Core Viewpoint - The Chinese government criticizes the EU's potential move to remove Huawei and ZTE from its telecom networks, arguing that such actions violate market principles and fair competition rules [1] Group 1: Economic Impact - Chinese companies have been operating in Europe in compliance with laws, providing quality products and services, and contributing positively to local economic development and employment [1] - The forced removal of Chinese telecom companies' equipment has reportedly delayed technological progress and resulted in significant economic losses for the countries involved [1] Group 2: Call for Fair Treatment - The Chinese government urges the EU to create a fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory business environment for Chinese enterprises to maintain investment confidence [1]

智通财经记者 聂舒翼 朱郑勇 林剑表示，中国企业长期在欧洲依法合规经营，为欧方的民众提供了优质的产品和服务，也为当地的经 济社会发展和就业作出了积极贡献。在没有法律依据和事实证据的前情况下，以行政手段强行限制甚至 禁止企业参与市场，这严重违反了市场原则和公平竞争规则。 林剑指出，事实证明，个别国家强行移除中国电信企业的优质安全的设备，不仅迟滞了自身技术发展的 进程，还造成了巨额的经济损失，将经贸问题泛安全化、政治化将阻碍技术进步和经济发展，损人不利 己。我们敦促欧盟为中国企业提供公平、透明、非歧视的营商环境，避免损害企业赴欧投资的信心。 责任编辑：何俊熹 11月11日，外交部发言人林剑主持例行记者会。彭博社记者提问，欧盟委员会日前要求欧盟成员国逐步 将华为与中兴的设备排除在其电信网络之外。外交部对此有何评论？ ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article emphasizes that Chinese companies have been operating in Europe in compliance with laws and regulations, providing quality products and services while contributing positively to local economic development and employment [2] - The article highlights that the forced removal of Chinese telecom companies like Huawei and ZTE from EU networks, without legal basis or factual evidence, violates market principles and fair competition rules [2] - It is pointed out that such actions not only hinder technological progress but also result in significant economic losses for the countries involved [2] Group 2 - The article urges the EU to provide a fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory business environment for Chinese enterprises, to avoid damaging their confidence in investing in Europe [2]

Core Viewpoint - The Chinese government criticizes the EU's potential move to remove Huawei and ZTE from its telecom networks, arguing that such actions lack legal basis and violate market principles, which could hinder technological progress and economic development [1]. Group 1: Impact on Chinese Companies - Chinese companies have been operating in Europe in compliance with local laws, providing quality products and services while contributing positively to local economic and social development [1]. - The forced removal of Chinese telecom equipment is seen as detrimental, causing significant economic losses and delaying technological advancements in the countries involved [1]. Group 2: Call for Fair Business Environment - The Chinese government urges the EU to create a fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory business environment for Chinese enterprises to maintain investment confidence [1].

Core Viewpoint - The Chinese government emphasizes the importance of providing a fair and transparent business environment for Chinese companies operating in Europe, particularly in light of the EU's potential actions against Huawei and ZTE [1]. Group 1: EU Actions and Chinese Companies - The EU Commission is reportedly considering measures to gradually remove Huawei and ZTE from its telecommunications networks [1]. - Chinese companies have been operating in Europe in compliance with local laws, contributing positively to local economies and job creation [1]. Group 2: Market Principles and Economic Impact - The Chinese government argues that removing Chinese telecom companies without legal basis or factual evidence violates market principles and fair competition rules [1]. - The forced removal of Chinese telecom equipment has been shown to hinder technological progress and result in significant economic losses for the countries involved [1]. Group 3: Call for Fair Treatment - The Chinese government urges the EU to provide a non-discriminatory business environment to restore confidence in investment from Chinese companies [1].

