Chinese Opinion on the Los Angeles Riots
Across the Pacific, Chinese people are closely following the protests unfolding in Los Angeles. Details of the unrest have appeared almost instantly in many Chinese media outlets and on social media platforms like WeChat or Little Red Book.
However, are these reports merely a form of “spectating” — akin to watching a Hollywood blockbuster — or do they reveal a sense of schadenfreude?
For the most part, Chinese media coverage of this event has translated reports from English-language sources, with little original commentary. This is perhaps because the story itself is already gripping: an extraordinary event taking place in the world’s most powerful country.
However, a closer look at nationalist-leaning media outlets and commentators reveals more nuanced interpretations, which are closely tied to China’s own experience during the months-long unrest in Hong Kong. In March 2019, the Hong Kong government proposed a bill that would have allowed extraditions to mainland China. In response, opponents flooded the streets in record numbers, sparking massive protests with escalating violence and anger on both sides.
In their coverage of the LA protests, several seasoned Chinese analysts draw very subtle parallels between the two protests, each taking place in a major city of their respective countries.
Hu Xijin, former editor-in-chief of Global Times and a prominent Chinese media figure, provided an in-depth analysis of the events (full translation below). He highlighted the political stakes for both President Trump and the Democratic Party, particularly their differing stances on immigration, as well as what Trump might gain — and what he might lose — by taking a hardline stance on the unrest in Los Angeles. “He is running headlong toward triggering a constitutional crisis in the United States,” Hu wrote.
Commenting on Trump’s threat to arrest California Governor Gavin Newsom, Hu noted, “It’s unprecedented in U.S. history for a sitting president to openly call for the arrest of the sitting governor of its most populous state. If this is just rhetoric, that’s one thing. But if carried out, it would undoubtedly constitute a constitutional crisis.”
Hu argued that Trump’s motives are strategic: “He believes he stands to gain more than he could lose.” By cracking down on illegal immigration, Trump could win public support and simultaneously weaken Newsom, a potential rival in the 2028 presidential race. “As long as public discourse centers around immigration, it benefits Trump and the Republican Party. The Democrats would prefer to talk about Medicaid cuts, Trump’s feud with Elon Musk, tariffs, or the economy.”
Still, Hu cautioned that Trump does not hold all the cards: heavy-handed enforcement could result in bloodshed or the exposure of migrants’ suffering, potentially triggering a backlash. “In a country built on immigration, if 11 million undocumented immigrants are pushed to the brink, anything could happen.”
On how Chinese people should view the protest, Hu wrote: “As Chinese, we don’t need to take a stance on what’s happening in the U.S. We can just be spectators and watch how this ‘scenic view’ ends.”
That phrase — “scenic view” — is particularly noteworthy. It echoes a famous remark by then-U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who in 2019 described the protests in Hong Kong as “a beautiful sight to behold.” At the time, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying responded sarcastically: “We hope there will be more such beautiful sights in the U.S.”
In Hu’s commentary, the reference to the “scenic view” appears only at the end — a subtle but pointed jab at Pelosi’s past words.
On the popular nationalist website Guangcha, an article titled “Pelosi Speaks Out — But No Mention of the ‘Beautiful Sight’ This Time?” takes a more direct approach. The piece first reports Pelosi’s June 9 social media post criticizing Trump’s handling of the protests and shares some background news information. It then reminds readers of her 2019 comment on Hong Kong.
“It’s worth noting,” the article states, “that some have referred to the Los Angeles protests as a ‘beautiful sight’ — the same phrase Pelosi once used to describe violent protests in Hong Kong.” The article then cites Hua Chunying’s response and concludes that, given the January 6 Capitol riot and the current unrest in Los Angeles, “Hua’s words are even more resonant today.”
Another widely read analysis came from Shen Yi, a prominent political commentator and professor of international relations at Fudan University. His Guangcha article, titled “Los Angeles in Chaos, Trump Grinning,” has garnered over 100,000 views. Shen explored different possibilities for how the situation might unfold, suggesting that the protests could escalate and spread nationally, or that Trump and Democrats might strike a behind-the-scenes deal.
Such a compromise, Shen argued, could involve reining in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) without directly and forthrightly confronting it — a move that might allow both parties to claim partial victories. Shen also predicted that, lacking meaningful progress on foreign policy, Trump would likely shift his focus inward and seek political gains by advancing controversial domestic agendas.
“But if he does,” Shen warned, “It raises the risk that unexpected events could inflame existing divisions in the U.S., potentially pushing the situation beyond control. The consequences could extend beyond U.S. borders and impact global politics. This is something we should continue to monitor.”
By and large, Chinese reports and commentaries on the LA protests have been relatively restrained, focusing primarily on analyzing the events themselves. That said, they deliver a subtle yet pointed rebuttal to Pelosi’s past remarks on Hong Kong — comments that many in China clearly remain unhappy about.
Below is Hu Xijin’s article referenced above. Full translation provided by Edison Chen.
Personally orchestrating chaos in America then acting as the “liberator” – is Trump addicted and going for the “ultimate explosion”?
Hu Xijin
Personally orchestrating chaos in America, then personally “liberating” America – Trump is having an absolute blast. But at the same time, he is running headlong toward triggering a constitutional crisis in the United States.
He himself would feel that what he’s doing is the legitimate work of cracking down on illegal immigrants while simultaneously attacking Democrats. The latest polls show that 54% of American respondents support the Trump administration’s plan to deport illegal immigrants. Heating up the illegal immigration issue is Trump’s greatest political advantage. Trump describes illegal immigrants as “criminals” and “invaders,” setting a powerful narrative rhythm throughout American society, because the word “illegal” easily creates associations with “crime.”
