Despite Mass Protests, UK Approves Controversial Chinese Mega-Embassy In London

Authored by Evgenia Filimianova via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Despite a weekend protest, the UK has approved plans for a new, significantly expanded Chinese embassy in central London, ending a planning dispute and overriding objections from local authorities and lawmakers who raised national security concerns.

An exterior view of the proposed site for the new Chinese Embassy, near Tower Bridge in London on June 23, 2023. Hannah McKay/Reuters

The Chinese communist regime purchased the Royal Mint Court site in 2018 and plans to convert it into a much larger embassy than its existing building in London. The site is located in the City of London, the capital’s financial district.

Tower Hamlets Council rejected China’s initial planning application in 2022, citing concerns about security, scale, and local impact. A revised application was submitted in July 2024, shortly after the Labour Party entered government.

The site for the proposed embassy lies close to major data cables and financial infrastructure that underpin the UK’s banking and communications systems, a factor that featured heavily in parliamentary objections

Approval was granted on Jan. 20 by Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government Steve Reed.

The UK’s domestic and foreign intelligence agencies said security risks linked to the new embassy could not be fully eliminated, but could be managed through mitigation measures.

In a joint letter to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, MI5 Director General Ken McCallum and GCHQ’s Director Anne Keast-Butler said it was “not realistic to expect to be able wholly to eliminate each and every potential risk.”

The intelligence chiefs added that the work to develop a package of national security mitigations for the Royal Mint Court site had been proportionate.

Reed said in a Jan. 20 statement that the decision is final unless overturned by a court challenge. He said the approval was based on the recommendation of an independent planning inspector who held a public inquiry between Feb. 11 and Feb. 19, 2025.

Political Backlash

Opposition lawmakers from across the political spectrum criticized the approval.

Shadow Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government James Cleverly from the Conservative Party described it as “a disgraceful act.”

The Conservative Party’s shadow secretary of state for culture, media and sport, Nigel Huddleston, said in a Jan. 20 post on X that there were multiple reasons to oppose the project, including heritage concerns, citing historical sites the new embassy will sit atop, including the Royal Mint and a medieval Cistercian abbey.

The Liberal Democrats said on Jan. 20 that allowing the embassy to proceed was Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s biggest mistake yet. The party’s foreign affairs spokesman, Calum Miller, said the decision “will amplify China’s surveillance efforts here in the UK and endanger the security of our data.”

Protesters outside a proposed site for a new Chinese Embassy in London on Jan. 17, 2026. Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

A Reform UK spokesman said the decision to grant the new Chinese embassy planning permission “represents a serious threat to national security.”

Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws, a co-chair of the cross-party Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, said British lawmakers should take a firmer stance toward Beijing.

“Whilst British parliamentarians, like myself, remain unjustly sanctioned and British citizen Jimmy Lai remains imprisoned on political charges, the UK must take a principled stand,” she said. “We cannot reinforce the dangerous notion that Britain will continue to make concessions – such as granting a mega-embassy – without reciprocity or regard for the rule of law.”

A UK government spokesperson said on Jan. 20 that intelligence agencies had been involved throughout the process and that national security remained the top priority.

“This planning decision has been taken independently by the Secretary of State for Housing,” the spokesperson said. “This follows a process that began in 2018 when the then foreign secretary provided formal diplomatic consent for the site.”

The spokesperson said embassy construction was a normal feature of international relations.

“National security is our first duty,” they said, adding that “an extensive range of measures have been developed to manage any risks.”

The spokesperson also said China had agreed to consolidate seven existing diplomatic sites in London into one location, which the government said would provide “clear security advantages.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/21/2026 - 06:30

De Beers Cuts Diamond Prices, Botswana Warns Of Prolonged Slump

De Beers, the world's largest diamond mining company, has warned of a prolonged downturn in the gem industry after cutting prices for the first time since 2024. Botswana is the epicenter of De Beers' diamond production, and declining output alongside falling prices is set to put significant pressure on the southern African nation's finances.

On Monday, Bloomberg News reported that De Beers cut its diamond prices for the first time in over a year, abandoning efforts to prop up the market amid faltering demand.

A combination of soft Chinese luxury spending, expanding market share for lab-grown stones, and added pressure from US tariffs on India has pressured the world's largest diamond exporter.

