How had the Rules-based International Order (‘RBIO’) influenced UK-China affairs on Hong Kong? A good example would The Handover. Britain transferred sovereignty to the People’s Republic of China (‘PRC’) under the Sino-British declaration 1984 which promised a high autonomy to Hong Kongers with ever progressive democracy in Hong Kong. The transfer of sovereignty occurred as promised regardless of the human rights turmoil between the signing of the treaty and the TianAnMen massacre.
Yet, do challenging regimes like China followed international treaties to the letter? No. First, China under the Chinese Communist Party (‘CCP’) imposed Chinese laws into Hong Kong and threw out the promise of high autonomy. Then, the CCP imposed its will through transnational repression in total contempt of UK law.
Even the Conservatives recognised China’s flagrant breach of the Joint Declaration and dusted out rescue plans for Hong Kongers – the BN(O) visa scheme. Yet, PM Starmer’s Government seems to be soft on the challenging regime in China. And in the case of the Chinese Embassy Complex development plan, they tried turning a blind eye. A firm China strategy is urgently needed if we are to halt China’s movement in destroying the RBIO.
Transnational repression of the Chinese Government
Chinese authorities are sending secret police to the UK carrying out acts of harassment and intimidation over pro-democracy campaigners. The 2023 Intelligence and Security Committee’s (‘ISC’) report on China highlighted that the remits of China’s Intelligence Services (‘ChiS’) are far larger in the UK. More worryingly, CHiS practices, including kidnappings, have far greater remits compared with the intelligence operations of many other countries. Moreover, the reports of China’s action against our parliamentary democracy and secret Chinese police operations are mentioned by the ISC investigation.
The role of the CHiS is our fundamental opposition to a new mega Chinese Embassy at the Old Royal Mint.
Former Minister of State for Security Tom Tugendhat once criticised the Chinese government on 6th June 2023 as follows:
‘The Chinese authorities regularly criticise others for what they see as interference in their internal affairs. Yet, they felt able to open unattributed sites without consulting the UK Government. It is alleged that this was a pattern repeated around the world.’ (Hansard)
China’s transnational repression extended to Hong Kongers living in the United Kingdom. For example, the Hong Kong authority issued bounties for information provided on the dissidents with view on kidnaping them to the Chinese embassy. Some pro-Beijing Hong Kongers, such as Innes Tang, established a network to report on pro-democracy activists within Hong Kong. It led to the political arrests of over 100 people. Tang openly planned to establish a similar network overseas.(BBC News 9th May 2025) A prominent repression was the arrest warrant issued against Carmen Lau, the pro-democracy activist who fled to the UK in 2021.(BBC News, 4th August 2025)
Chinese consulate staff in the UK also had a history of ignoring UK laws. In October 2022, Chinese diplomats dragged a protester into its consulate in Manchester and assaulted him. (BBC News 17th October 2022)
Yet Labour ignored all the warnings signs. The Chinese Embassy Complex development plan shows Labour would focus on trade talks; more promises made by promise-breaker Beijing.
The shortcomings of PM Starmer’s (lack of) China strategy
The mega Chinese embassy plans had been on ice through political ambiguity under the Conservatives. Then, Starmer decided to “call in” China’s application during trade talks which claims to have secured £600 million in Chinese investment commitments. Further, Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper had also expressed support for the embassy plan and sent a favourable joint letter to the Planning Inspectorate. (Center for Strategy and International Studies report, 13th June 2025)
The proposed complex was gigantic: The 20,000 m2 site included a large basement with unclear purposes (Redacted area). China could also design parts of the building to optimize for intelligence collection, such as multi-storey buildings optimized for line-of-sight signals intelligence (SIGINT) collection. It could house additional floors, including sensitive communications and collection equipment. (Center for Strategy and International Studies report, 13th June 2025)
CHiS apparatus and branches like the secretive Chinese Overseas Police Force will be facilitated by the size of the diplomatic mission. The redacted area of this mega Chinese embassy complex could provide the Chinese overseas police and secret agents a base of operations with little oversight available to British authorities although entirely within the UK.
Indeed, Beijing refused to provide further explanations on these redacted areas. On 6th August 2025, after facing strong opposition, Rayner issued a statement by giving China 14 days to explain why Chinese building plans were redacted and ‘why requests from Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and Foreign Secretary David Lammy had been ignored’. About 2 weeks after, Labour decided to delay the planning decision from 5th September to 21st October due to public pressure. (Guardian, 23rd August 2025)
Unfortunately, political ambiguity instead of firm strategy is played. Politicians who see a China-shaped hole of broken promises, and yet are not determined on a China Strategy are the major shortcomings which facilitated China’s will to breach the RBIO.
Liberals must fill the void in political shortcomings
Building on Paddy Ashdown’s foundation (Hong Kong Free Press, 29th November 2017) on protecting the right of Hong Konger has become ever more important. With new dealings with China, we are once again at the crossroads of an urgent need for a firm China Strategy.
In the autumn conference this year, we the Liberal Democrats Friends of Hong Kong will table a policy motion on Hong Kong (F34), which will cover the area of tackling transnational repression of China, and call for rejecting the Chinese Embassy Complex. Please join us at 14:10 pm on 22nd September for the debate!
* Larry is an elected representative in the Federal International Relations Committee and the ‘Against Authoritarianism’ sub-committee. He also chairs the Liberal Democrats Friends of Hong Kong.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Professor Joad sees his play at the Theatre Royal, Northampton
The DVLA's problem with number plates
Is Kier Starmer the new John Major?
Roland
David Raw
Chloe
Tom Bailey
2 Comments
The Hong Kong Agreement that transferred Hong Kong to China guaranteed autonomy and freedoms for 50 years. China violated the agreement by not waiting 50 years to make changes that reduced rights and freedoms – the UK had agreed that China should be able to make those changes…just not so soon.
That is so untrue. In nowhere of the Joint Declaration says that the UK had agreed that China is able to make changes. To highlight paragraph 5:
“The current social and economic systems in Hong Kong will remain unchanged,
and so will the life-style. Rights and freedoms, including those of the person,
of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of travel, of movement, of
correspondence, of strike, of choice of occupation, of academic research and
of religious belief will be ensured by law in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Private property, ownership of enterprises, legitimate right of
inheritance and foreign investment will be protected by law.”
The Joint Declaration is an international treaty binding The People’s Republic of China to maintain Hong Kong’s way of life. By imposing Chinese laws into Hong Kong, not only have China broken its promises, it has broken the rules-based international order ignoring an international treaty.