Your premise is that any enemy that puts out a list redefines treason based upon those lines - but it is insane, idiotic and would often be mutually contradictory.
Iran is also an enemy. If Iran puts out a list saying excluding homosexuals from society is one of their goals - then would excluding homosexuals in OUR society suddenly become treason?
How many examples do I have to come up with showing how ridiculous your premise is before you will admit it?
Lack of enforcing laws, a non-action, is once again, not treason.
Once again, like a liberal with the commerce clause, you have expanded the definition to cover whatever you want it to cover - actions and even non actions.
Communism was a territorial foe - we do not base our system on opposition to Communism - that whatever they are for we are against - and if they are for something - and one of our citizens is also coincidentally for that something - it doesn't make that citizen guilty of treason based upon that ludicrous criteria.
Our laws are not led around by the nose via lists our enemies supposedly put out (where is the source for your amusing list?).
Our Constitutional definition of treason is not subject to numerous lists of goals our enemies put out - it is clearly defined in our Constitution.
Let me put it to you in a way you might better understand...
Conservative - the words in our Constitution mean what they say and are not expansive and plastic enough to cover whatever I want, at the moment, for it to say.
Liberal - the words in the Constitution, where they have any meaning of importance in our modern age, are expansive and plastic enough to justify whatever I, at the moment, want it to mean.
You have a very expansive and plastic definition of treason. Our Constitution has a very fixed and definitive definition of treason.