China’s plan to create a “super-embassy” in London will necessitate the deployment of extra police personnel to manage potential mass protests of thousands of participants, as indicated by the Metropolitan Police ahead of a ministerial ruling.

Although the Met has withdrawn its official opposition to the project, it still expresses apprehensions about the complications that protests exceeding 500 individuals could cause to traffic flow, as stated by Deputy Assistant Commissioner Jon Savell, who highlighted that such events would “mandate additional police resources.”

In correspondence with former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith and the Home Office earlier this month, Savell reiterated the Met’s ongoing concerns regarding the embassy’s repercussions on the Tower Bridge vicinity.

In February and March, two significant demonstrations took place at the proposed embassy site, attracting between 3,000 to 5,000 attendees—far exceeding the Met’s estimation that gatherings of over 500 would be unsafe at the location. Another protest is planned for early May.

China intends to construct a new embassy on a 20,000 square meter plot at Royal Mint Court, within a historically significant 18th-century Grade II-listed structure. Tower Hamlets council rejected the proposal in December 2022, but China resubmitted its plans last summer after Labour came into power.

Ministers have bypassed the council’s authority and conducted a local inquiry where residents and activist groups voiced their concerns. The ultimate decision lies with Angela Rayner, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities, and Local Government.

In December, the Met warned that any assembly of over 100 individuals would likely overflow onto the roadway, posing risks to public safety and causing potential disruptions throughout the city.

Despite this, the following month, the Met retracted its objection after reviewing an older technical document financed by China, which suggested that up to 2,000 protesters could be accommodated safely around the site.

The withdrawal of the Met’s formal objection has opened the door for the approval of the plans. Although Tower Hamlets council reiterated its opposition in December based on police evidence, it has since stated that the removal of the Met’s objection meant it could no longer rely on that information.

During the local inquiry in February, the attorney representing the residents contended that ministers had attempted to sway the Met in favor of the project.

David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, and Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, have publicly endorsed the embassy project. In a joint letter from January, they emphasized the significance of nations maintaining operational diplomatic missions within each other’s capitals.

At that time, the ministers remarked that the Met felt “satisfied” that there was adequate space for demonstrations, while acknowledging that “differences of opinion remain regarding where protesters might congregate.”

As China seeks approval for the embassy, this has become a pressing diplomatic aim, especially as the UK government looks to foster stronger ties with the country.

Savell’s letter to Duncan Smith was dispatched after discussions with members of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (Ipac), which has expressed strong opposition to the embassy proposal and advocates for a firmer stance against Beijing.

Savell noted that the road junction next to Royal Mint Court would necessitate augmented police resources for larger gatherings to ensure both the safety of protesters and the uninterrupted flow of traffic, highlighting experiences from the recent large-scale protests.

Duncan Smith expressed intentions to reply to the Met, urging the force to communicate its concerns to ministers. “If arguments pertaining to national security and foreign interference are insufficient, perhaps the potential closure of the Tower Bridge junction and the mobilization of officers from across London to maintain safety will convince the government to reject this application,” he stated.

Savell’s letter clarified that the Met remains neutral regarding the proposed development, aside from its policing implications.

Blair McDougall, a Labour MP on the foreign affairs committee, remarked, “The Met’s evaluation clearly indicates that there isn’t enough room for protests at Royal Mint Court, where the safety of protesters would be compromised, and such gatherings would require significant police involvement, resulting in major traffic disruptions. The right to protest is non-negotiable, and the embassy should be situated where this right can be safeguarded effectively.”

Luke de Pulford, Executive Director of Ipac, commented, “A substantial amount of public funds has already been squandered on policing large protests at this site. It is neither safe nor accommodating. Demonstrations will persist until permission for this misguided embassy is revoked. It shouldn’t have taken the efforts of MPs, residents, and thousands of activists for the police to acknowledge the obvious, but I’m pleased they have.”