Not a China 'shock,' but a China opportunity

Editor's note: Shao Xia is a special commentator on international affairs for CGTN. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

In recent months, some Western politicians and media outlets have revived the rhetoric of "China Shock 2.0." Their argument is familiar: Chinese industries, allegedly subsidized by the Chinese government, have created an "overcapacity" that threatens to flood global markets with vast quantities of goods and overrun advanced manufacturing in Europe and the United States.

The "China Shock" narrative first emerged over two decades ago, after China acceded to the WTO – it warned that inexpensive Chinese goods would crush global markets. History, however, has told a different story. China did not drag the world down. It delivered enormous benefits to consumers and producers in developing and developed economies alike.  

Today's "China Shock 2.0" narrative is the same flawed logic in new packaging. Chinese manufacturing should not be perceived as a problem to be contained, but a source of opportunities to be seized.

First, Chinese manufacturing has made life better for ordinary people. Households worldwide have purchased Chinese-made products not under coercion, but by choice. International trade is built on comparative advantage, and consumers choose Chinese commodities for their quality and value for money.

China's strength also lies in its versatility. The same product or design is often adapted to meet diverse needs of different markets: Electric three-wheelers for Southeast Asia are designed with waterproofing, dust protection and shock absorption in mind; e-bikes for Europe focus on light weight, low noise and compliance with environmental standards, while models sold in Africa and Latin America prioritize long range, heavy loads and durability.  

Good value for money matters too. At a time of high inflation in Europe and the United States, affordable Chinese goods have acted as a pressure valve for household budgets. Research summarized by the Cato Institute found that a one-percentage-point rise in import penetration from China brought US consumer prices down by about 1.9%. For working families, that is not a "shock." It is a relief.

Second, Chinese manufacturing has created more opportunities for the world. The "China Shock" narrative assumes a zero-sum world: When China wins, others must lose. But the global industrial ecosystem does not have to work that way.

China's green industries are a clear example. By exporting wind power equipment, solar panels, electric vehicles and batteries, China has helped turn clean energy from an expensive option into an accessible tool. This is especially important for developing countries, which need affordable new technology to industrialize without repeating the high-carbon path of the past. China does not pull up the ladder after climbing it; it extends a hand to help others up.

Additionally, China is helping more regions connect to global supply chains. In 2025, Chinese companies signed $258 billion worth of new project contracts in Belt and Road Initiative partner countries and recorded $152.6 billion in turnover.

China-Europe freight trains have made more than 120,000 trips, while the New International Land-Sea Trade Corridor reaches hundreds of ports in more than 120 countries. Behind these figures are roads, railways, ports, jobs and new pathways to upward mobility.

China is also opening its own market wider. Starting from May 1, 2026, China expanded zero-tariff treatment to all 53 African countries with which it has diplomatic relations. Meanwhile, foreign investment restrictions in China's manufacturing sector have been removed, and service-sector opening continues to advance. The better question is not "Why is China getting prosperous?" but "How can others prosper alongside China?"

Third, Chinese manufacturing drives innovation and cooperation, not just trade flows. Europe's debate over trade restrictions reveals a dangerous confusion: mistaking protection for competitiveness.

Consider autos. The number of Chinese-made cars imported into the EU jumped from around 750,000 in 2023 to over one million in 2025. Yet Europe's difficulties run deeper than Chinese competition. German car sales in 2025 remained well below 2019 levels, and the broader EU market has lost substantial volume. Even without Chinese EVs, Europe's auto industry would still face a grueling transition.

A closed market may offer temporary comfort, but it cannot build the future. Competition forces companies to innovate, cut costs and accelerate the green transition. Chinese firms entering Europe are not merely selling products; they are investing, building factories and forging partnerships.  

For example, BYD is constructing a new-energy vehicle base in Hungary; CATL has opened a battery factory in Germany; Leapmotor is collaborating with Stellantis; and Chery is pursuing local production in Spain and the UK.

Many European business leaders see this clearly. Oliver Zipse, chairman of the board of management of BMW AG, has called additional tariffs the wrong direction, while Volkswagen has warned that anti-subsidy duties will not strengthen Europe's car industry in the long run. Rather than shelter behind barriers, these companies are partnering with Chinese firms on electric vehicles, batteries and autonomous-driving technologies.

As Imran Khalid, a Pakistani scholar, wrote in Asia Times: "The 'China Shock 2.0' is not a threat to be contained, but an opportunity for global optimization." That captures the real issue. The world needs affordable green technology, lower inflation, better infrastructure and broader development – and Chinese manufacturing helps deliver all four.

If that is a "shock," it is the kind the world needs for it brings not a crisis, but a productivity dividend; not a threat, but a shared opportunity.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)