For years, many Chinese critics believed that once they reached the United States, they could finally speak freely. Federal law enforcement officials now say that belief is increasingly outdated. According to their warnings and a growing number of real world cases, China has created an Orwellian climate of fear inside the U.S., one designed to silence critics even when they live under American law.
This climate is not built on mass arrests or public trials. It is built on intimidation, surveillance, threats, and pressure that makes people think twice before they speak, create, or organize.
Federal law enforcement officials say China has entered a new and more aggressive phase in its effort to silence dissent globally. In the past, the focus was mainly on high profile political dissidents and exiled activists. Now, officials say the net has widened to include artists, filmmakers, community organizers, and even candidates for public office in the United States.
One of the clearest examples is the experience of Hui Bo, an artist who commissioned sculptures of Xi Jinping and his wife as a form of protest against the Chinese government. Hui said that because of this work, he was harassed and warned that he was being watched.
In October 2023, Hui said F.B.I. agents told him not to come to their office for his own safety. Instead, they advised meeting in public. He recalled being told he was in great danger and that it would be wise to move and not continue living where he was. Hui described the moment simply: that was when he felt fear.
That fear is the point.
Why the Orwellian Description Fits
An Orwellian system does not need constant violence to function. It works by convincing people they are being watched and that consequences can arrive at any time. Federal officials say China’s campaign has intensified since Xi Jinping rose to power in 2012, expanding well beyond China’s borders.
Officials say the Chinese government has even attempted to influence elections abroad, including races in New York City, with the goal of suppressing criticism in places where people normally enjoy strong protections for free speech.
When artists, activists, and community leaders begin to censor themselves, the system is working exactly as intended.
Intimidation Through Families and Community Ties
One of the most effective tools described is pressure on family members who still live in China. Even if a critic is physically safe in the United States, threats directed at parents, siblings, or children back home can be enough to force silence.
This tactic became clear during the cancellation of the IndieChina Film Festival in New York City. The festival was scheduled for November 8 to 15, 2025, and was meant to showcase independent Chinese filmmakers exploring themes like censorship, freedom, and modern Chinese life.
Just days before it opened, curator Zhu Rikun announced the festival was suspended after about 80 percent of participating directors withdrew. Filmmakers living in China were questioned and intimidated. Directors living abroad reported that police contacted their families in China with threatening calls.
Zhu explained that he canceled the festival to avoid putting anyone in danger, whether the danger was real or manufactured to create fear. He said the goal was to stop harassment of directors, guests, staff, and even his friends and family.
Human Rights Watch confirmed that dozens of filmmakers and their relatives were harassed. A researcher at the organization said China had reached across the globe to shut down a film festival in New York City, demonstrating a clear attempt to control what the world sees and learns about China.
The Chinese Police Station in New York
One of the most alarming cases involved what federal prosecutors described as an illegal overseas police station operating in lower Manhattan.
According to a Justice Department complaint, two men, Lu Jianwang and Chen Jinping, were arrested for allegedly opening and operating a clandestine police outpost on behalf of a provincial branch of China’s Ministry of Public Security. The station operated in Manhattan’s Chinatown and closed in the fall of 2022 after those involved learned they were under F.B.I. investigation.
Prosecutors said the defendants acted under the direction of Chinese officials, failed to notify the U.S. government, and later destroyed evidence of their communications. Federal officials said the station was used to monitor and intimidate dissidents and critics of the Chinese government.
Justice Department and F.B.I. officials described the operation as a blatant violation of U.S. sovereignty and said it showed China’s willingness to export repression directly onto American soil. China denied the allegations, claiming such offices exist only to provide basic citizen services. U.S. authorities rejected that explanation.
Other Examples of Fear Crossing Borders
U.S. prosecutors charged 44 individuals tied to what officials described as China’s overseas intimidation program. According to the charges, Chinese officials created fake social media accounts to harass and intimidate dissidents living abroad and attempted to suppress speech on a U.S. based telecommunications platform. Federal officials said these actions showed a relentless determination to silence critics, even when it required exploiting American technology.
Another case involves Operation Fox Hunt, launched by China in 2014. While Beijing claims it targets fugitives, U.S. authorities say it has been used to harass and threaten critics overseas. In one instance, the targeted individual reported threats of violence against family members in both the United States and China.
In Brooklyn, federal investigators uncovered an alleged plot to silence pro democracy activist and U.S. congressional candidate Xiong Yan. According to prosecutors, operatives discussed smearing him with fabricated scandals involving prostitution or taxes and even proposed physical violence, including beating him until he could not run for office or staging a car accident. Investigators also described spying operations that transmitted photos and videos of Yan to Chinese authorities.
Each case sends the same message: dissent carries a personal cost.
What Victims and Advocates Are Saying
The people caught in these campaigns describe a shared experience of fear and pressure.
Hui Bo said the warning from federal agents made him realize he was no longer just an artist expressing an opinion.
Zhu Rikun said canceling the film festival was not surrender, but a refusal to let art be created under threat.
Human rights advocates say these tactics amount to transnational repression and warn that if they go unanswered, cultural institutions, artists, and activists will continue to be silenced one by one.
Federal officials have said they will defend the freedoms of people living in the United States and hold accountable anyone who helps foreign governments intimidate residents on U.S. soil.
The response begins with enforcement. Arrests, prosecutions, and public exposure send a signal that covert intimidation campaigns will not be tolerated.
Protection is also critical. When federal agents warn individuals about credible threats, those warnings must be taken seriously and backed by resources, not brushed aside as political disputes.
Institutions also matter. Human rights advocates argue that film festivals, galleries, universities, and media organizations must stand together with government support. When one venue caves quietly, intimidation works. When institutions coordinate, the tactic loses power.
Finally, awareness inside immigrant communities is essential. Chinese American citizens are especially vulnerable when they still have relatives in China. Fear thrives in isolation. It weakens when people know threats can be reported and taken seriously.
The Real Stakes
China’s campaign inside the United States is built on a simple idea: fear can travel even when borders do not matter.
An Orwellian climate does not need constant force. It only needs enough pressure to make people stay quiet on their own.
If intimidation becomes normalized, free speech remains protected on paper while disappearing in practice. That is why federal officials, artists, and human rights advocates see this issue not as a foreign policy abstraction, but as a direct test of whether freedom inside the United States can be defended when an authoritarian state tries to export fear.