To consider Yugoslavia “Europe” is somewhat of a stretch. Even accepting that in the 21st century, the concept of “continents” is simply a historical curiosity...
Btw, it’s “an historical curiosity” not “a historical curiosity...”
huh? “Yugoslavia” lay between Italy and Greece. What continent do you propose that it should be labeled under? True, a continent is more of a political or cultural concept geographically, Europe could be considerd a peninsula of Asia.
You’re correct.
The concept of geography defines national relations and mutual interests between nations is “less” significant than ever before. Japan is our largest economic trading partner. The Middle East, Caucasus, North Africa and China are our long term center of gravities in security concerns....... Belarus is not Poland’s friend, the US is. Australia is culturally more like us than any other nation, while Cuba 90 miles south of us might as well be Mars. The notion that mere proximity defines economic relations, cultural similarities, and who friend and foe are, is complete nonsense. India is actually culturally similar to us, more so than most Latin American nations/societies……. Geography matters, but not in the way people think.
Before World War I, some German or Austrian political leader (maybe it was Bismarck) declared, “Asia begins at the Landstrassen” (a district at the edge of Vienna).
OK, tell that to the beauraucrats at the EC who beleive the Balkans to be part of Europe, and Turkey not. GEorgraphy matters. In fact, I think we have already seen the highwater mark of globalism for a while. I do not celebrate the decline of globalism, but I regard it as an outcome of several geopolitical trends.