US denies officials relayed threats from authorities?

The meaning of the title is quite confusing:

In " US denies officials relayed threats from authorities",
1) officials = Chinese officials?
2) relayed threats = repeated threats?
3 authorities = Chinese authorities?

Context:
Chen Guangcheng's US-brokered deal unravels after leaving embassyChinese activist now pleads for help to leave China with family as US denies officials relayed threats from authorities
More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/02/chen-guangcheng-us-brokered-deal

Chen said he never asked to leave China in his six days at the mission, which followed his incredible escape from a brutal 19-month regime of illegal house arrest. But he said he only left the embassy because US officials told him Chinese authorities would send his wife and children back to their home province – where they have been watched around the clock and harassed by a team of 100 guards – if he remained inside. He added that, at one point, an American official told him his wife would have been beaten to death – a claim denied by the US.

I agree that the headline is somewhat ambiguous. It's understandable only because of the context

Lustig Andrei wrote:

I agree that the headline is somewhat ambiguous. It's understandable only because of the context

... a context which every reader is likely to be aware of, except for those who have just go back from a visit to the Moon, in which case they can remedy the deficiency by reading the article underneath the allegedly "ambiguous" headline. Headline writers lack space and value brevity.

That makes sense and also reveals the fact that you have been tracking such news for quite a while.
That's why you got the true meaning of "authorities" at a glance, Contrex.