What is behind the 'China shock' concoction

by Xinhua writer Li Jiacong

BEIJING, March 8 (Xinhua) -- Western media outlets are known for their knack of coining new terms to diffuse the "China threat" theory, and their latest invention is the "China shock."

By insinuating that China's export products pose a threat to other economies, the intent is clear: to curb China's development and its economic ties with the world.

Currently, while the global inflation pressure has slightly abated, it continues to present a significant challenge to the global economy, with major advanced economies still grappling to meet their central banks' inflation targets, and ordinary people struggling to pay their bills because of rising prices.

Amidst this economic backdrop, China has emerged as a pivotal force in curbing global inflation. With its resilient manufacturing industries, China can provide affordable and quality goods and services, thereby contributing substantially to the containment of inflation worldwide.

Even The Wall Street Journal, a pioneer in hyping up the so-called "China shock" this time, has to admit that a study found in 2019 that consumer prices in the United States for goods fell 2 percent for every extra percentage point of market share by Chinese imports, with the biggest benefits felt by people on low and middle incomes.

China's trade and economic partnerships with other countries go beyond mere exportation of goods. They are not winner-take-all scenarios, but forged by equal consultation and characterized by shared benefits and sustainable development.

Beijing actively helps foster the development of developing countries through technology transfer, financing, and training initiatives. These endeavors accelerate their industrialization processes, nurturing potential for future growth.

Take the Mombasa-Nairobi Standard Gauge Railway as an example. With China's input, the project, which links Kenya's two biggest cities, has reduced travel time and the costs of freight service, stimulating commerce and investments along its corridor. The railway has also created nearly 50,000 job opportunities, and trained more than 1,700 railway technicians and management professionals.

Yet U.S. media outlets like The Wall Street Journal have chosen to ignore those obvious facts as they rack their brains in their make-China-look-bad terminology workshops. Their deceitful inventions, many of which smell of the globally rejected "decoupling" theories, can fool no sober mind.

Talking about the cost of "decoupling" from China, the Nihon Keizai Shimbun said in an article that cutting off imports from China would cost Japan 53 trillion yen (353 billion U.S. dollars) in lost revenue, which is equivalent to 10 percent of Japan's annual GDP losses.

The article warned that "decoupling" would make everything in the world much more expensive at a time when global supply chains have been hit hard by geopolitical conflicts.

Gary Clyde Hufbauer, a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, argued that whether labeled as "decoupling" or "de-risking," the United States is steering towards the misguided path of neo-mercantilism which emphasizes trade restrictions.

While close economic cooperation and a more open world economy are desperately needed for global economic recovery, drumming for protectionism is the last thing the world needs.