China’s proposal to build a ‘super embassy’ at the former Royal Mint Court in London continues to stir controversy, with concerns over national security and surveillance risks at the forefront. UK intelligence agencies have highlighted that the site sits atop critical communication cables and is near three major data centres, raising fears it could facilitate espionage or monitoring activities. Local residents, alongside Hong Kong, Tibetan, and Uyghur communities, have staged protests, voicing concerns that the embassy could endanger political asylum seekers in the UK. The issue has ignited fierce political debate, with starkly divided positions among key stakeholders.
Communication Networks and Data Centres: A Closer Look at Surveillance Risks
The Royal Mint Court, located between the City of London and Canary Wharf, occupies a strategically sensitive position. Three critical data centres nearby process vast amounts of financial, commercial, and governmental data, forming a vital part of the UK’s economic infrastructure and global financial networks. Intelligence experts warn that a Chinese embassy at this location could deploy advanced technology to intercept communications, posing a significant threat to UK and allied data security.
The underground communication cables beneath the Royal Mint Court carry sensitive data, including encrypted transmissions for government, banks, and businesses. If physically or technically compromised, these could lead to data breaches. UK intelligence has pointed to China’s global track record in technical intelligence operations as a cause for concern. For instance, in 2019, the US accused Huawei of embedding ‘backdoors’ in its equipment, potentially enabling surveillance of global networks, though Huawei denied the allegations. Similarly, in 2020, Australian intelligence uncovered attempts by Chinese-backed hackers to infiltrate telecommunications infrastructure, underscoring China’s capabilities in communication surveillance.
A cybersecurity expert, speaking anonymously, explained: “The proximity of data centres and communication cables creates an ideal environment for potential surveillance. A Chinese embassy at Royal Mint Court could deploy advanced sensors or network equipment to capture unencrypted data or undermine the integrity of encrypted communications.” A 2018 Bloomberg report, albeit controversial, alleged that Chinese-manufactured server chips contained micro-spies, affecting US tech firms, highlighting the risks of hardware-based surveillance. Such techniques, if employed near the embassy, could directly threaten London’s data centres.
Threats to Political Asylum Seekers
Since the introduction of Hong Kong’s National Security Law in 2020, many Hong Kong dissidents have fled to the UK seeking asylum. Local Hong Kong groups fear that a Chinese embassy in central London could serve as a hub for monitoring dissidents. A protester, using the pseudonym Ah-chun, said: “We came to the UK for safety, but if the embassy is built nearby, our communications and activities could be monitored, putting us at risk of retaliation.”
Historical incidents lend weight to these fears. In 2022, UK media reported that staff at the Chinese consulate in Manchester allegedly assaulted a Hong Kong protester, suggesting direct involvement in suppressing dissent. A 2021 Amnesty International report documented China’s use of overseas diplomatic posts to track Uyghurs, employing phone intimidation or pressure on relatives to silence them. Hong Kong activist Simon Cheng warned: “This embassy could become a tool for control, fear, and silencing critics.” These precedents fuel concerns among Hong Kong, Tibetan, and Uyghur communities that the new embassy could facilitate transnational repression.
Political Tensions: Diverging Positions
Labour Government: Leaning Towards Approval Amid Pressure
Since taking office in 2024, the Labour government has signalled a willingness to support the embassy project. Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper have publicly backed it, arguing that an expanded embassy is a legitimate diplomatic need and that security risks can be mitigated through regulation. Prime Minister Keir Starmer discussed the project with Chinese President Xi Jinping, underscoring the government’s focus on fostering UK-China economic ties. However, Labour faces internal dissent. Foreign Affairs Committee member Blair McDougall has cautioned that the embassy could trigger protests, disrupting local traffic and safety. The final decision rests with Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, with a public inquiry set to conclude in early 2025.
Conservative Party: Vehement Opposition, Citing Security Threats
The Conservative Party has taken a hardline stance against the embassy, viewing it as a grave threat to national security. Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith has been vocal, warning of “national security and interference risks” and highlighting potential protest-related disruptions to Tower Bridge traffic. Former Security Minister Tom Tugendhat called the site “utterly inappropriate,” citing China’s growing influence in the UK and referencing the 2022 Manchester consulate incident as a red flag. Local Conservative councillor Peter Golds accused the government of ignoring community concerns, questioning whether Labour is yielding to Chinese pressure. The Tories’ position aligns with their hawkish policies, such as the 2020 ban on Huawei’s 5G equipment.
