Listen to Damian read this article.
The document is marked “Wanted Person” at the top. Beneath this heading is a photograph of a young woman, a studio-style headshot. She faces the camera directly, smiling openly, her dark, shoulder-length hair neatly styled.
Highlighted in red at the bottom are the words: “A reward of one million Hong Kong dollars,” accompanied by a UK telephone number.
The instructions for claiming the reward, approximately £95,000, are straightforward: “Provide information on this wanted person and the related crime or take her to Chinese embassy”.
The woman depicted in the photo stands before me, visibly uneasy as she surveys the building.
We are positioned outside an imposing edifice, formerly the Royal Mint, which China aspires to transform into a new, expansive embassy in London, replacing its significantly smaller current location, occupied since 1877.
Located opposite the Tower of London, the site is already under the watch of Chinese security personnel and a network of CCTV cameras.
“I’ve never been this close,” admits Carmen Lau.
Carmen, 30, sought refuge in the UK in 2021 amidst the arrests of pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong.
She contends that the UK should not permit China’s “authoritarian regime” to establish its new embassy in such a historically significant area. A primary concern is that a large embassy could facilitate the harassment, or even detention within the building, of political opponents.
Some dissidents also express apprehension that the proximity to London’s financial district poses an espionage risk. Additionally, local residents voice concerns about potential security threats.
While the local council previously rejected the plans, the decision now rests with the government, with senior ministers indicating support, pending minor adjustments.
The extensive site, spanning 20,000 square meters, would house the largest embassy in Europe if approved. However, would it genuinely introduce the dangers feared by its detractors?
China acquired the former Royal Mint Court for £255 million in 2018. The area is steeped in history, with the Tower of London, parts of which were constructed by William the Conqueror, located across the street. For centuries, it served as a residence for monarchs.
The proposal includes a cultural center and accommodation for 200 staff. However, the basement plans also depict rooms behind security doors with unspecified uses.
“It’s easy for me to imagine what would happen if I was taken to the Chinese embassy,” says Carmen.
In 2022, a pro-democracy protester from Hong Kong was forcibly taken onto the grounds of the Chinese consulate in Manchester and assaulted, prompting intervention by British police.
In 2019, mass protests erupted in Hong Kong in response to a government proposal to allow extradition of Hong Kong citizens to mainland China.
China responded by enacting a law mandating that all elected officials in Hong Kong, including Carmen, then a district councillor, swear allegiance to China. Carmen chose to resign.
She alleges that journalists from Chinese state-run media began to follow her. The Ta Kung Pao newspaper, controlled by China’s central government, published a front-page story alleging that she and her colleagues had held parties in their council offices.
“You know the tactics of the regime,” she says. “They were following you, trying to harass you. My friends and my colleagues were being arrested.”
Carmen fled to London but believes that she has continued to be targeted.
Hong Kong issued two arrest warrants for her, alleging “incitement to secession and collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security”.
The bounty letter, originating from Hong Kong, was subsequently sent to several of her neighbors.
“The regime just [tries] to eliminate any possible activists overseas,” she says.
Steve Tsang, a political scientist and historian and director of the SOAS China Institute, understands why individuals from Hong Kong, or other specific backgrounds, might feel uneasy about the new embassy.
He states that “the Chinese government since 1949 does not have a record of kidnapping people and holding them in their embassy compounds.”
However, he notes that some embassy staff would be responsible for monitoring Chinese students and dissidents in the UK, as well as targeting UK citizens, such as scientists, business leaders, and individuals with influence, to further China’s interests.
The Chinese embassy conveyed to the BBC that it “is committed to promoting understanding and the friendship between the Chinese and British peoples and the development of mutually beneficial cooperation between the two countries. Building the new embassy would help us better perform such responsibilities”.
Another concern, shared by some opponents, is that the Royal Mint Court site could enable China to infiltrate the UK’s financial system by accessing fiber optic cables carrying sensitive data for firms in the City of London.
The site formerly housed Barclays Bank’s trading floor, providing it with direct connectivity to the UK’s financial infrastructure. A nearby tunnel has carried fiber optic cables under the Thames since 1985, serving hundreds of firms in the City.
Within the grounds of the Court is a five-story brick building: the Wapping Telephone Exchange, which also serves the City of London.
According to Professor Periklis Petropoulos, an optoelectronics researcher at Southampton University, direct access to a functioning telephone exchange could allow individuals to gather information.
These factors have prompted warnings about potential espionage, including from Conservative frontbencher Kevin Hollinrake, as well as senior Republicans in the US.
An official with security experience in former US President Joe Biden’s administration stated that it is entirely plausible that cables could be tapped with devices capable of capturing passing information, and that detection would be nearly impossible.
“Anything up to half a mile from the embassy would be vulnerable,” he says.
However, he suggests that China might be disinclined to do so, as it possesses other methods for hacking into systems.
