China will not engage in expansion, and the US does not need to contain China's rise, says James Holmes, an associate professor of strategy at the US Naval War College, in an article on the website of Japan's The Diplomat magazine on May 24.

According to Holmes, US policymakers have reached a consensus that the US won't seek to contain China, and the idea is supported by President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and functionaries at all levels. Even Australia's Prime Minister Julia Gillard disavowed any policy of containment during an April meeting with Premier Wen Jiabao.

Yet quite a few Chinese commentators insist with "equal vehemence" that the United States, Australia, and other Asian states are indeed forging an alliance to "hem China in". The reference point for the containment analogy, whether on the US and Australian side or on the Chinese side, is obviously the US Cold War policy toward the Soviet Union, says the article.

But "is Washington really bent on such a policy?" asks Holmes. "To allow precision in discourse about US policy toward China, we have to ask whether contemporary China is like the Soviet Union in its heyday. Is China an expansionist power that must spread its ideology to survive and thrive?"

The answer is "No," says Holmes. China, like other rising powers, hopes to modify the current order to suit its own interests, which "is different from the Soviet paradigm of exporting revolution across the globe." Also, Beijing has no plan to subvert its neighbors, which would destabilize its own frontiers in the process.

"It's true, but trivial, when US officials say they have no plans to contain China's rise. There's nothing to contain in the Cold War sense," he argues, and suggests all sides "retire the Cold War analogies for US policy toward China."