China Again Uses "Anti-Monopoly Investigation" to Intimidate CK Hutchison – Experts Weigh In

The image shows a partial view of the Panama Canal. (Video screenshot)

[People News] The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has launched an investigation into CK Hutchison’s sale of ports in Panama and other locations, citing concerns over potential violations of its Anti-Monopoly Law. The escalation of pressure from Chinese authorities on CK Hutchison raises questions about its broader implications.

According to Radio Free Asia, the controversy over CK Hutchison’s port sales continues to intensify. On Friday, March 28, China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) issued a statement through its Anti-Monopoly Bureau, acknowledging the transaction and stating that it would conduct a legal review to ensure fair market competition and protect public interest.

Following this, Yuyuan Tantian, a media outlet under China Central Television (CCTV), published an article claiming that the transaction involved major national interests and that selling ports was akin to "handing a knife to the enemy." However, the article was later taken down. Meanwhile, the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office and the Central Liaison Office reprinted an article from Ta Kung Pao on Sunday, March 30, supporting SAMR’s involvement and urging CK Hutchison to "pull back from the brink."

When asked about the issue on Monday, March 31, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun reiterated that SAMR would conduct a legal review of the transaction.

China's Interference in Panama Port Sales – An Abuse of Power and an Attempt to Intimidate Li Ka-shing

Professor Xie Tian from the Aiken School of Business at the University of South Carolina criticized SAMR’s intervention, arguing that it was baseless. He pointed out that, according to China’s Anti-Monopoly Law, investigations should be limited to monopolistic activities within the Chinese market, making Beijing’s actions an abuse of authority.

Xie stated: "Li Ka-shing’s dozens of ports are not even located in China. Even if there were a monopoly issue, it would be in the global market, not within China's jurisdiction. CK Hutchison is registered in the Caribbean, Li Ka-shing himself is a Canadian citizen, and the ports in question are in Panama—China has no legal authority here. This so-called anti-monopoly investigation is just an intimidation tactic against Li Ka-shing and CK Hutchison. It has no legal basis and is a blatant abuse of government power. The only leverage the CCP has is to isolate CK Hutchison by pressuring mainland Chinese and Hong Kong companies to cut ties with it if the sale proceeds."

Li Ka-shing’s Port Deal Exposes CCP’s Corporate Manipulation to the World

Economist Si Ling also noted that the CCP’s actions reflect selective enforcement. He observed that while Li Ka-shing was once courted by Beijing’s top leadership, he has now been labeled a "traitorous businessman" and a "lamb to be slaughtered." This incident serves as a demonstration to Hong Kong, Chinese, and international business communities of how the CCP manipulates enterprises. Moreover, it reveals that Beijing exhausted all private means to block the deal but ultimately failed, prompting an official intervention.

Si Ling elaborated:
"This selective enforcement is happening because CK Hutchison’s sale of the Panama port has progressed far more smoothly than the Chinese government expected. If Beijing wants to intervene and stop the deal, it needs a legitimate excuse. SAMR’s involvement buys the CCP some valuable time for lobbying efforts. However, this is merely the CCP’s wishful thinking—it will be difficult to prevent CK Hutchison from ultimately completing the transaction."

Analysis: Can CK Hutchison sell ports like Panama? The CCP has become the ultimate loser

Chinese independent political scholar Chen Daoyin noted that the news about CK Hutchison not completing the transaction as scheduled on April 2 was reported by Hong Kong media and was not an official announcement from either CK Hutchison or the American consortium involved in the deal. He believes that the release of this information, the investigation under the "Anti-Monopoly Law," and the official sharing of critical articles should be considered together. The overall situation reflects the CCP government's strategy of verbal and military intimidation towards CK Hutchison, which, through commentary articles, suggests how CK Hutchison should navigate the issue. However, he emphasized that regardless of whether CK Hutchison ultimately reaches a compromise, the Chinese side has already emerged as the loser in this situation.

Chen Daoyin stated: "Whether this transaction succeeds or fails, the real loser is the CCP government. This is because the world is entering a phase of de-globalization. If the CCP government intervenes and disrupts this transaction, it will demonstrate to the world that the actions of the CCP government are inconsistent with its rhetoric. Additionally, since the Trump administration, there has been ongoing discussion about the fact that both mainland and Hong Kong enterprises are essentially controlled by the CCP government or the Communist Party of China. Therefore, if the CCP government can undermine a purely market-based transaction through its intervention, it only serves to prove that these enterprises lack autonomy and must adhere to the national interests of the CCP. Your actions, in fact, highlight this reality."

Chen Daoyin remarked that the success of the transaction is still uncertain, but the market operates according to its own principles and logic, and companies must prioritize integrity and commitments. He further noted that the Chinese Communist Party's intervention in this deal will not only speed up the withdrawal of funds from China and Hong Kong by CK Hutchison and BlackRock, but will also encourage other foreign investors to expedite their exit from China.