Core Viewpoint - The issue of "choose one from two" is not about the size of the online platforms but rather about their misuse of "private power" to unjustly restrict the operational freedom of merchants, ultimately harming competition among platforms [3]. Regulatory Actions - The State Administration for Market Regulation issued compliance reminders to major e-commerce platforms regarding the "Double Eleven" shopping festival, emphasizing the need to strictly regulate promotional behaviors and prohibit illegal practices such as "choose one from two" and "big data killing familiarity" [3]. - The revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law highlights the importance of fair competition, with specific provisions against platforms forcing merchants to adhere to pricing rules that disrupt market order [10]. Historical Context - The "choose one from two" practice gained notoriety following Alibaba's record fine of 18.228 billion yuan for abusing its market dominance by imposing such restrictions on merchants since 2015 [5]. - A recent court ruling found Alibaba liable for its monopolistic behavior, ordering it to compensate JD.com 1 billion yuan, reinforcing the principle of fair competition [6]. Market Dynamics - The competitive landscape among internet platforms is intensifying, with the need for fair competition becoming increasingly critical in the context of ongoing regulatory scrutiny [4]. - The "choose one from two" practice creates a "market blockade effect," limiting merchants' ability to engage with other platforms and reducing overall market competition [11]. Legal Framework - The concept of "choose one from two" is linked to various legal provisions, including the Anti-Monopoly Law and the E-Commerce Law, which prohibit unreasonable restrictions on merchants' pricing and operational freedom [8][10]. - The enforcement of these laws aims to correct the power imbalance between platforms and merchants, fostering market vitality and innovation [13]. Future Outlook - The regulatory focus should shift towards ensuring that market competition is not hindered by unfair barriers set by incumbent platforms, thereby promoting a healthier market environment for new entrants [12]. - The ongoing scrutiny of "choose one from two" practices is part of a broader goal to enhance market innovation and development in China's platform economy [13].

