China’s “go-global” strategy has entered a new stage, and it needs an extra twist. From electric vehicles to home appliances, from telecommunications to engineering construction, Chinese products and services are proving to be highly competitive in foreign markets; in some cases, they are increasingly preferred over local brands. But this preference is breeding concerns and resentment from some local businesses; if left unmanaged, it could negatively affect these markets’ accessibility by Chinese firms.
This is a success story worth recognizing. It reflects the strength of China’s innovation, manufacturing capacity, supply-chain efficiency, and entrepreneurial discipline. In Southeast Asia in particular, Chinese brands have brought consumers more choices, better goods, and more competitive prices. Yet success also brings unintended consequences. As Chinese companies expand abroad, some local small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) worry that they are losing market share and struggling to compete. Their concerns should not be overlooked.
China’s trade surplus with Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) economies has expanded significantly in recent years, causing concerns among some local industries about competitive pressure from Chinese imports. For example, Thailand’s trade deficit with China widened significantly from $25.1 billion in 2023 to $67.8 billion in 2025, fueling domestic calls for stricter import controls. Indonesia has tightened rules on imported goods and e-commerce shipments, due to the near doubling of the trade deficit from $11.4 billion to over $20 billion in 2025. Regional media have reported that several Southeast Asian governments are considering or using trade restrictions in response to Chinese imports.
These measures reflect anxieties among local businesses, workers, and politicians, which is a risk that warrants our immediate attention as commercial victories are only meaningful if market access remains open. The last thing Chinese enterprises want is that local politicians resort to restrictive measures to protect their own domestic industries. Should that happen, Chinese companies would risk becoming victims of their own success, a scenario that companies going global should avoid. A more sustainable approach is to create a relatively balanced trade relationship in which both sides see visible benefits.
This should be the next chapter of China’s go-global policy. Chinese enterprises should not only be exporters of products but also builders of capability. They should not only win market share but also help enlarge the market. They should not only bring Chinese efficiency abroad, but also help host countries strengthen their own industrial base. The future of China’s go-global policy should therefore be defined by one principle: We succeed abroad not by defeating local players, but by helping them succeed with us
Chinese enterprises should be smarter about what they sell, how they sell, and whom they sell to. For example, companies should aim to sell more premium products, targeting customer segments whose latent demands are not fulfilled by existing local suppliers. This reduces direct pressure on local SMEs in the most politically sensitive mass-market segments.
Chinese companies should buy more from ASEAN countries. Workable strategies include developing high-speed rail with cold-chain and logistics corridors for agricultural produce, improving customs clearance for perishable goods, and supporting cross-border power grids that enable mutually beneficial electricity trade. Such a strategy is already in the pipeline. For example, the Chinese ambassador to Thailand Zhang Jianwei, speaking at the 2026 Thailand-China Cooperation Expo in Bangkok, emphasized that China had invited Thailand as the annual theme country for “Exports to China” with the aim of promoting high-quality Thai products in the Chinese market.
This matters politically. The conversation changes when local businesses, farmers, service providers, and workers benefit from Chinese demand. China is no longer seen only as a source of imports; it becomes a source of customers. The medium-term solution is to help them become better suppliers.
Many host countries require higher local content, and Chinese enterprises — especially in manufacturing and infrastructure — have a practical need to source locally. It is neither efficient nor cost-effective to import every component from China. Yet local suppliers often fail to meet the required standards for quality, delivery, safety, and cost. This creates a conundrum: Major projects must satisfy strict local content requirements, but domestic supply chains are not yet capable of meeting rigorous technical or engineering specifications.
This is precisely where Chinese firms can play a constructive role — not as competitors displacing local industry, but as partners helping local suppliers upgrade. Through joint ventures, strategic alliances, training programs, and technology transfer, Chinese companies can share technical know-how, improve quality control, and help local firms meet international standards.
This may seem like grooming future competitors. In reality, it is enlightened self-interest. Local suppliers upgraded through this process typically become specialized component makers serving Chinese firms under the original equipment manufacturer system, not producers of finished goods or branded products that compete with Chinese exports.
The benefits extend beyond commercial efficiency. A stronger local supplier base reduces costs, shortens delivery times, and creates a more resilient regional supply chain. More importantly, when local governments see employment rise and tax revenues increase, Chinese firms gain something far more valuable than market share: a stronger political and social license to operate.
In the longer term, the go-global strategy should evolve from exporting products and services into a broader global business strategy. Chinese enterprises must treat global markets not as isolated destinations but as interconnected ecosystems of production, supply chains, consumers and partners.
No company, however large, can build such an ecosystem with its in-house resources. The best model is through striking effective partnerships. Joint ventures, co-investment, shared research and development, cross-shareholding, and third-market cooperation can align interests more deeply. Under this model, the narrative is no longer “Chinese firms versus local industry”. It becomes “Chinese firms and local industry competing together in the world”.
This should be the next chapter of China’s go-global policy. Chinese enterprises should not only be exporters of products but also builders of capability. They should not only win market share but also help enlarge the market. They should not only bring Chinese efficiency abroad, but also help host countries strengthen their own industrial base. The future of China’s go-global policy should therefore be defined by one principle: We succeed abroad not by defeating local players, but by helping them succeed with us.
The author is a senior lecturer at the Hang Seng University of Hong Kong and cochair of the Advocacy and Policy Research Committee, the Hong Kong Institute of Human Resources Management.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
