A letter dated Feb. 14 and attributed to a female senior at Shandong University began spreading online over the weekend. The writer says she contracted HIV after participating in what she describes as a university policy requiring female students to accompany African male international students. She writes that she does not have long to live.
Addressed to Peng Liyuan, China’s first lady, the letter urges her to use her position as Xi Jinping’s spouse to bring what the writer calls ongoing crimes against the country and its people to an end.
The full text of the letter is reproduced below:
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
Respected Ms. Peng Liyuan:
Greetings.
I am a senior at Shandong University. After Xi Jinping introduced a large number of African international students, the university, in order to fulfill political tasks, implemented a “three-companion system.” Under this system, three female students are assigned to accompany one African male international student, and the international student’s level of satisfaction is factored into the female students’ academic credit evaluation. During this period of companionship, almost all the girls entered into sexual relationships with the African male students. I was no exception.
Over the past three years, I have undergone five abortions. Three months ago, my medical report showed that I had contracted HIV. The international student I accompanied has already returned to his home country. When I reported the matter to university officials, I was told it had nothing to do with the school and was solely the result of my own misconduct.
I am not writing to defend my rights or to complain. I know my time is limited. Before I leave this world, I want to say what many Chinese people wish to say but dare not. The harm Xi Jinping has brought to China affects not only a group of female university students, but entire generations of the Chinese nation.
For more than a decade, as First Lady, you projected elegance and cultural confidence on the international stage. Your qipao diplomacy, your singing, and your work as a World Health Organization goodwill ambassador for tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS once helped present a softer image of China to the world. Many ordinary citizens, myself included, felt pride when watching your appearances at APEC and G20 events.
That image now stands in stark contrast to present realities. Since Mr. Xi took office, Chinese society has entered what I see as an unprecedented predicament. These are not isolated incidents but systemic failures, an accumulation of what can only be described as crimes against the country and its people.
The economic consequences are evident. The collapse of the real estate sector, including the defaults of Evergrande and Country Garden, wiped out the lifetime savings of millions of families. This was not simply market volatility, but the outcome of prolonged dependence on property-driven growth while neglecting social protection.
Youth unemployment has exceeded 20 percent. Official figures have been revised multiple times, yet independent estimates suggest the situation may be worse. Many graduates have chosen to “lie flat” or leave the country. The private sector has been squeezed, and foreign capital has accelerated its exit. Tesla has shifted part of its production capacity, and Apple has relocated significant portions of its supply chain abroad. Middle-class security has eroded, and the broader economy faces mounting debt pressures that threaten long-term stability.
Public life has tightened in parallel. Internet censorship has intensified, with repeated firewall upgrades limiting dissent. Bloggers, journalists, and rights lawyers have been detained or sentenced, including those affected by the “709” crackdown.
Legal norms have weakened. The aggressive promotion of the “Fengqiao Experience” and the suppression of civil NGOs have narrowed civic space. During the pandemic, the zero-COVID policy produced severe human consequences. In Shanghai, elderly residents reportedly went hungry and patients were denied access to medical care. Mandatory quarantine camps were established nationwide. These measures caused economic paralysis and family tragedies, and grievances had no outlet.
Minority policies have drawn global condemnation. The existence of “re-education camps” in Xinjiang, though officially denied, has been documented by international reporting and satellite imagery. More than one million Uyghurs are believed to have faced detention, forced labor, and cultural erasure. The United Nations has raised concerns about possible crimes against humanity, even as authorities frame the policies as counterterrorism.
Autonomy in Tibet and Hong Kong has steadily diminished. Under Hong Kong’s National Security Law, pro-democracy figures have been imprisoned and freedom of expression curtailed. International tensions have intensified. The U.S.–China trade war and disputes in the South China Sea have heightened geopolitical risk, leaving China increasingly isolated.
In foreign policy, China has drawn closer to Russia while relations with the United States and its allies have deteriorated to Cold War levels. During the Russia–Ukraine war, China declared a “no limits” partnership with Moscow and provided economic and technological backing. Critics argue that this stance has weakened China’s moral standing.
“Wolf warrior diplomacy” has become emblematic of the current era. Chinese diplomats have adopted combative rhetoric abroad, prompting governments in the European Union, the United States, Australia, and Japan to view China as a strategic threat rather than a partner.