Core Viewpoint - The newly revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law aims to address irrational "involution" competition behaviors in the digital economy, which harm both consumers and legitimate business operators [1][19]. Group 1: Legislative Changes - The revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law has increased the number of articles from 33 to 41, specifically targeting new forms of unfair competition in the digital economy [1]. - New provisions have been added to address unfair competition behaviors related to data acquisition and usage, as well as malicious transactions in the online space [8][19]. Group 2: Case Study - A case in Jiangsu Province involved a company selling software that illegally scraped data from competitors, resulting in over 1.6 billion data points being collected and an involved amount exceeding 8.7 million yuan [5]. - The market regulatory authority imposed a fine of 530,000 yuan on the offending company, marking the first case of this nature in Jiangsu [5]. Group 3: Market Dynamics - The rise of "involution" competition has led to practices such as forced price wars and the use of unauthorized data, which disrupt fair market order and harm sustainable development [11][16]. - The law now explicitly prohibits platform operators from forcing merchants to sell below cost, addressing the underlying issues of price manipulation in the e-commerce sector [16][19]. Group 4: Implications for Businesses - Businesses are urged to operate within legal boundaries when collecting online data to avoid engaging in unfair competition [7]. - The law emphasizes the importance of maintaining fair competition to foster innovation and high-quality development in the market [14][19].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the transformation of China's market system, highlighting the establishment of a unified national market that enhances efficiency, openness, and innovation, ultimately benefiting consumers and businesses alike [1]. Group 1: Market Reforms - The revision of the Anti-Monopoly Law marks the first major update in 15 years, with nearly 50,000 cases of unfair competition investigated, including 4,296 cases related to online competition [2]. - A total of 4,218 policies that hinder the flow of production factors have been identified and abolished [2]. - Administrative monopoly cases have been addressed, with 239 cases reported [3]. Group 2: Business Environment - The revision of the Company Law allows for an extended capital contribution period of up to 5 years [5]. - The "one certificate, one license" separation reform has been fully implemented, enabling a streamlined online business registration process [5]. - The electronic business license has been downloaded 370 million times, with over 600 million uses recorded [5]. - The net increase in registered enterprises reached 19.999 million, while individual businesses saw a net increase of 33.946 million [5]. Group 3: Standards and Compliance - Over 13,000 national standards have been newly released, bringing the total to over 47,000, with the average development cycle reduced from 36 months to 16 months [7]. - More than 2,400 national standards in key areas such as artificial intelligence and smart manufacturing have been published [7]. - 15 product categories, including lithium batteries for electric bicycles, have been included in CCC certification management [9]. Group 4: Consumer Protection - A total of 454.1 million illegal product listings were removed from platforms, and 58,000 online stores were ordered to cease operations [11]. - Significant cases in the live-streaming e-commerce sector have been addressed, including major cases like "Three Sheep" and "Northeast Rain Sister" [11]. - Food safety cases numbered 2.2604 million, with high compliance rates for grain, meat, and dairy products maintained over the years [13]. - The drug inspection pass rate remains stable at over 99.4%, with over 200 innovative drugs and 265 innovative medical devices approved [15].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the transformation of China's market system, highlighting the establishment of a high-standard market framework and the optimization of the business environment, which collectively enhance market vitality and promote innovation and consumer confidence. Group 1: Market System Development - The establishment of a nationwide unified market facilitates the smooth flow of production factors and enhances the business environment, leading to increased vitality among over a billion market entities [1] - The "14th Five-Year Plan" aims to create a more standardized, efficient, and open Chinese market, reflecting in the innovation enthusiasm and convenience experienced by individuals [1] Group 2: Regulatory and Compliance Measures - The revision of the Anti-Monopoly Law marks a significant update after 15 years, with nearly 50,000 cases of unfair competition investigated, including 4,296 cases related to online competition [4] - The implementation of the "separation of licenses and permits" reform has streamlined the process for starting businesses, with 3.7 billion downloads of electronic business licenses [6] Group 3: Standardization and Quality Control - Over 13,000 national standards have been newly released, bringing the total to over 47,000, with a significant reduction in the average development cycle from 36 months to 16 months [8] - The inclusion of 15 products, including lithium batteries for electric bicycles, into CCC certification management enhances product safety and compliance [11] Group 4: Consumer Protection and Safety - A total of 226.04 million food safety cases have been investigated, maintaining high compliance rates for grain, meat, and dairy products [16] - The drug inspection pass rate remains stable at over 99.4%, with over 200 innovative drugs and 387 children's medications approved for market [20] Group 5: E-commerce and Online Regulation - Platforms have been urged to delete over 4.5 million illegal product listings, with significant actions taken against non-compliant online stores [13][14] - The government has introduced guidelines to enhance compliance management within online trading platforms [14]

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around the Dutch takeover of Nexperia, which has led to China severing all related supply chains, prompting the EU to seek dialogue with China [1][3] - The EU's contradictory stance of urging China not to escalate the situation while simultaneously requesting the relaxation of rare earth export controls highlights a lack of coherence in their approach [3][8] - Nexperia, once struggling, regained strength through Chinese investment and support, particularly benefiting from the booming market for electric vehicle chips, which attracted Dutch intervention under the guise of security risks [3][10] Group 2 - Europe heavily relies on China for various resources, including rare earths, which are critical for industries such as electric vehicles and renewable energy [5][8] - Despite claims that the US and Australia have sufficient rare earth resources, the reality is that they still depend on China's refining and separation technologies to produce final products [7][10] - The backlog of rare earth export applications from EU companies in China indicates a growing concern, with warnings from the German automotive industry about potential production halts if the situation persists [8][10] Group 3 - The EU's rhetoric of "fair competition" and "market rules" contrasts sharply with their actions against Chinese companies, revealing a double standard in their approach to international trade [3][10] - The current geopolitical landscape necessitates a recognition of China's significant position in the global supply chain, particularly in rare earth production and processing capabilities [10][14] - The EU's need for cooperation with China is underscored by their reliance on Chinese resources, suggesting that political posturing may hinder their own economic interests [10][14]