The Diamond Standard Index, a benchmark price measure for investment-grade natural diamonds, has fallen by more than half since peaking in early 2022. The index is now at a record low, with data going back to 2002.

As for Botswana, the Finance Ministry warned that diamond income could fall to 10.3 billion pula ($744 million) in FY2025-26, less than half the historical average of 25.3 billion pula, and that revenues may never fully recover.

"The recovery in mineral revenue is expected to be prolonged," the Finance Ministry wrote in a report ahead of the annual budget next month. "The shortfall is likely to persist over the medium to long term with a possibility of a non-recovery."

Bloomberg wasn't clear about the size of the price discount De Beers offered buyers for diamonds.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/21/2026 - 05:45

"Rich Kids Of Iran" Flee To Turkish Nightclubs Amid Deadly Crackdown On Protesters: Report

The children of Iran's political and military elite are back in the spotlight for their opulent lifestyles amid reports that they fled the country to party in Turkish nightclubs, even as the regime's security forces carry out its deadliest crackdown on nationwide protests in years, the New York Post reports.

Anashid Hoseini, a model and designer, is married to the son of Iran’s ambassador to Denmark. They are considered part of the aghazadeh, or children of the elite

The phenomenon of Iran's affluent youth first drew international attention more than a decade ago through the Instagram account @richkidsoftehran (now with approximately 477,000 followers), which features eyebrow-raising posts of luxury cars such, watches, and designer gear.

Among the most infamous “Rich Kids of Iran" is Sasha Sobhani, the son of a former Iranian ambassador to Venezuela, who relocated to Spain in 2019 and has posted videos of his Lamborghini and other vehicles.

Sasha Sobhani, the son of a former Iranian ambassador to Venezuela, became a social media star showing off his expat life in Spain, where he moved in 2019. Instagram/sasha_sohbani

Another account belongs to Anashid Hoseini, who is married to the son of Iran's former ambassador to Denmark and whose Instagram account with over 1.7 million followers regularly displays expensive bling and designer handbags.

        View this post on Instagram                      

A post shared by Anashid Hoseini (@anashidhoseini)

The New York Post reports:

Amid an enforced internet blackout that allows an oppressive regime to commit “genocide under the cover of digital darkness,” according to one outraged expert, reporters from The Telegraph are said to have observed “rich Iranians” partying at a nightclub in a popular holiday hotspot on the border with Turkey.

And as the Telegraph reports:

The province of Van, in far-eastern Turkey, shares a mountainous border with Iran, making it a popular holiday destination for Iranians looking to party.

Despite the chaos at home – where more than two weeks of protests had been halted by deadly force and a total communications blackout – The Telegraph witnessed elite Iranians gathering to drink, socialise and party in Van city.

Locals said that in recent days, wealthy Iranians – some said to support the Islamic regime – had arrived in Turkey to escape the political instability, fearing the protesters might turn on them as well.

"They left Iran for now because they were worried about staying there. Here, they can feel safe. They have made a lot of money from their businesses in Iran, and then they come here to spend it," one Iranian said of the partygoers. 

"Imagine if, in your country, thousands of people had been killed. Would you have the heart to go out dancing in a bar?" another Iranian told the outlet. 

The renewed attention on Iran’s showdy elites has come into focus as Iranian authorities have now acknowledged that it’s brutal crackdown on protesters have resulted in significant casualties.

In a public address, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei conceded that "several thousand" Iranians died in the violence, which he unsurprisingly attributed to foreign-backed "rioters" and "terrorists" incited by President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

An unnamed Iranian official cited by Reuters estimated the verified death toll at least 5,000, including roughly 500 security personnel. Independent monitoring groups face challenges due to a near-total internet blackout, but the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) has confirmed more than 3,900 deaths, while other activist and medical sources inside Iran have cited figures ranging from 12,000 to 20,000 protester fatalities, according to CBS News.

Trump has repeatedly condemned the crackdown, urging protesters to continue their efforts and stating that "help is on its way.” The president has warned Tehran of "very strong action"—potentially including military measures—should executions of detained protesters proceed or the violence persist. The White House has said that all options remain under consideration, though to the eternal chagrin of warmongers like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), recent assessments suggest a possible deescalation.

