There is growing momentum among Western countries to take stronger action against transnational repression – the overt and covert tactics of some authoritarian governments, including China, to suppress dissent abroad. In June, the leaders of the United States, Japan, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Canada, and the EU pledged “to boost G-7 cooperation” to counter a practice that “undermines national security [and] the safety and human rights of victims.” The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Austrian diplomat Volker Turk, also told the Human Rights Council that all states should have “zero tolerance” for such abuses.
However, Europe remains ill-prepared. According to a European Parliament study on the impact of transnational repression on public life, “EU member states are falling short in upholding their obligations to protect human rights defenders at risk.”
Transnational repression has garnered significant attention in recent years due to increasing evidence of Beijing’s systemic targeting of dissidents, ethnic groups, political activists, journalists, students, and others abroad – at times using regular diplomatic and law enforcement channels, but more often relying on covert ones.
[...]
China uses these covert tactics in tandem with overt exploitation of law enforcement mechanisms such as Interpol, extradition treaties, arrest warrants, or counterterrorism efforts. [...] Beijing has used these worldwide requests to co-opt European law enforcement agencies into the provisional arrest of thousands of people it sought to extradite.
[...]
While many European countries maintain law enforcement cooperation and extradition treaties with both China and Hong Kong, European courts have so far acted as crucial safeguards against politically motivated extradition and, since 2019, have increasingly rejected such requests. In 2022, the European Court of Human Rights set a landmark precedent by refusing extraditions based on the “authoritarian nature” of China’s regime.
[...]
Beijing additionally uses proxies to harass individuals, spread intimidation and fear, and ultimately silence dissent. Recent cases have shed light on the rising risks of co-optation and espionage. For instance, U.S. authorities in March arrested two foreign nationals for allegedly hiring people to intimidate a U.S. resident for criticizing Xi Jinping. These kinds of operations fracture trust within communities, fuel self-censorship, and undermine the pool of diaspora expertise that European societies could otherwise benefit from. Low trust in local authorities further compounds the problem, as communities often attribute their reluctance to report intimidation to a prevailing “climate of fear.”
[...]
The European Parliament study recommends that EU agencies formally integrate combating transnational repression into their human rights protection frameworks, ensuring that exiled activists or minorities abroad can be officially recognized as at risk and entitled to protection. It also urges the adoption of an official definition of the phenomenon, allowing EU institutions and member states to share a common understanding and respond consistently.
[...]
Europe can look to other countries for examples. Canada, for instance, has taken significant steps after identifying transnational repression as “one of the greatest strategic challenges to Canada’s sovereignty and democracy.” It created a foreign interference watchdog, announced the introduction of a foreign agent registry, and passed new legislation following a major public inquiry. These measures reflect a recognition that tackling repression requires both domestic safeguards and international coordination. It was no coincidence that the G-7 pledge on transnational repression was signed at the Kananaskis Summit during Canada’s G-7 presidency.
[...]
For Europe, the challenge is significant but not insurmountable, as many member states now recognize the complexity of the issue. However, they must be prepared to take political heat and invest in the necessary resources.
[...]