Illustration: Xia Qing/GT
A recent article by VOA raises concerns that Malaysia risks being used by Chinese companies as a hub for "country-of-origin laundering" or "origin washing" of goods. However,
MKsport these unsubstantiated and misleading claims do not accurately reflect the reality of Malaysia's role in global trade. The term "origin washing" appears to be a manufactured concept, designed to create discord among global trade partners.
Over the past year, some Western media outlets have promoted the idea that Chinese companies are using ASEAN countries, including Malaysia, as intermediaries to circumvent US trade tariffs. This has led to calls for stricter regulations, despite the complete lack of credible evidence to support these allegations. VOA has further amplified the so-called "origin washing" threat, suggesting that goods from one country are rerouted through third-party nations, relabeled to evade tariffs, and then re-exported to other markets. This portrayal is misleading because it oversimplifies global trade dynamics, failing to account for the intricate interconnectedness of global supply chains.
While these concerns are largely unfounded, they come amid a broader context of rising trade tensions between the US and some ASEAN countries, particularly in sectors like photovoltaic products. These disputes are primarily driven by US protectionist policies, which are aimed at curbing the competitive rise of both Chinese and Southeast Asian manufacturing in key industries. In this context, it is hardly surprising that certain American media outlets would seek to inflame tensions over "origin washing" as part of a broader economic agenda. As trade tensions rise between the US and some Southeast Asian countries, such narratives could serve as a convenient excuse and create a favorable public climate for Washington's protectionist measures targeting Chinese and emerging Southeast Asian industries. This may explain the origin of these accusations.
It is undeniable that several ASEAN countries have made impressive progress in the manufacturing sector in recent years. A notable example is the substantial portion of US imports of photovoltaic panels now sourced from Southeast Asia. This trend raises a critical concern: if Washington fails to adopt effective strategies to enhance the competitiveness of its domestic manufacturing and instead resorts to trade protectionism to shield its vulnerable industries, merely targeting China's competitive sectors will not be enough. The expanding manufacturing capacity in Southeast Asia will inevitably pose a competitive challenge to the US as well. In this context, ASEAN nations are likely to face growing pressure from America's protectionist measures. These measures, along with the growing discourse around "origin washing," are ultimately attempts to obscure the underlying causes of US trade policies.
The economic complementarity between China and ASEAN reflects the natural, legitimate, and mutually beneficial nature of trade and investment between China and Southeast Asia. The trade and investment flows between China and ASEAN countries are a direct result of their complementary economies and should not be viewed with suspicion. Rather, they should be recognized as an opportunity to promote regional stability and growth.
Moreover, the free trade agreement (FTA) between China and ASEAN provides clear and detailed rules of origin, making it extremely difficult to obscure or misrepresent the origins of goods produced either in China or ASEAN countries. The FTA's focus on reducing tariffs and adhering to rules of origin underscores both sides' commitment to fostering cooperation in industrial supply chains while ensuring transparent and orderly development. Therefore, concerns about "origin washing" are unfounded, as the existing regulatory frameworks guarantee the integrity and traceability of product origins.
The media's sensationalized coverage of these risks can, to some extent, be seen as a convenient excuse for justifying the US' increasing trade protectionism against countries that are in the mid-stream of the global supply chain - nations that serve as crucial links between China and the US in both production and trade networks. This approach would cause further damage to the global industrial chain.
In light of this, it is crucial for the global community to recognize the long-term dangers posed by protectionist policies. These policies not only undermine global economic stability but also threaten the mutually beneficial trade and cooperation in the region.