Cooperation has deepened with governments including Iran and North Korea, involving military collaboration and nuclear technology assistance. China has maintained ties with the Myanmar military junta and the Taliban. Under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), it has indirectly engaged with organizations such as Hamas. In my view, these alignments increase the risk of entanglement in global instability rather than enhancing national security.
Extensive overseas spending has compounded domestic strain. Through BRI projects, large-scale loans and aid have flowed to countries in Africa, Latin America, and Central Asia, including Pakistan’s Gwadar Port and Sri Lanka’s Hambantota Port. Some projects have resulted in debt disputes and local resentment. Meanwhile, many citizens at home struggle near the poverty line. This approach has not strengthened China’s standing, but expanded its list of adversaries and left it facing pressure even within international institutions such as the United Nations.
Among the public, an extreme metaphor has circulated. You are compared to Pan Jinlian in “Water Margin,” Mr. Xi to Wu Dalang, and the system to a bowl of soup that must be “medicated.” This is not a literal call for poisoning, but a political fantasy born of despair. When reform appears impossible, some imagine only a dramatic rupture can force a reset.
In classical literature, Pan Jinlian is a negative figure. Here, she is reimagined as a reluctant redeemer, a spouse who might hold unique influence. The metaphor is crude and naive. It concentrates responsibility on one individual and overlooks institutional complexity. Yet its popularity reflects a perception that petitions are intercepted, complaints blocked, and criticism criminalized. In such conditions, anger finds expression in destructive imagery.
I do not write in expectation of your action, nor to advocate violence. I write in the hope that when such metaphors circulate inside and outside the firewall, someone will recognize that society’s illness has deepened to the point where fantasies of poison arise.
May you remain safe, and may this land regain its vitality.
A victimized female student of Shandong University
February 14, 2026
Online reaction was sharply divided.
Some dismissed the appeal. “Birds of a feather flock together. They are all the same. There is no point in hoping. Unless the CCP regime is completely dismantled, no one will be spared,” one commenter wrote. Another added, “Expecting ‘Peng Jinlian’ to give ‘Xi Dalang’ medicine? Impossible.”
Others said the sections criticizing Xi’s governance were accurate. Some directed their anger at the university, accusing it of humiliating female students while privileging foreign students.
Companion policy controversy
Shandong University’s study-companion system has drawn attention in previous years. In October 2022, a blogger on X reposted a domestic video in which female students allegedly claimed that within three months of accompanying black male students, all had undergone abortions. Other online posts alleged that HIV cases at Shandong University rose by 295.2 percent over five years.
Since 2016, the university has assigned Chinese study companions to international students. In 2018, the number reportedly increased to three per student, primarily female. That same year, after an international student was hospitalized following a traffic accident, the university reimbursed all medical expenses and recruited 25 students for round-the-clock companionship, prompting debate online.
An X account identified as “Luo Xiang” cited a student who claimed black classmates received more than 200,000 RMB, approximately 28,000 USD, annually, along with favorable housing and benefits, and were able to bring girlfriends to campus. Some netizens alleged that African international students said the stipends exceeded their needs.
HIV data and campus trends
According to the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, roughly 3,000 young students are newly infected with HIV each year, primarily through sexual transmission. By the end of 2022, 1.215 million people were living with HIV in China, with 418,000 cumulative reported deaths. By the end of 2023, the number had reached 1.29 million.
In recent years, annual growth in HIV infections among university students has ranged between 30 percent and 50 percent, making campuses heavily affected areas.
Online, the HIV-related forum “Fear of HIV Bar” has more than 110,000 followers and 14 million posts, drawing hundreds of thousands of daily views.
Chinese political commentator Zhou Peng’an has argued that one contributing factor in the spread of HIV on campuses is the large influx of African international students. He said many African students are HIV carriers and that promiscuity is another contributing factor.
Globally, more than 70 percent of people living with HIV are concentrated in Africa. Through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China provides substantial funding for African students to study domestically, offering nearly 100,000 RMB, approximately 14,000 USD, per person each year. In some universities, opposite-sex study companions are reportedly assigned, which critics say has accelerated transmission.
Statistics from China’s Ministry of Education show that the number of African international students has increased sharply over the past two decades. In 2003, there were 1,793 African students, accounting for 2.31 percent of the total. By 2018, that figure had risen to 81,562, or 16.57 percent. A report by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace noted that by 2020 China had become the second-largest destination for African international students after France.
