27th Parliamentary-Intelligence Security Forum – China Competition

John Strand spoke at length about a less visible but increasingly important aspect of the U.S. China and Europe China competition: “lawfare” the strategic use of legal systems by Chinese state-backed entities to intimidate, pressure, or silence critics. He emphasized that this approach targets governments, companies, think tanks, academics, and journalists outside China, exploiting the legal protections in democracies to create high costs for those who challenge Chinese interests. Because Chinese companies and government-backed actors have nearly unlimited resources, they can sustain prolonged legal campaigns that ordinary critics cannot, effectively creating a chilling effect.

Strand illustrated this with multiple high-profile examples:

• Huawei has actively used lawsuits to push back against national security bans in countries such as Sweden, Romania, Portugal, and Spain. Beyond local courts, the company has even pursued disputes through WTO tribunals and other legal avenues to pressure governments and test the limits of trade and regulatory law. These actions create significant financial, administrative, and reputational burdens for the targeted entities.
• Academics and journalists conducting research on Chinese companies or government influence have also faced direct legal threats. Hon. Strand highlighted cases in Europe and the U.S. where researchers were pressured to withdraw peer-reviewed publications or reports detailing corporate ties to the Chinese state. Many of these individuals ended up practicing self-censorship, avoiding engagement even with colleagues or the media, effectively silencing critical voices.
• He also noted the broader geopolitical dimension: when countries or individuals take actions that challenge Chinese interests, such as the arrest of Huawei’s CFO in Canada, China has historically responded with retaliatory measures against citizens abroad, exemplifying the global reach and risk of lawfare tactics.

He stressed that this strategy is part of a larger pattern of Chinese influence operations and highlighted the need for transparency and coordinated response. Governments, companies, and civil society in the U.S., Europe, and other democracies must understand how these legal tools are abused and work together to protect free expression, maintain judicial integrity, and expose actors who are using legal systems to undermine democratic processes.