Will the Telegraph cover 'rich kids of Israel' partying it up while bombs drop on Gaza?

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/21/2026 - 04:15

German Chancellor Merz Admits Shutting Down Nuclear Energy Production Was A "Severe Strategic Mistake"

Via The Last Refuge,

Germany has a severe electricity shortage and cost problem, and it’s getting worse.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently made the admission that shutting down the German nuclear power reactors was a “severe strategic mistake.”

“To have acceptable market prices for energy production again, we would have to permanently subsidize energy prices from the federal budget,” Merz said, adding:

“We can’t do this in the long run.”

“So, we are now undertaking the most expensive energy transition in the entire world,” Merz said with pronounced frustration.

“I know of no other country that makes things so expensive and difficult as Germany.”

Merz’s government aims to solicit bids to build 8 gigawatts of new gas-fired power plants this year with the goal of having them online by 2031.

Another 4 gigawatts of capacity are foreseen for lower-carbon energy sources or gas plants that can switch to hydrogen more quickly.

Merz said on industry power price cuts that “the European Commission will also approve the combination of several options.”

Keep in mind, Germany represents the largest contributing economy in the European Union. 

The German industrial sector is the backbone of the European economic model.

All of these realities paint a very tenuous picture for the economic future in Europe, when combined with a new trade relationship with the USA, increasingly cheap goods dumped into the EU by China and the EU promising to continue spending on the war effort in Ukraine against Russia.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/21/2026 - 03:30

"Naive To Think We’re Not At War": Latvia's Central Banker Warns Europe On Russia

Latvia's central bank governor, Martins Kazaks, has warned European leaders against downplaying the danger posed by Russia, describing in a fresh interview the European Union is already "at war" with Moscow and must be ready for further escalation, particularly in its financial systems.

This is raising eyebrows at the Kremlin, but many Russian officials might actually agree with this grim assessment: "It's naive to think that we are not at war" with Russia, Kazaks told the Financial Times.

Governor of the Bank of Latvia, Martins Kazaks

He cited as examples of an active war situation the ongoing cyberattacks on Europe, alleged acts of sabotage targeting infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, as well as drone violations of Danish and other EU airspace - the latter which has involved plenty of speculation and accusations leveled among EU officials, but no final or clear proof of links to Russia or its intelligence services.

Kazaks acknowledged that as of yet, the conflict connected to Ukraine is not being fought directly on EU soil, but he stressed "we need to be resilient to deal with that."

In response, Latvia’s central bank has intensified contingency planning in recent years, prioritizing uninterrupted access to cash and digital payments during emergencies and the ability to carry out offline card transactions for essential purchases. On this Kazāks emphasized, "We are in many cases best in the class."

He further cautioned that an armed conflict involving a eurozone member could trigger "financial stability issues" - but ironically he claimed that more and constant European/NATO support to Kiev would make these risks "marginal", also as the EU has newly sought to greatly bolster its own defensive capabilities.

This is in line with his own government's consistently hawkish anti-Moscow stance, along with the other tiny (but loud) Baltic and former Soviet satellite states.

We can say at the very least that Russia-NATO proxy war has been in full swing for quite a while now. As a reminder, the world just reached the following tragic milestone:

Russia’s full-fledged war against Ukraine has already lasted longer than the Soviet fight against Nazi Germany in World War II—as discussed in Steve Gutterman’s RFE/RL. “None of the conditions for a final resolution of the conflict are in place,” Ruth Deyermond of King’s College London told Gutterman for his analysis entitled "Will Russia's War Against Ukraine End In 2026?" Deyermond believes neither Ukraine nor Russia are “in a position to achieve a conclusive victory on the battlefield” or to collapse under pressure. According to Deyermond, the main obstacle to peace is Moscow’s stance: “Russia… seems to have no interest in an end to the fighting, let alone the war,” she says, while CSIS analyst Mark Cancian argues the Russians’ “stated goals are totally unacceptable” and their intransigence “stems from their belief that they are winning.” At best, a cease-fire or “temporarily frozen conflict” is possible so long as Putin’s presidency remains tied to the war, according to Crisis Group’s Olga Oliker.

