Illustration: Chen Xia/GT

Some people in Britain are talking with great alarm about the "second China shock," as if the UK's economy is in peril of being knocked off balance by an unfair and disproportionate flooding of its markets with goods which are cheaper, more advanced and therefore more desirable than domestic alternatives. Well, here's some news: The British economy is already off balance, has been for some time - and it's the British themselves who did that. Blaming China might make some economists and politicians in London feel a little better, and less culpable, but shifting the blame to Beijing from where it really lies at home is like putting one's fingers in one's ears to prevent hearing bad news.

The roots stretch back decades, not least to a conscious decision to refashion the UK economy from one underpinned by goods such as manufacturing to one driven by services. Margaret Thatcher's revolutionizing of the financial sector put Britain at the vanguard of a global metamorphosis, with London at the heart of it. Today, services like that account for about 80 percent of GDP. The financial Big Bang, as it was called, was successful to the extent that the UK's services sector is now all that is keeping the country's balance of trade from sinking entirely. But the flip side of this "success" has been the relative withering of manufacturing. The goods sector performs badly and drags down the balance of payments from surplus to deficit. That is not necessarily a reflection of the quality of manufacturing so much as quantity, following decades of continuous deindustrialization.

Britain's new Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, seems to be someone who appears to have finally recognized this catastrophe by pledging to reverse it. Just four days after taking office, he announced plans to "reindustrialize Britain." It was an open admission that the UK has spent decades managing industrial decline. Despite having the fifth largest economy in the world, last year the country ran a current account deficit equal to 3.1 percent of GDP. Manufacturing, which accounted for almost 30 percent of GDP in the late 1970s, has fallen to 8.5 percent of economic output today.

These historical facts and the dry numbers are a stark illustration of why the resilience - or lack of it - of Britain's economy and its consequent vulnerability are not China's fault, but Britain's. Decline seems to have become hard-wired into its fabric.

The very expression "second China shock" is offensive and misleading. It is a mask for failure somewhere other than Beijing. The "China shock" is a political phenomenon, not an economic one. It is used to distract from the uncomfortable reality that Britain's woes are not to be blamed on China's success, but are to be laid at the feet of politicians who cultivated a landscape of decline. Any negative impact being postulated is not due to China's alleged overwhelming dominance or unfair tactics, but is due to China's stable long-term planning, efficiency, inventiveness and hard work - in contrast to the short-termism created by the UK's political need to create a temporary veneer of success in order to be re-elected every five years. Long-term planning does not seem to be in Britain's nature, while in China it is in the nation's DNA.

Burnham should not be distracted by phantom threats like the "China shock." Rather, he should grasp the reality - as demonstrated by his commitment to reindustrialization - and see engagement with China as an opportunity for both nations. China is playing by the rules in an internationally regulated market. It is wrong that it should be maligned simply for being successful.

The author is a journalist and lecturer from Britain. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn