While I see the appeal of having a free-standing non-Soviet (by any definition) section (and putting pre-Soviet, Soviet republics, and post-Soviet some place else), I could also make an argument against the divorce. On balance, the divorce may be the most logical solution.
We still have a matter of definition before us.
Warsaw Pact: Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, DDR, Hungary, Poland, and Romania.
Fine, easy.
COMECON would add: Afghanistan, Cuba, Ethiopia, Finland, Iraq, Lao Republic, Mexico, Mongolia, Nicaragua, Vietnam, PDR Yemen, and Yugoslavia.
Some may have "issues" with this? But I think these belong (but maybe not Finland and Mexico?).
COMINFORM would add the communists of France, Italy, and Trieste. This may be "a bridge too far"? COMINTERN would go ever further afield.
And, yet, some places are still missing. China, Kampuchea, and North Korea spring immediately to mind. There may be others.
I think having categories (organized as some now are: titles, orders, medals, etc.) for all is a good idea. "Build it and they will come."
We still have a matter of definition before us.
Warsaw Pact: Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, DDR, Hungary, Poland, and Romania.
Fine, easy.
COMECON would add: Afghanistan, Cuba, Ethiopia, Finland, Iraq, Lao Republic, Mexico, Mongolia, Nicaragua, Vietnam, PDR Yemen, and Yugoslavia.
Some may have "issues" with this? But I think these belong (but maybe not Finland and Mexico?).
COMINFORM would add the communists of France, Italy, and Trieste. This may be "a bridge too far"? COMINTERN would go ever further afield.
And, yet, some places are still missing. China, Kampuchea, and North Korea spring immediately to mind. There may be others.
I think having categories (organized as some now are: titles, orders, medals, etc.) for all is a good idea. "Build it and they will come."