But the above doesn't address the other pressing question: can Ukraine and its dwindling and fatigued armed forces last? While the West believes it is weakening Russia, there is little doubt that Ukraine is being fast drained and weakened to the brink of collapse. It is being propped up by the Western powers, financially, militarily, and really on almost every level.

For example, on the pressing issue of the country's collapsing power infrastructure, regional media warns amid rolling blackouts, power outages could begin to last over 16 hours a day under newly proposed emergency schedules. The country can't get parts fast enough to replace damaged substations, and this is an area where no amount of external support can keep up, ultimately.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/21/2026 - 02:45

Ukraine Is Defending Itself With Money Europe Doesn't Have

Authored by Ian Proud,

The ugly truth is that an end of the Ukraine war may have as devastating economic and political consequences for Europe as its continuance...

Ukraine already faces a $63 billion U.S. dollar funding shortfall in 2026 and I would be surprised if this figure doesn’t increase if the war continues. Ukraine’s massive fiscal splurge is driven by two factors

• The enormous cost of maintaining a standing army of almost one million people;

• The vast expense of importing weapons from the west to fight the war.

Weapon purchases are not sources of productive investment as they are literally burned in the heat of battle.

The same, of course, is true for Russia.

Both countries saw reducing economic growth in 2025, with Ukraine’s at 2.1% and 1.5%.

And, western pundits would point to this as evidence that Ukraine’s economy is performing better.

But the opposite is true.

Russia’s economy is around twelve times larger than Ukraine’s nominally and just over ten times larger when you look at GDP using purchasing power parity.

You can see this in the defence spending numbers.

Russia spent a record $143 billion on defence in 2025 compared to around $60 billion for Ukraine, so around 2.3 times higher. Yet, Russian defence spending amounted to just 6.3% of its GDP whereas for Ukraine it was 31.7%. So, massive spending on defence is a much less pivotal issue for Russia in terms of its economic fortunes.

Defence spending represents a far smaller proportion of total economic activity than it does for Ukraine. And Russia can afford to pay for its defence needs with its own finances, while Ukraine is entirely dependent on money from western donors to keep the war going.

Despite the massive cost of war, Russia ran a fiscal deficit of just 1.7% of GDP in 2025.

That is still well below the EU fiscal rule of 3% of GDP with some countries like France and Poland having deficits at or more than double that figure.

Ukraine’s fiscal deficit on the other hand was around 20% of GDP.

That gap had to be filled by foreign funding as it has debt of 107% of GDP and is cut off from foreign lending.

So, hence the EU stepping up with a loan of 90 billion Euros, two thirds of which is earmarked for defence.

Russia on the other hand has debt of around 15% of GDP and doesn’t really need to borrow heavily to keep its war effort afloat. By the way, 15% of GDP is far lower than the U.S. or any European nation, many of which, like Ukraine, have debt levels of over 100% of GDP.

Ukraine is defending itself with money Europe doesn’t have.

Despite the shock of sanctions, Russia doesn’t have to break the bank nor boost its lending significantly.

This also means that when the war eventually ends, Russia will be able to make the economic transition back to peace in a less painless way.

Russia will be under no pressure to impose massive cuts to defence spending to live within its means and can instead do so gradually.

Ukraine on the other hand faces a massive financial cliff edge when the war ends.

Ukrainian economic growth according to the OECD is set to fall further to 1.7% in 2027 if the war continues.

And that assumes continued large injections of capital from outside countries. In 2025, Ukrainian defence spending made up 31.1% of Ukrainian GDP, and two thirds of state budgetary expenditure. None of that spending goes into improving Ukraine’s weak economy.

With all of the support that it receives, Ukraine’s GDP in 2025 amounted to just under $210 billion according to the IMF.

Bear in mind here that Ukraine received $52.4 billion in external financing in 2025, or around one quarter of its GDP at the end of the year.

Take away foreign funding and Ukraine suddenly sees its economy shrink by over 20%.

Or, put it another way, take away the war and Ukraine sees its economy shrink by over 20%.

Russia simply does not face the same problem.

Rather, an end to the war may help Russia to get inflation – perhaps its biggest economic challenge – under control as economic activity returns to its normal rhythm.

