Keir Starmer is poised to give the go-ahead for China’s new mega-embassy near the Tower of London – the biggest diplomatic mission in Europe and a ‘nest of spies’ in the eyes of its opponents. But this will not be the end of the story. A legal challenge seems certain to follow, and the decision will be seen by critics as further evidence of Starmer trying to cosy up to Beijing at the expense of national security. In addition, the timing could not be worse, given the turbulence in geopolitics and strained relations with Trump’s America.
The decision is expected as early as today, with Starmer claiming Britain’s intelligence agencies have raised no formal objections. This is in spite of the embassy’s proximity to sensitive fibre optic cables servicing the City of London and the reported existence of dozens of secret rooms, including an underground chamber in close proximity to the cables.
Starmer’s decision to give permission for the build was supported at the weekend by Ciaran Martin, the respected former head of GCHQ’s National Cyber Security Centre. He argued that MI5 and GCHQ would have been asked to make highly classified assessments of the risks and would not allow the project to go ahead if the risks were unmanageable. He also played down revelations about the secret rooms, saying all embassies had secure areas for conducting sensitive business.
Ministers have tied themselves in knots over describing China as a threat – even though it evidently is
This may be the case, but this is also an increasingly hostile China, with a proven track record of rampant cyber (and other) espionage and intimidation of overseas opponents. Hong Kong exiles, who were out in force on Saturday at a protest outside Royal Mint Court, where the embassy will be built, are especially concerned that they might be targeted and that secret detention facilities are being prepared in the bowels of the building.
The geopolitical sensitivities surrounding the embassy were underlined at the weekend when Mike Johnson, the speaker of the US House of Representatives, told the Sunday Times that the security threats ‘seem real’. In saying so, he was reiterating warnings from the White House last year. Starmer has reportedly also had to reassure other anxious allies about the security risks. Given that President Trump’s designs on Greenland are justified by the threat of increased Chinese and Russian activity, handing Beijing an enhanced espionage base in London will hardly be well received.
The embassy decision will reinforce the impression that Britain’s China policy (as far as one is identified) is spineless and adrift, motivated solely by the forlorn hope of economic returns. Last year, government advisers were accused of torpedoing a high-profile spy trial to avoid embarrassing China – an accusation they denied. The government has also been accused of fudging a much-hyped ‘audit’ of China policy that was supposed to provide some clarity but instead was largely classified. Ministers also refused to place China in the top tier of a new foreign influence registration scheme, which would have required greater scrutiny of those acting on Beijing’s behalf.
Ministers have tied themselves in knots over describing China as a threat – even though it self-evidently is – and have instead stressed economic engagement. ‘The scale of the opportunity in China is immense,’ Starmer told the Lady Mayor’s Banquet at the Guildhall in December, suggesting that not to engage was a ‘dereliction of duty’ – a highly debatable assertion, given China’s fragile domestic economy and mercantilist trade policies.
Whatever their stance on the embassy, Britain’s intelligence agencies have become increasingly alarmed at the scale of Chinese espionage and influence operations in the country. Shortly before Christmas, MI5 issued an alarm over spying at Westminster, warning MPs, peers and parliamentary staff that they were being targeted. Ministers also confirmed that Foreign Office computers had been hacked. While analysts privately accused China, the government did not do so publicly.
Approval of the embassy this week will be only the latest chapter in a long and sorry saga that began in 2018 with the £255 million purchase by China of the former royal mint site, where coins were minted from 1809 to 1967. Edward Lister (since ennobled as Lord Udny-Lister), a close aide to Boris Johnson, helped broker the deal and was paid both by the property firm representing Beijing and by the developer that sold the site. The British government insisted Johnson’s trusted adviser had declared his interests as required and there were no conflicts of interest. The then Chinese ambassador to London personally thanked Lister and ‘spoke highly’ of his ‘effort’ in securing the ‘diplomatic premises’, according to a news release from the embassy.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch told protesters outside Royal Mint Court on Saturday that Starmer ‘needs to stop being naive; he needs to stop being complacent and quite frankly, he needs to grow a backbone’. But it should be remembered that as business secretary in the government of Rishi Sunak, she too reportedly argued for caution in dealing with China, urging that ‘business and trade implications’ be taken into account in drawing up the foreign influence registration scheme.
The battle over the embassy will now almost certainly move to the courts, with the government facing a lengthy and potentially embarrassing judicial review over its actions. Opponents argue that the embassy was a ‘done deal’, undermining the planning process. Last September, campaigners commissioned a legal opinion from Lord Banner, a leading planning lawyer, which said that green-lighting the embassy could be unlawful if ministers gave assurances to Beijing in advance. This, they said, would constitute ‘actual or apparent predetermination’ of the planning application.
There are multiple instances where this would appear to be the case. In a letter written in 2018 when he was foreign secretary, Boris Johnson told his Chinese counterpart that the project had ‘political commitment at the highest levels’. He also said he would grant Beijing consent for Royal Mint Court to be ‘designated as diplomatic premises’.
The government took the planning application out of the hands of the Tower Hamlets local authority, which had initially rejected it. The Metropolitan Police also initially opposed the embassy on public safety grounds, arguing that because of its location on a major arterial route into London, any demonstration would have a ‘serious and significant effect to not only the local area, but also wider London’. However, the Met later reversed its position.
Last November, when Starmer met Chinese president Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, he told Xi, ‘You raised the Chinese embassy building in London when we spoke on the telephone,’ and assured him, ‘we have since taken action by calling in that application. Now we have to follow the legal process and timeline.’ China has also warned of ‘consequences’ if the embassy is not approved, with the foreign affairs ministry in Beijing at one point declaring that the constant delays went ‘entirely against the UK’s commitments and previous remarks about improving China-UK relations’.
Starmer aims to visit Beijing at the end of the month with a posse of business people, the first visit by a British prime minister since Theresa May in 2018. However, China is reportedly refusing to confirm the visit until the embassy is approved. The Chinese government is also refusing to give the go-ahead to much needed refurbishment work at the British embassy in Beijing. Some would call that blackmail – but don’t expect a word of criticism from Starmer or his ministers this week, for whom appeasement appears to have become policy.
Comments