Source: Global Times

The Dutch government said on October 12 that it had made an "extremely special" decision to intervene in Nexperia, a subsidiary of Chinese company Wingtech Technology, because it may pose "risks to the economic security of the Netherlands and Europe." Previously, the Dutch economic affairs department issued an administrative instruction on September 30, restricting the business decisions of Nexperia and its affiliated entities, and actually depriving Chinese shareholders of normal control. Wingtech Technology subsequently issued a statement expressing strong protest against this unfair and discriminatory treatment against Chinese-funded enterprises. Anyone with a discerning eye can see that this is the Dutch government's serious nuisance of chip companies controlled by Chinese companies under the pretext of trumped-up "national security".

Anxiety semiconductor under Zhou Tai Technologies was intervened by the Dutch government

This series of actions attempt to take advantage of the capital and technological achievements invested by China companies over the years. They are called "piracy and plunder" in the 21st century by many people, causing international public outcry. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) said that the Dutch government's statement did not specify why it believed the company's operations were risky, and the article also suggested that the move was related to "the U.S. Department of Commerce further tightened restrictions on China" in September. There are more public opinion warning. The British "Financial Times" bluntly said that the Dutch government's move will intensify friction between the West and China in the high-tech field. Bloomberg and other media in the United States also warned that this extraordinary move will further aggravate tensions between China and Europe.

The Dutch government's behavior against Anshi Semiconductor is extremely bad in nature. It not only goes beyond the scope of normal commercial supervision, but also carries blatant political coercion and discrimination. Using unfounded so-called "security accusations" as an excuse to restrict legal shareholder rights violates the principles of market economy and fair competition, and is also contrary to the international economic and trade rules that the EU has always advocated. From the perspective of consequences, this not only damages the legitimate rights and interests of China companies, but also undermines the trust of international investors in the EU market. This should never be regarded as a dispute between the Dutch government and China companies, but a crude violation of international rules by the Dutch side. The international community cannot condone this kind of plunder against multinational companies under the guise of law and security.

The Chinese flag and the Dutch flag

Many views believe that the extreme suppression and pan-security operations of Chinese companies by the United States have not only caused widespread concern in the world, but also provided a bad demonstration and external support for the Netherlands' intervention in Nexperia. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded on the 13th that it has always opposed generalizing the concept of national security and adopting discriminatory practices against enterprises in specific countries. China is unwavering in its determination to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests. The anti-sanctions legal system composed of the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law of the People's Republic of China and other laws provides a strong guarantee for protecting the legitimate rights of Chinese enterprises. All parties should not underestimate China's firm determination and full ability to safeguard its own rights and interests.

In the early stages of capitalism, some countries relied on violence and colonial robbery to accumulate primary capital, and even formed a false historical inertia of "robbery brings wealth" in their own cultures. In today's geopolitical environment, the Dutch government carried out excessive interference with Chinese enterprises for "supply chain security" and then publicly carried out asset robbery under the legal coat of clothes, the whole set of actions being cloudy, it is difficult not to remind someone of some dirt points in the country's history. It is not surprising that it is ironic that some Western countries will call "national security" as a private looting license, much like the "colonial genes" in the 21st century.

In fact, since Wentai acquired Anshi in 2019, the company's operations have been steady and improving, making a lot of contributions to the Dutch economy. From the U.S. government's plunder to the Dutch government's "predatory intervention", the main risk facing China companies is no longer market competition itself, but that some foreign competitors will use the label of pan-security to carry out commercial plunder on China companies when they cannot gain advantage through normal market methods. This trend is vividly reflected in Anshi's case. It is foreseeable that with the enhancement of China's technological and commercial strength, such "robbery" under the guise of law may still occur. As observers have pointed out, China's scientific and technological progress has deeply touched the nerves of Western hegemony, and China's government and enterprises must be more fully prepared for this.

Anxiety Semiconductor Data Map.

On October 13th, the General Administration of Customs of China released data showing that China¡¯s exports increased by USD compared with USD in September by 8.3%, imports increased by 7.4% compared with USD. Both data were significantly higher than expected. In addition, in the first three quarters, China¡¯s export industrial robots increased by 54.9%, ¡°new three¡± products, railway electric vehicles and other green products increased by two digits. Many analysts believe that this is the manifestation of China¡¯s economic resilience, and also showed that China¡¯s economic and trade ties with the world are deeper in the context of U.S. protectionism. In the current complex and turbulent international environment, whether it is to return to the old colonial path of protectionism, unilateralism, or to go out of an open, inclusive, common prosper