But still the question arises, how come Ukraine has grown so little when it received so much foreign funding?

One big reason is that Ukraine recorded a trade deficit of $30 billion over the same period, a record according to the National Bank of Ukraine.

So, $52 billion in foreign money came into Ukraine during the year and $30 billion went straight back out again.

Because Ukraine’s massive trade deficit is fuelled by two things.

• First, a huge increase in the import of weapons from western suppliers which have doubled since 2022, not least as they are no longer being provided free of charge.

• Second, Ukraine has increased its imports of natural resources, in particular a massive increase in gas imports, because domestic production has been hit hard by the war. Coal is another area, as Russia has swallowed up important coal mines in the Donbas.

Not all of that deficit in trade will be recoverable even after the war ends, even if Ukraine was able to reduce the overall size of its trade deficit.

By comparison, Russia’s surplus of trade in goods was already at over $100 billion by October 2025, although the overall trade picture is narrower, at around $36 billion because of a significant deficit in services trade, including from large numbers of Russians who have moved overseas since the war started.

An end to the war, if anything, may allow Russia’s trade surpluses to grow further. A future relaxation on the import of natural resources into Europe could mean that Russia benefited from already increased trade with Asia and renewed trade with Europe.

In any case, the consistent surpluses that Russia pulls in both help shore up economic growth and foreign exchange reserves, which in 2025 grew by over $135 billion to a whopping $734 billion.

And just to be clear, Russia put their reserve funds almost completely into gold which now stand at over $310 billion.

One big reason for Russia storing its reserves in gold is to keep them clear of the stealing hands of western bureaucrats, who froze around $300 billion in reserves at the start of the war.

This means that Russia has a surplus of $434 billion in foreign exchange reserves which is almost completely insulated from western expropriation. The $10 billion rise in foreign currency reserves in 2025 was undoubtedly caused by an accumulation of reserves in non-dollar, Euro and sterling currencies, suggesting the move to greater trade in Chinese Yuan and Indian rupees.

An end to the war may at some point lead to the unfreezing of immobilised Russian assets in the U.S., Europe and Japan.

Ukraine’s reserve position is also comparatively strong, at $57.3 billion at the start of 2026, a record figure. However, that rise is completely down to inflows of foreign capital to fund the war effort. An end to the war would likely shrink Ukraine’s reserves as its stubborn trade deficit was not being offset by foreign inflows of funds as they had been during war.

But it’s the sudden and shocking loss of foreign funding that accompanies an end to the war which will cause Ukraine’s economy to shrink dramatically.

But fear not, Europe is determined that Ukraine maintain an army of 800,000 personnel when the war ends. However, this seems more about economic survival than about security.

Ukraine would not be able to pay for such as large army with its own money, as it doesn’t have any money. So, once again, Europe will be forced to step in to meet Ukraine’s financing needs to pay the salaries of soldiers who are no longer in war fighting mode.

This will lead to debt and taxes rising in Europe, according to a recent Kiel Institute study. But it will also lead to a loss of business for European defence firms. Because peace time will inevitably mean a sharp drop in the munitions and military material being burned on a daily basis in the fog of war.

Two thirds of the EU’s recently 90 billion Euro loan to Ukraine will be spent on military support, including weaponry. That has sparked an argument between Germany and France over a proposed ‘buy European’ clause, with France wanting to prevent Ukrainian purchases of U.S. equipment. Perhaps with one eye on the future, the French in typical fashion, are trying to ensure that their firms get a decent share of what could amount to dwindling Ukrainian orders for weapons.

A bit like the French army, Europe is reversing itself inevitably into economic defeat when the war ends.

Obligated to keep an economically failed Ukraine on life support.

Having to increase its debt and taxes to support bad foreign policy decisions it has been taking since 2014.

Trying to boost its defence industrial complex but losing business with the end of war.

For the mainstream political parties in Europe, this adds to the trend of them heading towards electoral Armageddon when they start putting themselves to the polls from 2027 onward.

Until then, they are stuck, knowing that continuing the war will kill them electorally, and knowing that ending the war will too.

To quote my old British soldier dad, they are like the mythical oozlum bird, continually going round in circles until they disappear up their own backsides.

Tyler Durden Wed, 01/21/2026 - 02:00