Myth of being 'swamped by Chinese businesses' needs to end

Recently, the phrase 'swamped by Chinese businesses' has appeared in some Southeast Asian media headlines. Dramatic and attention-grabbing, it paints foreign investment as a threat. But as a lawyer who advises on cross-border investment and compliance, I can confidently say that this rhetoric is misleading.

Markets evolve. Investments flow to opportunity. Companies—whether Chinese, American, Japanese, or European — enter markets because rules allow them. To call this "swamping" implies that healthy competition is somehow harmful. In reality, competition drives innovation, efficiency, and growth. If local industries feel pressure, the problem is not the competitors — it is preparedness.

Legally, "swamped" has no definition, no evidentiary weight, and no analytical value. The real questions are: Is market entry transparent and non-discriminatory? Foreign firms entering legally are following the host country's rules. Are business practices compliant with local laws? Tax, labor, product safety, and environmental regulations apply to all. Violations are enforceable by regulators. Is competition being distorted? Antitrust laws address monopolies, predatory pricing, and unfair competition. Without illegal conduct, labeling an entire nationality as "swamping" a market borders on economic prejudice.

Chinese companies succeed abroad because they are efficient, innovative, and fast — not because of conspiracies. They bring advanced technologies，integrated supply chains, competitive pricing as well as scale and execution.

These are normal business advantages, not a threat. Many host economies benefit through job creation, technology transfer, and stronger supply chains.

Labeling investment as "swamping" shapes perception and policy. It may prompt restrictive measures that harm investment. It undermines market confidence and discourages capital inflows. It distracts from necessary reforms in local industries, such as innovation, productivity, and industrial upgrading.

The reflex to blame external players avoids the harder questions: Are domestic industries prepared to compete globally? Are regulations transparent, predictable, and effectively enforced? These determine competitiveness far more than nationality.

Focus on governance, not nationality

In today's global economy, where supply chains are integrated and capital is mobile, origin matters less than conduct. Effective regulation and enforcement ensure fair competition for all market participants. Countries that uphold rule-based systems remain attractive for investment — Chinese or otherwise.

Instead of asking if we are being "swamped," policymakers and businesses should ask: Can we manage competition effectively? Can our industries upgrade and adapt to global standards? Are our regulatory and legal frameworks transparent, predictable, and fair?

Answering these questions strengthens economies far more than perpetuating fear-based narratives.

Calling foreign investment a "flood" does not stop it. Progress and competition are inevitable in a globalized world. What matters is legal clarity, regulatory capacity, and domestic competitiveness. Economies that invest in these areas, rather than in panic-driven narratives, will thrive.

CW Loh is a Malaysian lawyer and cross-border investment advisor with over a decade of experience in international trade, corporate compliance, and commercial dispute resolution. He advises businesses on legal and regulatory matters across Southeast Asia and Greater China.

The views don't necessarily represent those of China Daily.

If you have a specific expertise, or would like to share your thought about our stories, then send us your writings at opinion@chinadaily.com.cn, and comment@chinadaily.com.cn.