China Intimidated UK University to Ditch Human Rights Research, Documents Show
Posted2 months agoActive2 months ago
bbc.comOtherstoryHigh profile
heatednegative
Debate
80/100
China InfluenceUK UniversitiesAcademic Freedom
Key topics
China Influence
UK Universities
Academic Freedom
China allegedly intimidated a UK university into dropping human rights research, sparking debate about the influence of international students and funding on academic freedom.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
1h
Peak period
59
2-4h
Avg / period
11
Comment distribution88 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 88 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Nov 3, 2025 at 3:15 AM EST
2 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Nov 3, 2025 at 4:37 AM EST
1h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
59 comments in 2-4h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Nov 4, 2025 at 9:31 AM EST
2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45796907Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 6:45:47 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Anecdotally - some of them(definitely not all, not even a majority) - clearly didn't care about actually learning anything, they just spent the entire day in the lab playing LoL or didn't actually turn up. In a private conversation with our professor he said he's basically not allowed to fail them even if they don't turn anything in, the funding they get is far too important. And they still have to somehow produce an MSc thesis at the end to get their degree, so in the eyes of the university they are still passing correctly to get their degree.
Either way - UK universities are too dependent on that funding to risk angering China which can easily make it a pain to go to UK to study.
When the bubble bursts (and it will, probably due to immigration politics) we will have a load of empty, badly-built SROs unfit for normal habitation.
That’s a better option than people buying flats in residential buildings and letting them out to students, which is what’s happening around White City with the new Imperial campus.
I don't think anyone can go London and think it is all bad unless you just don't like urban places.
People say this in defence of the city. But I was an occasional visitor (usually seeing Uni mates). My experience as someone that occasionally used to visit to see friends was usually awful and expensive.
Just getting in an out of the city is generally difficult on public transport. It is like a 3 hour train ride and then another hour or two on the underground. Driving used to be OK (I've done it twice), but I've heard it has got worse.
I've been in London quite a bit during my 20s and 30s. I hate the place and I never went back after 2018.
- It is really expensive. This is coming from someone that grew up in Dorset (which is known for being expensive).
- People are constantly rude and aggressive. Usually there is like no reason for it.
- I had to pay a fine on the underground even though I had the London Travel for car for it (forgot what it was called now). I was treated as a criminal and forced to pay a fine on the spot. It was total BS.
- I got fined for getting lost and driving down the wrong street. I was less than 1 minute on that road before I realised my mistake and got a £80 fine. Also total BS.
- I had a man scream in my face because I went in the wrong lane at a junction.
- Had some guy rapping his Grime single presumably to sell CDs / iTunes album. I thought I was in a skit. Everyone was just waiting for the dude to shut up. Everyone had that look on their face of "not this shit again", as if it happens often.
- I had a man try to mug me in a Train station (Euston).
After that last incident decided, I am not ever going back to London.
> I don't think anyone can go London and think it is all bad unless you just don't like urban places.
London is awful. I used live in Dorset/Hampshire, every weekend there is literally an exodus from London to Hampshire and Dorset. Half the people I work with that go to London for work, hate it. So, it isn't just me.
I've lived in Southampton, Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield (I used to travel a lot for work as a contractor / consultant) and while I wouldn't live in those places now, I don't hate them.
In my country of origin, the prestigious universities were all public and (almost) free. The most sough after degrees are difficult to get in and difficult to finish.
There, the mentality is that the only reason why would you pay for a private university is if youre not smart enough to finish the degrees on your own. I always found it intriguing that the logic is reversed in the US - the good ones are the expensive ones and the only reason you wouldnt go there is if you cant afford it. But Im glad to see that the logic in my home country does have some merit, as evidenced by the quote from your professor.
The very best schools in the US: to choose a relatively uncontroversial list, MIT, Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, Yale -- all have need blind admissions, meaning they assess your ability to come whether or not you need financial aid. At least some (like Harvard) have sliding tuition scales that make the school totally free if family income is under $100k a year, or room and board only for family income under $200k a year, with some support continuing for families that make more than 200k.
Students want to go to these schools because they offer class mobility in the states alongside the excellent education.
Additionally you have to go well down the list of top tier universities and colleges in America before you get to one that spends less than tuition on its students. Yale states they spend about $90k over tuition per undergraduate for instance.
IDK if this is true.
In other words, you won't be refused an offer simply because the university thinks you can't afford it.
Bear in mind this is a thread discussing how UK universities are claiming in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are not being influenced by foreign governments. So we should be able to accept that universities are capable of lying about their internal practices.
We absolutely should. As of now, universities tend to get away with practices that would be called out in the private sector. Entshittification of some services plus greed plus willingness to bend your morality around someone's golden glove (which hides a fist...).
I don't doubt that it's been kept around for the reason you described though.
