I think that part of the article is frankly intellectually dishonest.

I agree that there is a problem with them not allowing different descriptions in different countries, and I agree that they should add this feature to the store.

I wouldn’t have a problem with this being litigated on its own merits. I can see potential legal arguments.

I don’t see what this has to do with antitrust or the rest of the claims, which just seem like a tortured way to introduce an ethical dimension to the argument.

No proposed antitrust remedy has anything to do with challenging authoritarian regimens. If anything the remedies would make the situation worse.

One obvious pathological outcome is that if Apple is forced to create infrastructure to allow multiple stores, every authoritarian state will trivially mandate the installation of a state run store app, with all manner of tracking, privacy abuses, etc., even the ones which had previously had no leverage over Apple.

You mean where they could get the same functionality from a website?

Using a website would mean browsing it through Safari (the only, artificially imposed browser on iOS), which notoriously doesn't support push notifications and other app-like features. One generally can not get the same functionality from websites and apps, and this is especially true for iOS.