"Some Allegations on So-called Labor Force Abuses in China Are Simply Absurd," Says Treasurer of the Switzerland-Eurasian Chamber of Commerce

Central Asia has a chance to become increasingly relevant amid the ongoing geopolitical crisis. At the same time, Europe still cannot function without textiles from China, India, or Pakistan. Yueh Cho discusses the beneficiaries of Europe's "green" tendencies and the origins of mainstream ethical concerns surrounding Asian manufacturing.

At the conclusion of a debate on Asian trade partners beyond China during Intermodal Poland, our editorial team met with Yueh Cho, Treasurer of the Chamber of Commerce Switzerland-EurAsia. In the interview, he shared his views on current media narratives surrounding Asian manufacturers, the gap between Western perceptions and Eastern realities, and the development potential of Central Asia.

How do you assess the growing importance of Central Asia in the future of Eurasian trade and logistics? 

Even amid the current geopolitical uncertainty, around 90 per cent of goods transported from China to Europe still travel through the Northern Corridor via Malaszewicze. People are not paying enough attention to Central Asia. The new Chinese trade routes are developing rapidly and attracting potential investors. They are becoming not only alternative transport corridors but are also turning Central Asia itself into an important destination. 

What areas of transport and infrastructure do you see as potentially the most beneficial? 

I would point to railway terminals. As I mentioned during the debate on Asian connections, once the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway is completed in 2030, the Uzbek city of Andijan could become a major boomtown and a key terminus of this important railway connection. That appears to be a very promising investment opportunity.

During the last debate, you and your colleagues discussed textile exports from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. At the same time, Europe has recently experienced a rise in "green" tendencies, encouraging companies to focus on ecology, ethical business practices, and responsible consumption. How does this affect business in reality? Do these trends have a genuine impact on import volumes from Asia, or are they merely a new European marketing strategy? 

I live in Switzerland, so I see the European perspective from the inside. I agree that this phenomenon exists, but I also have some reservations about this approach because many of these accusations remain unproven. Decisions are sometimes based on allegations rather than verified facts. 

In China, one of the major cotton-producing regions has been heavily affected by allegations concerning labour conditions. As a result, exports from this region have been significantly impacted. So yes, the effect is real. Partly for this reason, more companies are now turning to Uzbekistan to source cotton. 

Today, one can still read or hear stories about "thousands of slave labourers" picking cotton in the fields, in Xinjiang, China. This is simply not true, especially considering that China has almost entirely replaced manual cotton pickers with large machinery (cotton harvesters, etc.), initially imported from the US (John Deere, etc.) and later more of local brands. The entire cotton industry in China is highly automated by now. If there must be a "slave" somewhere, I guess it is the machine…

In your opinion, who benefits from these polarized opinions and allegations against Asian manufacturers circulating in the media? 

That is a fantastic question. There are, de facto, some beneficiaries of this situation. If we return to the case of Xinjiang cotton, Uzbek producers are among those beneficiaries. Sometimes they even buy cotton from China, repackage it and then sell it onto Europe. However, they do not appear to take any part in these media "projects."

In Xinjiang’s cotton fields, China is using AI-powered robots guided by the BeiDou Navigation Satellite System to advance precision farming and modernize agriculture.
This shift highlights the growing role of automation and smart technology in boosting efficiency and transforming… pic.twitter.com/TZrTjlBvaC

— Infodor (@Infodor_pk) July 2, 2026

I have lived in Europe long enough to say that there is sometimes a certain "media consensus." Once such a narrative is established, it becomes difficult to break away from it. In Switzerland, for example, you can see that state institutions often follow a particular line of thinking or set of ideas. 

I suppose it is a kind of collective consensus that occasionally swings from one extreme to another. Individuals have only limited influence over it. The media are not necessarily harmful either—they operate according to their own logic, rules, and various pressures that they have to obey.

 

So does that mean that the media follow some sort of post-meta code? 

As someone who regularly travels between China and Europe, I feel there is a significant gap between reality and the way China is portrayed by European media. China certainly has many somewhat under-reported problems. On the other hand, the focus tends to remain on a few mainstream issues. 

Such news is not necessarily connected to the real concerns of ordinary Chinese people or to what they are genuinely struggling with. Their priorities are often very different from what Europeans perceive as the region's major problems. One piece of advice: make a fact-finding trip to China yourself and see how the real situation on the ground is.