US can defeat China in open warfare.
* If things are close, it'll think twice about trying. That'd be an expensive bit of work.
* If China has clear military superiority, I think they'd topple Taiwan's government overnight. The US would back down.
The whole point of a big stick is that you don't have to use it. If I come up to you on the street, point a gun at you, and politely ask for your wallet, I'm much more likely to get your wallet than to need to use my gun.
I agree that for TSMC, market size is more important, but the blanket statement about global economic power is a little bit excessive. If we want to have COVID19 PPE, mass-produce medical equipment, or rapidly build military equipment, China can out-manufacture the US.
I know 2 of those three will be controversial (esp. military equipment), but I think they're true. The US military is probably superior to China's today, but the US had an inferior military at the start of WWII as well. However, the US was a manufacturing superpower and produced a superior military quite quickly. If China were to focus its manufacturing and engineering prowess on military technology, I think it would pass the US rather quickly at this point too. Yes, I'm aware of US technological superiority, and yes, I've seen estimates of how long it would take China to bridge the gap. No, I don't believe those estimates. I think there are a lot of mistaken assumptions in them, and it's to everyone's benefit (US' and China's) to believe the US is further ahead than it is.