A lot of universities across the west seem to have cargo cult copied the Harvard application model. Harvard are doing it so it must be good.
I'm really not a fan of this. I'm from a part of the world where it's practically impossible to describe your extra-curricular activities without giving away your ethnic background.
Who exactly receives these class mobility benefits and who does not are at the center of a multi-decade culture war in the US, with lines drawn on all sides. It's definitely an open topic at schools, and the Supreme Court weighed in a few years ago on the matter.
Chinese and Indian students and the children of African diplomats pay ‘international’ fees. This is an international, mobile clientele with considerable means who have a choice. This represents a significant source of income.
In addition, the percentage of foreign students is taken into account in many rankings, prestige, etc. Therefore, public universities are also affected by this phenomenon.
At this point I just try and avoid selecting people for interview who fit this profile at all.
Usually they were completely lost but at the end of it they got a "better" degree than ours, which was annoying...
We had quite a lot of foreign students on the course and they were all, without exception, completely awesome and great people to do a course with. Mind you, Norwegian moonshine is horrific...
[1] by well-regarded, I mean well-regarded by eg people at competently run well-paying firms who do hiring, rather than eg people who are really into politics and who have idiosyncratic opinions about particular universities
Part of my bias is that I was an exchange student at RIT and while I appreciated the experience, I was not impressed by the CS courses or the level of maths of the students going there.
Funnily enough, as a full-fee paying international student, I had an easier time learning in India than in the US a decade or so ago; the only thing that made my masters education worthwhile was the research opportunities, the general quality of students, and an easier job market (at that time). Given that all three are in decline right now, I would not advise anyone to pursue masters abroad.
About 10 yrs ago, I had 3 students in my chem class from Saudi Arabia who:
- could barely speak English (this is relevant)
- would fail my weekly quizzes miserably, using nigh incomprehensible English when they had to explain an answer.
- aced my first exam (3 highest grades!) using idiomatic English in all of their explanations (and they used the same idioms!).
Obviously, they were cheating. It's far too complicated to explain how they cheated, but man oh man my Dean did not want to hear about a group of cheating foreign students.
The Dean never told me that I couldn't fail them (I did fail them), but he did not want me to bring this 'problem' to him--and I could tell that if there were any political blow-back associated with their failing grades, it was going to be 'my fault.'
The main cheater even emailed me near the end of the semester and admitted he cheated, but explained that if I failed him, he would have to stay an extra semester to complete the course.
I'm pretty sure the school where my students were enrolled knew that they admitted students with fraudulent TOEFL scores, but they needed the $$$.
No idea if it is still the way to handle foreign students nowadays tho. But I think that's how every school should handle foreign students: no special passes, asked to learn the language to integrate.
I would take a guess and say most of their parents are also rich so accomodation even in West London is no problem.
This is not a poor student who worked their ass off to get to the UK storyline, this is a foreign program set up in the UK. Makes you wonder what the fuck is going on.
Last breaths of a dying empire. UK is trying to make a quick buck on its prestige before it's gone.
£9-10k a year sounds like a lot but it is eg not that far off the amortized cost of the various computer hardware I use for development at work. Similarly, the maintenance loans tend to be much lower than typical living costs for someone with a job but they were sufficient when I was a student. Maybe I was particularly fortunate as a student or I have a particularly expensive development environment at work.
I do think the dependence on foreign student fees is bad. Part of this is the government cutting funding massively and part is terrible management of the student visa system – universities should not have been allowed to be a backdoor way of paying for a U.K. visa as this hurt the legitimate use of the system.
When I was a student not so long ago but before the recent REF/funding/immigration changes, the international students (typically from the EU paying home fees, but also those from outside the EU paying full tuition) were clearly very able, often more so than home students. The most suspiciously moronic students seemed to be on de facto sports scholarships.
And what I mean by this - when I finished uni I had £12k debt, which I paid off after about 10 years of working, and it was on about 1% interest that entire time. In contrast, my sister who finished university few years after me, has around £50k of student loan debt. And that loan is now on.....7% interest? It's insane. She is working full time and her payments are not even covering that interest, or barely cover it - she will never pay that loan off, it will eventually get written off. It's a constant 10% tax on all of her earnings, for 25 years(I think it's 30 now? or 35?) - except that this tax doesn't even go to the treasury.
£50k is a lot to your sister because of the sorry state of the British jobs market.
To put it simply, there was a principle of reciprocity: if the Chinese students passed their years, the French students would also pass theirs. If it became too difficult or the results were not as expected, it would become difficult for our students.
There were lots of tricks, with special exams in English or Chinese, catch-up work, etc. Who corrected the Chinese assignments in France? No idea.
It was also common knowledge that they had to bring back research documents to China. The lab manager left uninteresting documents lying around everywhere to control the phenomenon.
So nothing new, nothing has changed.
