The Superpower That Is China

When Japan rebuilt itself after World War II and became an economic powerhouse in a single generation, the world called it the "Japanese Miracle". When South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore soared from poverty to prosperity, they were celebrated as the "Four Asian Tigers". 

But when China does exactly the same thing – actually, on a scale far more massive than any of them – Western media calls it the "China Shock". Same playbook. Different label. 

What changed? 

A Costa Rican economist named Ottón Solís had written an essay, titled "US negotiating more than trade", that was published in October 2025, on the platform Latinoamérica21 (and syndicated via China Daily). It cuts through this double standard with refreshing clarity and resounding cogency.

Let's walk through his argument, because it's definitely worth hearing. 

What China Actually Did 

Over the past decade, China has become a global leader in electric vehicles, AI, batteries, biotech, renewable energy, robotics, and semiconductors. It didn't just catch up – in many areas, it pulled ahead. 

The Western response? "Overcapacity". "Production surplus". "State-driven distortion". 

But as Solís points out, the same strategies – state-guided industrial policy, massive investment in education and infrastructure, a focus on long-term planning, and a stable political environment – were precisely what powered Japan and the Asian Tigers. 

Yet when Japan did it, it was a miracle. When China does it, it's a threat. 

The Real Outcomes 

Here's what "overcapacity" actually means in practice: 

First, millions of middle‑ and low‑income consumers around the world now have access to affordable cars, phones, solar panels, and other industrial products. This is not a bad thing. 

Second, the global fight against climate change became far more effective because high‑quality renewable energy equipment is now cheap enough for developing countries to afford. 

Third, Western industries that are less productive and high‑cost can't compete. And instead of asking why their own industries became uncompetitive, Western politicians are blaming China for being... too efficient. 

The Factors Western Politicians Refuse to Talk About 

Solís lists five factors behind China's success: 

• A vast domestic market that enables economies of scale. 
• High savings and investment rates – driven by cultural attitudes and policy choices. 
• Policy continuity and political stability. 
• Massive investment in education, infrastructure, energy, and R&D. 
• A coherent development strategy that includes industrial policy alongside market forces. 

Now, ask yourself: which of these factors is uniquely Chinese? 

None of them. 

Western countries could boost their savings rates through fiscal and monetary policy – if their political systems were willing to make those choices. They could invest more in education, infrastructure, and science – if they were willing to cut military spending or raise taxes on billionaires. They could reach cross‑party agreements to ensure policy continuity – if their politicians prioritized national strategy over short‑term electoral victories. 

But they don't. 

And then they blame China for their own political failures. 

The Uncomfortable Conclusion 

Solís's argument is simple: Western politicians have a choice. They can keep blaming China, stoking anti‑China rhetoric, and risking global peace. Or they can look at what China did right, learn from it, and apply those lessons within their own political and economic systems. But that would require acknowledging that China's success is not a fluke or a cheat – it's the result of deliberate, long‑term strategies that any country could adopt, if its leaders had the will. 

Instead, they double down on the narrative that China is somehow "unfair", while refusing to examine their own shortcomings.