Addressing these concerns, the Chinese embassy stated: “Anti-China forces are using security risks as an excuse to interfere with the British government’s consideration over this planning application.
“This is a despicable move that is unpopular and will not succeed.”
At the rear of the Royal Mint Court is a row of 1980s-built flats. Mark Nygate, a resident of over 20 years, gestures towards his low garden wall. “Embassy staff will live there and overlook us,” he says.
“We don’t want [the embassy] there because of demonstrations, because of the security risks, because of our privacy.”
Opponents of the embassy – individuals from Hong Kong, Tibet, and the Uighur community, as well as opposition politicians – have already staged protests involving up to 6,000 participants.
Primarily, however, he fears an attack on the embassy, which could endanger him and his neighbors.
Tony Travers, a visiting professor in the LSE Department of Government who lives near the current embassy, remains unconvinced that similar protests will materialize for the new neighbors, should the relocation proceed.
“I’m not aware of any evidence that there are regular protests that block the road outside the current Chinese embassy… self-evidently, there are much larger protests outside a number of other countries’ embassies and high commissions.”
The Chinese embassy in London asserts that the proposed development would “greatly improve the surrounding environment and bring benefits to the local community and the district”.
China’s initial planning application for the site’s development was rejected by Tower Hamlets council in 2022 due to safety and security concerns, and fears that protests and security measures could negatively impact tourism.
Rather than amending the plan or appealing, China waited and resubmitted an identical application in August 2024, one month after Labour assumed power.
On August 23, Sir Keir Starmer and Chinese President Xi Jinping held their first talks by telephone. Sir Keir subsequently confirmed that Xi had raised the issue of the embassy.
Subsequently, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner exercised her authority to remove the matter from the council’s jurisdiction, following encouragement from Foreign Secretary David Lammy.
This occurs within the context of a governmental effort to engage with China after former Conservative Prime Minister Rishi Sunak declared in 2022 that the “golden era” of UK-China relations was over.
Professor Travers believes that politics is involved in planning decisions.
“The Secretary of State has to make the decision on the basis of the documentation in front of them and the law surrounding and affecting the issue,” he argues.
“But it would be naïve to imagine that politics didn’t play a role.”
Lord Peter Ricketts, a former diplomat who chaired the UK’s National Security Council, advising prime ministers on global threats, emphasizes the complexity of the country’s relationship with China.
A National Security Strategy published in June outlined the conflicting priorities in the government’s approach, highlighting its desire to use the relationship to boost the UK economy while also acknowledging likely “continued tension” over human rights and cybersecurity.
But is this duality of reaping business benefits while addressing human rights transgressions even feasible?
“It is absolutely an adversary in some areas, which tries to steal our intellectual property, or suborn our citizens,” says Lord Ricketts. “(But) it is a commercial market, a very important one for us, and it’s a player in the big global issues like climate and health.
“We have to be able to treat China in all those categories at the same time.”
The embassy decision, he says, lies at the heart of this issue. “There are acute dilemmas, and there are choices to be made, whether to privilege the 30, 40 or 50-year relationship with China, which an embassy, I guess, would symbolize.
“Or whether to give priority to the short-term security threats, which are no doubt real as well.”
Conservative MP Sir Iain Duncan Smith is convinced that approving the new embassy would be a significant error. “They think that the only way they’ll get growth is by kissing up to China and getting them to invest,” he says.
However, despite the security concerns, Professor Tsang argues that consolidating officials into one large embassy could facilitate monitoring their activities in the UK.
“Allowing the Chinese to put their staff on one site is preferable,” he argues, “because they’re at the moment all over the place in London, you can’t actually keep an eye on them.”
He is not convinced that either rejecting or approving the embassy will have an impact on business and trade.
“The Chinese are the absolute ultimate pragmatists. They are not going to suddenly say that no, we’re not selling our best electric vehicles to you any longer just because you denied us the embassy,” he says.
But, equally, “they are not going to substantially increase Chinese investments in the UK because they have got the new embassy compound.”
If Angela Rayner shares this view, her decision may hinge on the seriousness with which she takes the warnings that China could eavesdrop on the UK’s banks.
If she rejects the embassy, it may be because she judges the danger it poses to be very real indeed.
Top image credits: Reuters, Richard Baker via Getty Images, SOPA Images via Getty Images and EPA -EFE/REX/Shutterstock
BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Lecturers are also being harassed, the report finds, as ministers say threats will not be tolerated.
A BBC investigation finds cats and kittens mutilated and tortured by online networks with UK links.
Cat Eccles registered a trip she made to Israel and Palestine in May after the 28-day deadline.
Some say Britain’s decision is an important first step – while others worry it won’t make a real difference, writes BBC’s International Editor Jeremy Bowen.
Trump’s tariffs in his first term took aim at China – but this time they are going beyond.