Résumé : There is an increasing recognition of the international presence and regulatory influence of the EU in competition policy. Despite a scholarly focus on its international dimension, the issue of nationality-based (non-) discrimination has insufficiently been investigated in the existing literature on EU competition policy. Thus, this research aims to fill this gap in the literature by examining whether the EU internally and externally utilizes its competition rules for the objective of promoting (potential) national and European champions, while disadvantaging non-EU based companies operating inside and outside the European internal market. Empirical findings validate two hypotheses of this research: that the supranational institutional setting of the EU in competition policy constrains the ability of member states to use their competition policies for neomercantilist, and even for protectionist purposes; and that the institutional setup assures nationality-blind enforcement by EU competition regulators, even vis-à-vis non-EU based companies. The research also identifies key systemic factors which either constrain or empower the EU as a regulatory power in the competition policy domain. The empirical analysis draws on both quantitative data and in-depth studies of recent major cases. Most cases are from the period between September 1990 and August 2015, involving American and Japanese companies, which have a strong presence in European economies.EU competition policy is highly supranational and has a distinctive goal of market integration. In order to understand better how these features shape EU competition policy, this research proposes an original model of ‘stringent competition policy’, drawing on the theory of regulatory states. This model is more useful than the essentially neomercantilist model of strategic competition policy in explaining the EU’s enforcement without regard to the nationality of firms. Internally, the supranational institutional setting significantly constrains the ability of the member states to utilize their competition policies for neomercantilist and protectionist purposes. Regarding external consequences of this policy, the EU stringently enforces its competition rules regardless the nationality of firms involved in law infringements, though some cases involving non-EU firms were highly politicized and contested. To ensure that its stringent competition policy does not deteriorate the international competitiveness of European firms, the EU has been promoting competition policy externally, especially since the 1990s. However, the EU’s ability to play a leadership role in global multilateral fora is limited, despite its dedication and ambitions. This is because the EU’s regulatory power is fundamentally constrained by systemic factors such as a sharp increase in the number and heterogeneity of competition policies around the world, the deadlock of WTO negotiations on world competition law, and the emergence of transgovernmental networks such as the ICN. At the same time, these systemic factors have created the demand of younger competition authorities for reference points, if not models, and this opened up a window of opportunity for the EU to promote its competition policy rules and norms more extensively in third states. Overall, this research contributes to the EU competition policy literature by firmly placing it in a wider debate on competition and/versus competitiveness in the study of global political economy.