Reform UK: Opposition Rooted in Sovereignty and Security
Reform UK, a right-wing populist party, firmly opposes the embassy, framing it as a risk to British sovereignty. Party leader Nigel Farage, during the 2025 local elections, stated that Reform UK stands for “British values” and resists projects that could undermine national security. While the party has not issued a detailed policy on the embassy, its 2024 manifesto called for a “freeze on immigration” and safeguarding UK sovereignty, reflecting wariness of Chinese influence. With 78% of Reform UK voters believing “multiculturalism has made Britain worse,” the party’s base is likely to oppose a Chinese embassy in central London, adding a populist dimension to the debate.
Hong Kong Community and Local Residents: Fierce Resistance
The UK’s Hong Kong community has been a driving force in opposing the embassy, organising large-scale protests. In February and March 2025, thousands of Hong Kongers, Tibetans, and Uyghurs demonstrated outside Royal Mint Court, brandishing signs reading “CCP is Watching You” and “Stop the Super Embassy.” Simon Cheng, founder of Hong Kongers in Britain, warned that the embassy would be “a tool for control, fear, and suppressing voices,” particularly for dissidents wanted by Hong Kong authorities.
Local residents share these concerns. The Royal Mint Court Residents’ Association, represented by solicitor Simon Bell, accused the government of succumbing to political pressure, neglecting community safety. Residents fear protests will disrupt daily life and heighten surveillance risks. Tower Hamlets’ significant Muslim population (38%) has also expressed solidarity, citing China’s oppression of Uyghurs in Xinjiang, amplifying local opposition.
Tower Hamlets Council: Opposition Softens Under Pressure
Tower Hamlets Borough Council rejected the embassy plan in 2022 and 2024, citing safety and traffic concerns. However, at a February 2025 planning hearing, council lawyer Morag Ellis announced it would no longer present evidence against the project, following the Metropolitan Police’s withdrawal of objections. This shift sparked accusations of political interference, with residents claiming the council was pressured by central government. The council’s softened stance highlights the limits of local authority in the face of high-level diplomatic priorities.
Metropolitan Police: Inconsistent Stance Amid Safety Concerns
The Metropolitan Police’s position has fluctuated. Initially, it opposed the embassy due to the safety and traffic implications of protests, noting that roads near Royal Mint Court cannot safely accommodate gatherings exceeding 500 people. Protests in February and March 2025 drew 3,000 to 5,000 participants, requiring significant police resources. However, on 17 January 2025, the police reversed their objection, citing a three-year-old council document claiming sufficient protest space. This about-face drew criticism, with residents’ lawyers alleging government influence. Senior officer Savell, in a letter to Iain Duncan Smith, acknowledged that protests would still demand substantial policing and disrupt traffic, underscoring persistent safety concerns.
Expert Opinion: Can Security Risks Be Managed?
Views on the embassy’s national security implications are divided. Supporters argue that China, as the world’s second-largest economy, has a legitimate need for a larger embassy, and the UK can mitigate surveillance risks through technical safeguards. Critics, however, point to China’s intelligence track record. James Lee, an international relations scholar at the London School of Economics, said: “An embassy near data centres and communication cables heightens the temptation for surveillance. Even with safeguards, the risk of technical infiltration remains significant.”
Conclusion
As the early 2025 public inquiry approaches, the fate of China’s ‘super embassy’ remains uncertain. Surveillance risks, threats to asylum seekers, and intense political divisions have made the project a flashpoint in UK-China relations. Labour’s economic priorities, the Conservatives’ and Reform UK’s security concerns, the Hong Kong community’s and residents’ protests, and the council’s and police’s shifting stances create a complex web of contention. The UK faces a delicate balancing act between diplomacy and security, with the outcome set to shape London’s—and Britain’s—future.
Discover more from “Bridging Hongkongers. Reporting Truth.”
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
