Tensions between Britain and China have escalated significantly following further delays to the planning decision on Beijing's proposed “mega embassy” in London. China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed “grave concern and strong dissatisfaction” after Steve Reed, the UK Housing Secretary, pushed back his final decision until December 10, 2025. This diplomatic row further complicates Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s attempts to reset relations with Beijing, efforts already hampered by accusations of Chinese espionage in the UK.

The controversy centers on China's ambition to establish a vast diplomatic headquarters at the former Royal Mint site near the Tower of London. Beijing purchased the historic site for £255 million in 2018 with the intention of relocating its embassy from Marylebone. However, its initial redevelopment plans were rejected by Tower Hamlets Council in 2022. Following Labour’s general election victory, a planning application was resubmitted, and Prime Minister Starmer revealed that ministers “called in” the decision after Chinese President Xi Jinping raised the matter with him.

Lin Jian, a spokesperson for the Chinese foreign ministry, vehemently criticized the UK, stating that it had shown “disregard for contractual spirit, acting in bad faith and without integrity” and demanded that the UK “immediately fulfil its obligations and honour its commitments otherwise the British side shall bear all consequences.” The UK, through Downing Street and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), maintained that the delay was not politically motivated but reflected the “detailed nature of the representations” and the need for “full consideration” of the complex application. Downing Street also rejected any claims of commitments or assurances made by the government regarding the embassy.

Significant national security concerns underpin the opposition to the embassy project. Former senior Downing Street aide Dominic Cummings and UK security services (MI5 and MI6) have explicitly warned that China intends to use the new embassy as a “spy centre.” These concerns are amplified by the proposed location’s proximity to critical infrastructure, including fibre-optic cables, datacentres, and telecoms exchanges serving Canary Wharf and the City of London, raising “eavesdropping risks in peacetime and sabotage risks in a crisis.” The initial planning drawings submitted by China contained redacted portions, further fueling suspicions of covert intentions.

The diplomatic strain is compounded by an ongoing row over alleged Chinese espionage in the UK. The case against two British citizens, Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry, accused of spying for China, collapsed last month. This collapse prompted accusations that the government had intervened to preserve diplomatic ties with Beijing, a claim Labour ministers attributed to the previous Tory administration’s failure to officially designate China as a threat. However, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch suggested Labour made a “deliberate decision to collapse the case” to “curry favour” with Beijing. Reports also suggest Beijing has accessed classified material on British servers for several years, renewing fears that the new embassy could enhance surveillance efforts.

Political figures from across the spectrum have voiced strong opposition. Matt Western, a Labour MP and chair of the joint committee on national security, wrote to the government, warning that approving the embassy was “not in the UK’s long-term interest.” Sir James Cleverly, the Tory shadow housing secretary, emphasized the need for access to full unredacted drawings and for security agencies to submit evidence in private. Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrats’ foreign affairs spokesperson, called for the embassy proposal to be “put out of its misery,” urging the government to signal a firm stance against industrial espionage.

Despite the heated rhetoric and security concerns, Housing Secretary Steve Reed has reiterated that national security will be “paramount” in his decision and that he expects to see full, unredacted plans for the proposed site. While a new deadline for the decision has been set for December 10, 2025, Downing Street indicated that this date is “not legally binding,” suggesting the timeline could potentially slip again amid the ongoing complexities and diplomatic pressures.