After failing to secure approval in 2022, the Chinese government has resubmitted its controversial proposal to build a massive new embassy complex in London – 10 times the size of its existing facility. While the plan has been debated for over two years, public discussion has largely focused on logistical concerns, such as its impact on nearby residents and whether local infrastructure can handle increased foot traffic.
Yet a far more urgent issue has been largely overlooked: human rights. In recent years, the Chinese government has escalated its transnational repression, frequently using its overseas institutions to conduct covert political operations, particularly targeting dissidents abroad. Given these growing concerns, the question is not just whether London should approve this so-called “super embassy,” but whether it can afford to ignore the broader risks that come with it.
Beijing’s diplomatic offices have played an active role in monitoring, harassing, and intimidating overseas dissidents. Reports indicate that embassy officials have pressured protesters to cancel demonstrations while their families in China face government harassment. Chinese diplomats have also been accused of surveilling students who criticize Beijing, suppressing their speech on campus, and even threatening to have them sent back to China. Some embassies have reportedly pressured foreign universities to prevent outspoken China scholars from speaking to the media, particularly during politically sensitive events such as state visits by Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Investigations further suggest a coordinated effort to infiltrate and disrupt Tibetan, Uyghur, and other dissident groups overseas. Documented across Japan, Canada, the U.S., and Europe, these incidents reflect a growing pattern of repression under Xi Jinping’s aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomacy – one that is drawing increasing international scrutiny.
China’s embassy and consulates, as well as Hong Kong’s overseas offices, have repeatedly violated U.K. laws and human rights protections, ruthlessly targeting dissidents with impunity. In 2022, staff at the Chinese consulate in Manchester – including then-Consul General Zheng Xiyuan – violently confronted protesters, dragging one inside the consulate grounds and beating him. Two months later, Beijing recalled six diplomats involved, seemingly to evade legal repercussions from the U.K. government.
Then, in 2024, British authorities arrested three individuals on espionage charges, including a manager at the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office in London. Prosecutors alleged the Hong Kong office had paid them to spy on and harass exiled dissidents – including myself.
These incidents underscore how the Chinese government systematically exploits diplomatic privileges to expand its authoritarian repression abroad, using surveillance and intimidation to silence critics.
The impact of China’s transnational repression is deeply felt among exiled Hong Kongers, Uyghurs, Tibetans, and other diaspora communities. Even in democratic countries, many are afraid to protest or speak freely, knowing Beijing’s influence extends beyond its borders. These actions violate fundamental human rights and openly defy local legal protections.
Chinese embassies and overseas offices have far exceeded their diplomatic role, crossing a line no society with the rule of law should tolerate. If foreign governments allow this repression to continue unchecked, it will not only endanger dissidents in exile but also erode public trust in their legal system. Granting China approval to build a “super embassy” in London would further empower its authoritarian grip abroad, enabling more personnel, resources, and space to intensify surveillance and harassment under the guise of diplomacy.
The U.K. government has repeatedly pledged to safeguard exiled communities and take a firm stance against transnational repression. Yet, officials have now given the green light to a vast Chinese embassy – even actively facilitating its approval. This raises a serious question: Is the United Kingdom curbing Beijing’s growing influence of repressing human rights overseas, or enabling its expanding reach?
