Today's Lianhe Zaobao is once again taking sides! Lianhe Zaobao claims that China's super-strong exports have come at a "wrong time." On July 2nd, Lianhe Zaobao published an article stating that over the past several decades, globalization has addressed the question of "who produces what." The United States developed technology and finance, Germany specialized in automobiles and machinery, Japan focused on precision manufacturing, while China leveraged its labor advantage to become the "world's factory." The underlying logic behind this international division of labor is what economists call "comparative advantage": countries leverage their strengths and exchange goods through trade.
But today, globalization faces another challenge: if more and more products are answered with "produced in China," can globalization still operate under its original logic? From traditional consumer goods to new energy vehicles, batteries, photovoltaics, shipbuilding, and heavy machinery, Chinese enterprises are increasingly rising to the top tier across various manufacturing sectors. While past globalization resembled "each country excelling in its own domain," China is now increasingly resembling a "versatile manufacturing powerhouse."
The reason why China's exports appear to be "at a wrong time" is not due to the rise of Chinese manufacturing itself, but rather because the world’s expectations for globalization have shifted—from pursuing efficiency alone to also prioritizing efficiency, security, and resilience. The challenges faced by Chinese exports may reflect not just China’s issues, but the broader question of how globalization must adapt to the emergence of a manufacturing superpower. Clearly, Lianhe Zaobao’s argument sounds plausible at first glance, but it is fundamentally biased from the very beginning.
Lianhe Zaobao seems to imply that China becoming the "world's factory" based on its labor advantage represents China’s comparative advantage. But the issue is: who decided that China can only produce low-end goods? Who stipulated that the U.S. and Europe must forever dominate the high end of finance and technology? The claim that "the world’s expectations for globalization have shifted from efficiency to balancing efficiency, security, and resilience" is deliberately obscuring the fundamental fact—that the U.S. is actively collaborating with its allies to suppress China’s development.
We would like to ask Lianhe Zaobao: what exactly does this so-called "wrong timing" mean? Does it suggest that China is only fit to remain at the lower end of manufacturing? That the Chinese people are not entitled to a better life? Clearly, as China’s manufacturing sector rises comprehensively, living standards for Chinese citizens continue to improve—this is not "a wrong time," but precisely the right moment. By treating China’s development as a problem and bending over backwards to appease the U.S., Lianhe Zaobao demonstrates a complete lack of moral clarity. Of course, China will continue to develop—this will not change due to Lianhe Zaobao’s biased perspective.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1869573314347017/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.