Once they unleash large-scale arrests and deportations of illegal immigrants, this is destined to become a prolonged conflict in America – for the United States, it’s equivalent to a “civil war.” Because it involves multiple overlapping manifestations: sharp group conflicts, vicious party fighting, and loss of control of the situation, all intertwined and filled with explosive energy.
For example, Los Angeles was relatively calm before Trump sent the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to arrest illegal immigrants, calling those immigrants “criminals.” Many ordinary Americans believed those people were “bad guys” and therefore supported arresting them.
However, as a nation of immigrants, America has a large population of illegal immigrants (who are also often called “undocumented immigrants” within the U.S.). They are part of America’s reality – most work low-end jobs, support their families, and avoid causing trouble. When ICE went to Home Depot stores in Los Angeles to arrest them en masse, it sparked protests. Those protesters weren’t all illegal immigrants – many were sympathizers of illegal immigrants. Once protesters form a “mob,” they become bolder and clash with police, with some throwing rocks and even burning cars.
These chaotic scenes appearing on television and social media played right into Trump’s hands. He then declared that California had “riots,” and when some protesters waved Mexican flags, this became evidence of their “invasion” of America. Trump then invoked the Insurrection Act, announcing the deployment of an additional 2,000 National Guard members to Los Angeles. He even announced on Monday the deployment of an additional 700 Marines to California.
California Governor Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Bass, and California Attorney General Bonta are all Democrats and are extremely angry. Newsom furiously denounced Trump’s “troop reinforcement” order on social media as “extremely reckless and meaningless” and also “disrespectful to the U.S. military.” Newsom also attacked Trump as “dictatorial” and accused him of “serious violation of state sovereignty.” Legal scholars have noted that this is the first time in more than half a century that a U.S. president has forcibly deployed troops to a state against the state government’s refusal.
Many believe Trump is testing the boundaries of presidential power. The California government filed a lawsuit in court on the 9th, requesting the court to rule the president’s actions illegal and demanding their reversal. Trump also made it clear on Monday that he supports arresting Newsom. Newsom responded that such behavior crosses a “red line” that America “cannot cross.”
A sitting president publicly advocating for the arrest of the sitting governor of America’s largest state has never happened in normal periods of American history. If this is just rhetoric, that’s one thing, but if carried out, it would inevitably constitute a constitutional crisis. At a discussion hosted by the American media outlet POLITICO, a senior legal affairs reporter said he doubted most judges would overturn the president’s judgment, but didn’t rule out the possibility that California might win a round or two during the appeals process. “Perhaps the situation will gradually calm down, and the legal disputes will be shelved.”
Trump is stirring up this crisis because he believes he stands to gain more than he could lose. First, cracking down on illegal immigrants resonates with current American public sentiment. Trump’s slogans like “America is being invaded” and “liberate America” are highly inflammatory, and even if he goes overboard, the risk isn’t very high.
The next development is that as long as American public discourse focuses on immigration issues, it benefits the Trump administration and Republicans. Democrats would prefer to discuss Medicaid cuts, Musk’s breakup with Trump, tariffs, or economic issues, because Democrats lost last year’s presidential election precisely on the immigration issue.
Furthermore, Trump can selectively target illegal immigrants, creating chaos in blue states governed by Democrats and embarrassing Democratic rising stars like Newsom, who is widely seen as a potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidate. Whether Los Angeles descends into chaos or large numbers of illegal immigrants are actually arrested, both scenarios would increase Newsom’s embarrassment.
However, Trump doesn’t hold all the cards on immigration. Many people currently support him because they believe illegal immigrants are mostly criminals and thugs. Once the National Guard and Marines that Trump deployed actually get involved in conflicts and kill people, or if those subjected to brutal arrests are proven to be “innocent unfortunates,” and sympathetic images appear in the news, public opinion in America – this unique nation of immigrants – could shift, and many neutral observers might reposition their attitudes.
If Trump merely wanted to put on a show of deporting illegal immigrants to consolidate his approval ratings, then this “civil war” would end quickly. But the problem is that Trump genuinely despises illegal immigrants and deporting them all is his long-term political position.
Moreover, he feels that the bigger the situation gets, the more advantageous it is for him and the more it consolidates his unshakeable position within the Republican Party. He may persist in demanding that ICE arrest 3,000 illegal immigrants daily. If raids like those in Los Angeles continue happening elsewhere in America, then the scale of this “civil war” will certainly expand, and whether American public opinion will shift becomes very difficult to predict.
During Trump’s first term, the death of George Floyd – who was asphyxiated by a white police officer pressing on his neck – led to the vigorous “Black Lives Matter” movement, which ultimately weakened Trump and benefited the Democrats. At that time, Trump wanted to invoke the Insurrection Act to deploy troops to suppress protest activities, but due to opposition from then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper, he ultimately didn’t take action. Trump’s current second-term governing team has no one who dares to slack off in executing his orders, so it’s possible that Trump intends to further escalate the conflict, which means civilian resistance is destined to become even more fierce. In a country built on immigration, if 11 million undocumented immigrants are pushed to the brink, anything could happen.
Finally, I want to say that as Chinese people, we don’t need to take any particular stance on what’s happening in America. We can just be observers, watching how this American “scenic view” plays out, and that’s enough.
Juan Zhang is a senior writer for the U.S.-China Perception Monitor and managing editor for 中美印象 (The Monitor’s Chinese language publication).
The views expressed in this article represent those of the author(s) and not those of The Carter Center.
