China-critical UK academics face ‘extremely heavy’ pressure from

Published: 06 November 2025. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

A growing number of UK academics whose research is critical of China are reporting significant pressure from Beijing, prompting concerns over academic freedom and the financial dependence of UK universities on Chinese students. Scholars have described targeted harassment, threats, and institutional constraints that they say compromise their ability to conduct research freely, raising questions about the broader implications for higher education in Britain.

The revelations follow reports that Sheffield Hallam University had complied with a demand from Beijing to halt research into human rights abuses in China, forcing the cancellation of a major project. The university’s decision, initially framed as a compliance measure, has reignited debate about the extent to which financial incentives influence academic autonomy. Researchers fear that the high fees paid by international students, the majority of whom come from China, can leave institutions vulnerable to external influence.

One UK-based China scholar, speaking anonymously for safety reasons, described being subjected to death threats and a coordinated smear campaign. Another academic, sanctioned by China for her research into the treatment of Uyghur Muslims, revealed she can no longer travel to China to conduct fieldwork. These cases highlight the varied strategies Beijing reportedly employs, ranging from subtle pressure and institutional caution to overt targeting of individual academics.

In February, Sheffield Hallam University, home to the Helena Kennedy Centre for International Justice (HKC), asked one of its leading researchers, Professor Laura Murphy, to suspend work on a project examining supply chains and forced labour in China. Documents seen by journalists suggest that commercial considerations played a role in limiting Murphy’s work, raising concerns that financial interests may outweigh academic principles. The suspension, which lasted eight months, was lifted in October following threats of legal action, with the university issuing an apology. Despite the reversal, the episode has underscored the chilling effect such interventions can have on academic research.

Murphy told the Guardian: “I think that there are a lot of people who experience some version of this, typically more subtle, usually not so black and white. But it’s too risky to speak out against their university. They’re worried they might suffer consequences.” Her statement reflects broader unease among academics who study China, as universities balance financial interests with the principles of free inquiry.

Andreas Fulda, a political scientist and China expert at the University of Nottingham, has also been directly targeted. He described receiving “spoof” emails sent in his name to colleagues, falsely announcing his resignation and inviting them to a farewell gathering. Fulda also reported death threats directed at both himself and his family. “What I’ve come to learn is that once you reach a certain perception threshold in the eyes of the Chinese security agencies, you are punished to dissuade you from airing your views,” he said.

Fulda argued that the Sheffield Hallam case demonstrates structural vulnerabilities in UK higher education, where universities’ reliance on Chinese tuition fees creates leverage for Beijing. The Chinese government, he said, can indirectly shape research agendas and institutional decisions. “British universities have considerable vulnerabilities. I am afraid that we will experience many more Sheffield Hallam incidents in the future if universities do not stop cosying up to China,” Fulda warned.

Jo Smith Finley, a reader in Chinese studies at Newcastle University, was sanctioned by China in 2021 for her research into human rights abuses against Uyghur Muslims. She described the ongoing pressure as “extremely heavy,” noting that it affects both recruitment operations in China and the behaviour of university managers in the UK. “Ever since then, Newcastle University has been walking a very difficult tightrope in its treatment of me, because I’ve become a liability in a context where universities are all dependent on Chinese student tuition fees,” Finley said.

Other academics working on China-related issues have been reluctant to speak publicly, citing fear of professional repercussions. Amid widespread redundancies and financial uncertainty in the sector, some staff feel that openly discussing the pressures imposed by Beijing could jeopardise their employment. One anonymous academic told the press: “I’m scared I will lose my job if I talk about my experiences of working on China in British universities.”

Universities UK, which represents higher education institutions across the country, said it remains committed to safeguarding academic freedom and free speech. A spokesperson stated: “UK universities are committed to upholding free speech and academic freedom. They work hard to protect these fundamental freedoms and meet significant legal duties in this area set out by the Office for Students. This commitment extends to international research and partnerships with institutions around the world.”

The spokesperson added that universities take threats to staff and students extremely seriously and collaborate closely with the government to mitigate risks. “Anyone working or studying at our universities should know that their rights to personal and academic freedom are protected when they are on British soil,” the statement said.

Experts say the case underscores broader systemic issues in the UK’s reliance on international student fees. Universities have increasingly become financially dependent on Chinese tuition, which has risen sharply in recent years. This reliance, while supporting university budgets, can also create vulnerabilities that foreign governments may exploit. Policy analysts warn that the current funding model risks compromising institutional autonomy, as universities may be hesitant to support research that could endanger student recruitment or provoke international tensions.

In addition to these pressures, academics report self-censorship as a widespread response to potential threats. The fear of jeopardising institutional funding, combined with the personal risks associated with research critical of Beijing, has led some scholars to modify or abandon projects. Fulda emphasised that these indirect forms of pressure are often as damaging as overt censorship. “Soft pressure is pervasive,” he said. “It encourages self-censorship, which ultimately undermines the integrity of research and academic debate.”

Calls are growing for a reassessment of the UK higher education sector’s dependence on international tuition. Scholars, policymakers, and commentators have urged universities to diversify revenue streams and reduce reliance on a single source of funding. Some suggest greater government support for domestic students and targeted measures to protect academic independence, including safeguards against external influence in research and curriculum design.

The Sheffield Hallam incident is viewed by some as a potential turning point. By exposing the risks faced by researchers critical of China, it has sparked renewed debate about the balance between financial sustainability and academic freedom. Experts argue that without structural reforms, similar cases are likely to recur, creating a climate in which scholars may feel compelled to avoid topics considered politically sensitive.

In the face of these challenges, academics continue to highlight the importance of resilience, institutional accountability, and advocacy for academic freedom. While the pressures from Beijing are described as “extremely heavy,” scholars argue that transparent policies, government support, and international solidarity can help protect the integrity of UK research and maintain the country’s position as a global leader in higher education.

The case also reflects broader geopolitical tensions, as China seeks to extend its influence in international institutions, while Western universities navigate the competing priorities of financial stability and scholarly independence. For UK universities, the unfolding situation serves as a reminder that global engagement must be managed carefully to safeguard academic freedom and uphold the principles that underpin higher education.