Published: 04 August ‘2025. The English Chronicle Desk
An alarming new report reveals that UK academics and students engaged in China-related research are increasingly facing harassment, surveillance, and institutional pressure to self-censor, especially when their work touches on issues considered politically sensitive by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
The findings, published by the transparency group UK-China Transparency, shed light on a growing concern within British higher education, where financial ties with Chinese institutions and dependence on Chinese international students may be compromising academic freedom. Based on responses from 50 scholars across UK universities, the report paints a picture of a conflicted academic landscape—some institutions support critical research on China, while others appear to prioritize diplomatic and financial considerations over scholarly integrity.
Several respondents shared deeply unsettling experiences, including being stalked, verbally threatened, and monitored by visiting Chinese scholars. One academic recounted how a Chinese visiting scholar whispered, “we’re watching you,” during an interaction, while others reported that their Chinese students had been coerced into spying on university events and were later interrogated by Chinese authorities upon returning home. One scholar even halted their teaching duties altogether after persistent intimidation.
The report also highlights administrative interference. Some academics were reportedly told by university administrators to avoid content that might offend Chinese students or risk diplomatic tensions. In certain cases, scholars were pressured by external funders to abandon or alter research projects deemed sensitive to the Chinese government. In one instance, a faculty event was canceled entirely, and its funding returned, allegedly due to Chinese governmental pressure.
While a significant portion of respondents—64%—believed that the financial dependence on Chinese students influenced university administrators’ stance on political issues, 38% felt this atmosphere hindered their ability to conduct objective research. In contrast, 46% claimed that their work remained unaffected.
Despite the challenges, some respondents saw value in continuing their sensitive work, emphasizing that academic scrutiny of China’s political system remains essential, though often difficult. A few scholars suggested that opportunities have arisen for those adopting a more critical approach, though others warned of a lack of nuance and increasing polarization within the field.
China’s embassy in London firmly rejected the report, calling it “completely groundless and absurd.” The embassy reiterated its commitment to academic freedom and denied interfering in other nations’ internal affairs. It urged the continuation of educational and cultural cooperation between China and the UK.
Dr. David Tobin, a lecturer in East Asian Studies at the University of Sheffield, lent further credibility to the findings, stating that these issues have persisted since at least 2007. Tobin recounted an incident where officials from the Chinese consulate, invited by a colleague, roamed his workplace unsupervised and viewed sensitive materials on his screen. He added that Chinese scholars based in the UK remain fearful, with their families in China sometimes targeted for their academic activities abroad.
The government has responded with new guidance, cautioning universities that partnerships requiring ideological alignment—such as those involving Confucius Institutes—may violate UK regulations. The message is clear: while global collaboration is vital, it must not come at the expense of academic freedom, integrity, or national security.
As tensions between geopolitical interests and institutional values rise, British universities are now forced to confront difficult questions about whom they serve—and at what cost.
