• amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        26 days ago

        Not enough negatives, I prefer non-non-non-non-aligned.

        But in all seriousness, I don’t even know what the non-aligned movement is, what OP’s sources are on why China specifically is not part of it, or what this has to do with today’s geopolitics.

  • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    What? In what way were Laos, Vietnam, Cuba, and North Korea true adherents of the non-aligned movement and not merely doing so for realpolitik reasons? All four of those countries were staunch supporters of the USSR and major diplomatic allies, trade partners, and in ideological cohorts with the Soviet Union.

    Cuba sent hundreds of thousands of troops alongside the Soviets to fight the South Africans invading Angola.

    • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      27 days ago

      Because the non-aligned movement was largely lip service and Cuba was seeking any and all allies against the United States. Ideologically and diplomatically Cuba was staunchly in the Soviets corner.

  • davel [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    27 days ago

    What even is the Non-Aligned Movement since the Second World fell to the First World in 1991? Does it have any teeth today? Is it salvageable, or should it disband?