Seoul: Ten years ago, few believed that China could evolve from a producer of low-cost, generic goods into a global leader in advanced manufacturing. But in just a decade since launching its "Made in China 2025" initiative, China has defied expectations and redrawn the map of global industrial power.
According to Yonhap News Agency, today, China holds the top position in at least seven high-tech sectors: electric vehicles, batteries, drones, 5G telecommunications, solar panels, high-speed rail, and advanced materials. These sectors represent the heart of future industrial competitiveness, a transformation resulting from a deliberate, long-term national strategy. This strategy mobilized policy, capital, personnel, and innovation in unison.
China's commitment is extensive. The country dismantled regulatory barriers, introduced tax incentives, and directed massive public investment into research and development. Since 2010, China's R and D budget has increased at an average annual rate of 12.7 percent, reaching 646 trillion won ($471 billion) in 2024-more than 20 times Korea's 31 trillion won. Meanwhile, Chinese universities and government agencies have cultivated a generation of top-tier STEM professionals, with nearly half of the world's artificial intelligence researchers now being Chinese nationals. China is already advancing toward its next target: global leadership in AI and frontier technologies by 2035.
In contrast, Korea has stagnated and, in some cases, regressed. Aside from semiconductors and parts of the secondary battery sector, Korea has lost ground across nearly all major industries. Its once-dynamic manufacturing sector is now beset by indecision, fragmented policies, and political interference. Industrial policy changes with every administration, regulatory burdens increase, but strategic direction is absent. Vision is short-term and populist, resulting in a growing sense that Korea, once a model of technological dynamism, is now falling behind.
This divergence reflects national priorities. Where China treated advanced manufacturing as a matter of survival, Korea has allowed political agendas to eclipse economic logic. Manufacturing, a cornerstone of national power, is increasingly treated as an afterthought, invoked only for campaign slogans or symbolic policy gestures.
Recent presidential platforms highlight the problem. One leading candidate focuses heavily on redistribution, proposing a 4.5-day workweek, stronger union protections, and expanded punitive damages. These proposals may resonate with certain voter blocs but risk increasing business uncertainty and raising labor costs, particularly for manufacturers already under global pressure. Another candidate favors a business-friendly environment but lacks a coherent strategy for workforce development, supply chain resilience, or industrial innovation. Both approaches are dangerously out of step with the urgency of the moment.
Korea's manufacturing malaise is not cyclical; it is structural. The country's most vital industries are at risk. Engineering know-how is dwindling, high-potential startups are throttled by bureaucracy, and global competitiveness is declining. This is not just an economic issue; it is a national security concern. If Korea loses its edge in manufacturing, it forfeits its ability to lead in future-defining technologies, from clean energy to AI.
The path forward is clear but challenging. The next administration must develop a long-term, bipartisan industrial strategy, insulated from short-term political winds. It must establish a centralized control tower to align industrial policy across ministries and create an ecosystem where large conglomerates, medium-sized enterprises, and startups can thrive together. This means investing in R and D, fostering STEM education, overhauling outdated regulations, and reestablishing innovation as a core national value.
Ten years ago, the world underestimated China's potential. Today, Korea is underestimating its own crisis. If complacency continues, Korea risks becoming not just a follower but a bystander in the next industrial revolution. The nation must act decisively, strategically, and with the full weight of government and society behind it.