追鱼传奇牡丹剑舞:Western "containment", an outdated kick Li Hongmei's column

By Li Hongmei

"Containment" both as a political term and as a means to countering expansion of rivaling strengths should have put to an end, with the end of the Cold War.

"Containment" was first applied to the Soviet Union. In practical terms, containment of the Soviet Union meant, among other things, setting up the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Following World War II, the Soviets had occupied and overpowered many countries in Eastern Europe – Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland etc. Heavily armed NATO forces stood ready to prevent any further "takeovers."

"Whenever Soviet agents started to stir up trouble anywhere in the world, America and its allies were there with financial and military aid to block them," which was almost the then marking of times. The reverse was also true as the Soviet Union tried to counter the expansion of the Western allies.

George F. Kennan was a high-ranking American diplomat. In February 1946, he sent what has become to be known as The Long Telegram, from his post in Moscow, capital of the Soviet Union, to Washington.

In that message, he outlined what was called the policy of "containment." His analysis was that "the Communist regime was intent on expanding its influence over the rest of the world." He advised that "this expansion must be contained," and this became the objective of American foreign policy for the next 50 years.

But since People’s Republic of China was founded in 1949, "containment" has also become the basic formula of U.S. policy toward China. This has not gone unnoticed in Beijing, as, after all, the West is still not ready to accept China’s emergence, and want to thwart its "ambitions" by containing it.

But whether the Western deep-seated preconception of "containment" can also be extended to today’s China is highly arguable. The West powers are supposed to ask some questions before wielding the stick of "containment"----First, Is China now anything akin to Soviet Union in its heyday? Second, Is China a power to enforce "expansionism" upon others? Last, but not the least, Is China exporting its own ideology and forcing others to believe what it believes, and living and thriving on brainwashing others?

If the answer to all the questions above is No, why shouldn’t the Western allies put down the obsolete views and means of "containment"?

Indeed, like all the other emerging powers, China also yearns for a new world order, a change of the old international structure and a louder say on the global stage. But that does not mean China would follow in the footsteps of the former Soviet Union promoting sales its revolution to the world market, nor will China live on converting others to its beliefs.

Seeing how things stand, it might be true when some US high-ranking officials always state that they have no intention to "contain China’s rise", as there is nothing about China inviting their "containment", at least, it is manifest that China, bent on its economic development and harmonious society buildup, has no intention of "expansion".