Israel’s Pager Attack Has Cooked More Than Just iPhone Sales in China

The pager explosions have taken about 12 lives and injured around 3000 people on September 17

Last week, the pager attack in Lebanon captured global attention. This form of attack not only triggered panic among the Lebanese people but also shook global confidence in economic globalization. This is because Israel has opened Pandora’s box of using civilian product supply chains for military objectives.

The remote-controlled explosions in Lebanon came in two waves. In the first wave, the devices targeted were primarily pagers used by Hezbollah members. According to The Washington Post and other Western media, the explosives were pre-installed in the batteries. But in the second wave, the explosions extended to everyday civilian items like mobile phones, laptops, cars, and even electric razors used in barbershops. Chinese media outlet Guancha reported that this is done by mixing batteries with remote-controlled detonators into ordinary batteries in the Lebanon market, which were then randomly installed into these devices during repairs.

This is almost akin to randomly poisoning a city’s water supply, resulting in widespread, uncontrollable collateral damage. At least 32 people, including two children, were killed and thousands more injured. In fact, it aligns closely with the United Nations General Assembly’s definition of terrorism, reaffirmed since 1994: “criminal acts intended to cause public fear.”

In the realm of global economics, this type of terrorism is causing an alarming effect on a conceptual level.

For example, on Twitter(X), a photo of an iPhone detonated in Lebanon has sparked widespread attention. And on Chinese social media Weibo, Phoenix News created a vote, asking related to trending news, do you believe iPhones’ batteries have security issues? — with 45.6% of 8121 respondents voting “yes.”

This incident has triggered a direct trust crisis among Chinese consumers toward Western electronic products. Three days after the pager attack, the iPhone 16 was launched in mainland China. Normally, consumers would have to queue at stores to get the latest iPhone, often paying scalpers extra. But this year, the iPhone was already being sold at a discount on e-commerce platforms.

On the other hand, Huawei saw a surge in support. This is because, in the Lebanese explosions, manufacturers from Taiwan island and Japan were unaware that their products had been converted into bombs, claiming that external agents or suppliers had tampered with them. Chinese consumers, recalling that U.S. sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction have prevented Huawei from sourcing parts from Western manufacturers, noted that Huawei has increased the localization of its supply chain. Many Chinese commentators argue that U.S. sanctions have, ironically, “de-risked” Huawei phones.

The term “de-risking” was originally popularized by Western media during Trump’s trade war with China. But as Israel’s actions escalate, it seems Western media have lost control of their narrative. After all, when the West imposed long-arm jurisdiction on Chinese smartphones, electric vehicles, and 5G suppliers, it claimed that its safety standards were high and its detection methods sophisticated. These claims only hold water if consumers believe in them, making such jurisdiction legitimate in democratic societies. Now, however, Israel’s covert actions have undermined that legitimacy. If Western countries and Taiwan authorities cannot prove that they can protect their supply chain from the Mossad, they will lose their authority to define “safety standards” in China and around the world.

This, in turn, offers a significant advantage to Chinese companies. Going forward, Huawei and other manufacturers will no longer need to promote compliance with EU or U.S. standards to endorse product quality. Instead, labels like “Produced according to Chinese standards” or “Entirely non-Western suppliers” could become new selling points. This signals a potential shift in consumer value judgments from a unipolar world dominated by Western standards to a multipolar world where “Chinese standards” compete in parallel. This could reshape the direction of economic globalization, introducing new dimensions and market entry rules.

In the past, China made extensive adjustments to its economic policies and production standards to meet the requirements of the World Trade Organization (WTO), particularly in food safety. However, during incidents like the Fukushima nuclear wastewater discharge and the COVID-19 pandemic, China’s technical standards for inspecting seafood and meat products were notably higher than those of Western countries. With global consumer health in mind, this raises the question: Is China now better positioned to set international food hygiene standards? And in other sectors where China has similarly higher standards, shouldn’t they also be adopted by the WTO?

Clearly, if Western countries are genuinely committed to promoting the cross-border flow of production factors—allowing each country to capitalize on its strengths within the global market—then when it comes to ensuring supply chain security and setting safety standards for certain products, China evidently has a comparative advantage, to lead a higher quality economic globalization.

If the global market is truly free, then perhaps it’s time to move beyond a globalization dominated by Western-developed countries and shift toward a multipolar globalization that better reflects the comparative advantages of all nations.