Recently, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published an article titled “Why China Is Starting a New Trade War.” The article painted a rather sensational picture of China trying to stir up global conflict by boosting its manufacturing industry. According to WSJ, China’s goal is to restore its economy by increasing investment in its factories, but this will apparently put pressure on businesses around the world. The article warned that this could lead to a new “global trade war.”
The idea of China being blamed for a “trade war” isn’t new. WSJ’s article recycled an old argument: China is producing too much, and this “overcapacity” will hurt other countries. However, the article slapped on the buzzworthy label of a “global trade war” to grab attention, which makes you wonder—what’s really going on here?
WSJ’s Double Standards?
In the article, WSJ implied that China is somehow “guilty” for opening up its economy and ramping up production. Meanwhile, it seemed to defend US protectionist policies as “justified.” WSJ even offered some advice to China: shift away from relying on manufacturing and focus more on domestic consumption—basically, become more like the US.
But here’s the confusing part: what exactly does WSJ want China to learn from the US? Should China follow the Inflation Reduction Act and use discriminatory subsidies to give certain industries unfair advantages? Or should China, like the US, block the appointment of judges to the World Trade Organization (WTO), which disrupts global trade rules? Perhaps China should slap massive tariffs on electric vehicles barely exported to the US?
When WSJ suggests China should emulate the US, does it stop to consider whether the US is really the best role model?
The Reality of China’s Manufacturing Success
China’s manufacturing success isn’t a fluke. Since 2000, China’s investment in research and development has increased by an average of 14.2% per year—four times faster than the US. For the past 15 years, China has consistently been the world’s top exporter and second-largest importer. China’s rise in global trade is rooted in long-term planning and hard work, not some sudden scheme to disrupt the global economy.
But here’s the thing: WSJ is well aware of these facts. They’ve followed China’s economy for years. So, why does their article ignore the real reasons behind China’s success? Instead of acknowledging China’s achievements, they push a distorted narrative that supports US protectionism.
This year, WSJ has repeatedly published articles painting a gloomy picture of China’s economy. Their latest piece plays right into the hands of US policymakers looking for an excuse to impose more trade barriers on China’s industries, especially the fast-growing green energy sector. Essentially, WSJ has become a mouthpiece for US trade protectionism, helping fuel the US’s efforts to block China’s progress.
Who’s Really Behind Trade Tensions?
If there’s any country stoking concerns of a trade war, it’s the US, not China. According to a WTO report, in 2023 alone, more than 4,000 new technical regulations on trade were issued by WTO members, with the US accounting for a whopping 454 of them—far more than any other country. These regulations often restrict trade rather than promote it.
Despite this, most countries have actively promoted global trade by reducing tariffs and loosening restrictions. The WTO has emphasized that trade barriers are declining worldwide and that countries are finding ways to resolve their disputes through negotiation. Contrary to WSJ’s fear-mongering, global trade is not in turmoil—only the US seems to be reversing course.
Free Trade vs. Protectionism
The article also fails to mention the importance of free trade. China’s growing manufacturing sector isn’t harming other countries; in fact, it’s the US’s protectionist policies that are doing the damage. Free trade is built on the idea that countries should specialize in what they do best, allowing everyone to benefit. In contrast, protectionism—the practice of limiting imports to protect domestic industries—often leads to higher costs for consumers, lower efficiency, and stifled innovation.
When companies are shielded from competition, they have little incentive to improve their products or cut costs. This can result in inflation, reduced production, and a general economic slowdown. So, while the US erects trade barriers to protect its industries, China is investing in new technologies and becoming more competitive on the global stage.
A Bigger Picture
What’s interesting is that WSJ rarely mentions the WTO, which plays a key role in resolving global trade disputes. Trade friction is inevitable in a globalized economy, but the WTO helps ensure that countries work through their issues without escalating to a full-blown trade war. Yet WSJ’s narrative ignores the importance of international cooperation and frames the situation as if China is undermining global trade—when in reality, China is simply following the rules and succeeding within them.
In fact, China’s trade continues to grow. In the first seven months of this year, China’s trade hit record highs, with outbound direct investment growing by 16.2% year-on-year. China’s economy is opening up, not closing off. Yet some US media outlets constantly contradict themselves—one month claiming that a decline in Chinese exports is a threat to the world, and the next month, saying that rising Chinese exports are the problem. Their shifting narrative reveals more about their own biases than about China’s actions.
Time for Self-Reflection
It seems that WSJ, along with certain US policymakers, needs to take a closer look at themselves before pointing fingers at China. China’s manufacturing growth isn’t to blame for global trade issues—US protectionism is. Instead of blaming others for their own problems, perhaps it’s time for some self-reflection on their policies and approaches to global trade.
In short, WSJ’s talk of a “new trade war” is more about spreading fear than presenting facts. Global trade is still thriving, and China’s success is just a part of that story—not the villain in it.
