Imperialism is the nature of expansionist empires. Once they’ve conquered other disparate regions, they continue to practice imperialism by repressing, exterminating or assimilating disparate peoples within those expanded borders. To suggest otherwise would be deny the past imperialism of the British Empire. Was repression and violence against India not imperialist when that country was part of the empire? This seems absurd, especially when you recognize that imperial borders often exist primarily on paper. These peripheral territories only become truly integrated after local diversity and autonomy is crushed. We’ve seen much similar activity in China over the last several decades.

If you drink the kool-aid of your local instance then you probably believe the completely fabricated and ahistorical definition of imperialism that Stalin invented to deflect criticism of his own imperialism. This will make it impossible for you to recognize non-western imperialism, which is by design.