China has been very successful with its university rankings, with everyone scrambling to increase their foreign student numbers and collect tuition fees at the expense of academic results.
All this for the prestige of being ranked by a Chinese university.
Vice chancellors earn salaries that are often multiples of what the prime minister earns and pay at the senior levels is scaled from that - at the same time they take advantage of people who are full time academics at the start of their careers.
The whole system is old, creaky and probably needs widespread reform but it also won't get it until external factors force it.
Wonder how long it will take before the Chinese are powerful enough that they can launch missile strikes? Or put bombs in mobile phones?
Consequently, when someone attempts to publish material about Qatar, particularly regarding its role in financing Hamas, they often hit a wall. As one case illustrates, “the editorial team has an issue with the fact that they have an upcoming partnership in December with Qatar. One of the directors flagged it as problematic and felt it might put them in a delicate position, so they prefer to run another piece with a lighter touch on the subject. Sorry.”[3]
Coming from a developing country where Islamists and anti-Western propaganda are pervasive, it is surreal to witness Western institutions falling, one by one, under the influence of autocratic and religiously extremist governments. This is where Western civilization appears to be declining: not because of “America First” politics, but because of low birth rates and an education system increasingly shaped by cash-rich foreign actors whose values diverge sharply from Western liberal principles.
[0]: https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2025/04/02/qatars-footprint-in-...
[1]: https://quincyinst.org/research/soft-power-hard-influence-ho...
[2]: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/brookings-president-res...
[3]: https://quillette.com/2025/10/31/the-qatar-problem-hamas-isr...
"low birth rates"
fwiw, this was such a insane non sequitur that I immediately became skeptical of everything else you said
https://www.npr.org/2025/01/08/nx-s1-5246200/demographic-cli...
Colleges in the US are panicking over enrollment.
No, this is not made-up FUD at all.
Another lesser problem is the half-baked REF system.
(full disclosure: I dropped out of state school with a 2.8 GPA in economics and got a job at Google 5 years later. yet, I can avoid this fallacy, so it's disturbing to see)
The point about the tourism/finishing school aspect of universities in Britain is widely held and has been reported on for years. It was inevitable that it would provide China with leverage and other things. Not a good idea imo.
We also went on a bit of a walk back from the bailey to the motte. "sector in the tourism industry" to "tourism/finishing school aspect" (tourism ~= finishing school now?).
Then, a vague hand wave towards "wide reporting" for...the original idea that universities are tourism? Or one of the new ones, like universities have an aspect of finishing school? Unclear.
- U.K. universities have pivoted to being a finishing school (e.g. you cannot fail if you pay enough money) and Harry Potter experience for international students. -This affects all levels of prestige. Harms research. - Is a geopolitical leverage tool of unknown power. Interesting example linked by poster.
This is well known in most of Western Europe as a phenomena and some naive people love it because it makes short term profits: https://opportunities-insight.britishcouncil.org/short-artic...
I also agree in the sense that there are less prestigious universities that appear to operate as if they are almost Chinese/in China.
Both are major concerns I would have thought.
I'm not sure how you fix this. The UK is sleep walking into becoming irrelevant.
For me I draw the line at military systems (though given the type of programming I do not really relevant) and gambling systems (which actually has come up before and was a lot more money but I decided that me looking in the mirror and liking the person looking back mattered more) - I don't presume to judge other people for it though, it's my personal choice.
The story is very different for "ex-polys" like Sheffield Hallam, or oxford brooks many of whom absolutely trade on the basis of foreign students essentially propping up the entire operation more or less.
Some of this is their own making - for example the 'highly respected' universities not doing clearing so when their intake is lower than expected they don't top that up with 2nd choices.
Schools are now competing within universities to win student retention so their numbers don't look as bad / to help protect their budgets from being slashed further.
> pretty much all of our "traditional" universities are absolutely capable of standing on their feet without international students
This is simply not true. At least not currently possible. If the UK made the _strategic decision_ then I don't see why we couldn't, but currently if all foreign students boycott'd the UK then the majority of our universities would be bankrupt. (Again, in the way they are currently managed: they could sell property etc. but that's never considered.)
Two things:
1. converting all the old Polytechnics to Universities, in 1992, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universities_in_the_United_Kin...
followed by
2. trying to get '50%' of kids into further education https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/mar/08/johncarvel
The state already paid for education to the age of 18. Another 3 years of specialized education costs (the state) more. Getting more kids into HE, costs more even when they fees that are still state subsidized. Hence the increase in unsubsidised foreign students.
It's debatable whether the desired outcome of better educated and 'more employable' 21 year olds was actually achieved, or whether it simply removed a large cohort from the unemployment figures.
It probably could but Universities as with all organisations are going to take the easy path and trading in on the prestige of UK universities for foreign students is easier and more profitable.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45790447
15 more comments available on Hacker News