3.4 The most critical challenge in this case is whether or not there is a negative impact of nationalistic sentiment on the relationship between the decision of the Ministry of Commerce and national brand protection， industrial policy or economic security

　　As a result of irresponsible media speculation and guidance, widespread attention is paid to this case in China. And up to 82% of online statistics were against this acquisition.

　　I agree with the views of the vast majority of scholars that the decision of the Minsitry of Commerce has nothing to do with national brand protection, industrial policy ir economic security, and it has not been affected by nationalistic sentiment. However, the over-exaggeration in media and the fuzzy position of the Ministry of Commerce offered a vague excuse for the outside world. This seems suspicious that the decision of the Ministry of Commerce has been made under a situation being kidnapped by Chinese public opinion.

　　3.5 Under the background of financial crisis, what kind of negative impact will be caused by the decision of Ministry of Commerce to prohibit the acquisition

　　Even if there is no such a decision of the prohibition on the acquisition of Huiyuan by Coca-cola, still there is a serious challenge for Chinese enterprises "going out". If we demand that the Chinese anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies protect Chinese national brands, meanwhile also take care of the feelings of multinational companies as well as to ensure the Chinese companies to go out, they can''t function well anymore. The Anti-monopoly Law, as a rule regarding competition, should be equally applicable to SOEs and private enterprises, and to domestic enterprises and multinational corporations as well. In addition, in such financial crisis, a possibility can not be completely ruled out that the regulators are manipulated by those being regulated.

　　3.6 Finally, judging from the anti-monopoly review, many need to be improved in some aspects

　　The Anti-monopoly Law needs to be more sophisticated and its enforcement should be more closely and narrowly exerted.　We urgently need to develop the implementation details of the Anti-monopoly Law, and its Implementation Guide. The Ministry of Commerce needs to pay a closer attention to the development of at least four regulations: Regulation on Application for Enterprises Concentration, Regulation on the Review and Approval of Enterprises Concentration; Regulation on Investigation and Treatments Regarding Unregistered Enterprises Concentration ; Interim Measures of Investigation and Regulations about Enterprises not in keeping with　Declared　Standards　and with Suspicion of Monopoly, which are equivalent to "Merger Guidelines" in the United States, Australia and other countries. The application procedures should be more transparent, so as to allow enterprises to know clearly what kind of materials should be provided at different stages of the application.　For example, what are the necessary information they should provide at the initial application, what are the adequate and sufficient information they should provide when necessary in the following stages of application. In this way the anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies can get more complete information.

　　In any case, the Ministry of Commerce''s　prohibition of the acquisition of Huiyuan by Coca-cola is a landmark in the implementation of the Anti-monopoly Law. It is conducive to the popularity of a competition culture which is very scarce in China''s society, and it is beneficial for promoting China''s Anti-monopoly Law to the world.

　　4．The Rational Attitude of Facing Foreign M&A

　　In a market economy, it is normal to either have a competition or cooperation. Opening-up China should have an open mind and all the people of China should have the courage to face and accept market competition. In the condition of economic globalization and market competition, we need to pay special attention to nationalist sentiment, we can not have a national bias or laissez-faire economic nationalism. Otherwise it will cause the international community, especially foreign investors to mistrust Chinese economic environment with no confidence, eventually, it shall endanger China''s economic development. As market economy is governed by law,　we should regard foreign M & A in a rational manner, from perspectives of relevant laws, internationalization and the market behavior, rather than protecting domestic enterprises and evading the normal market competitive under the pretext of nationalism. This time, the domestic over-reaction for Huiyuan case, on the one hand, has reflected that people pay more attention to China''s domestic enterprises'' development. On the other hand, it has also reflected people''s tendency of excessive nationalism and irrational catharsis when facing the foreign M & A. These also demonstrated that people have overlooked laws in their minds and the emotional over-reaction and irrational catharsis outweighed the social value of the law. （In this case, few people advocate that to let legal things be handled by laws". On the contrary, the voice that the law should yield to the so-called public opinion becomes very popular; strictly speaking it contradicts the tenet of the rule of law）. Therefore, we should seriously consider how to seek for a reasonable balance point between the public opinion and the legal rules when we encounter cross-border M & A, so as to ensure not only that the law can fully play its role in society in dealing with such issues, but also it is in line with the true wishes of the majority of people--in the environment of competition, to ensure the country''s healthy economic development healthily as well as consumer benefits, and even to allow a win-win situation on both sides of M & A.