Andrew: I think your account of diplomatic recognition is Brit-flavored. As I recall, British procedure has always been that diplomatic recognition is accorded to any govt. that can show control of its territory, and implies no moral judgment whatsoever. The American tradition is different, and diplomatic recognition is often withheld even from regimes securely in control, for moral or domestic-political purposes. (Brits on Yanks: “Those moralizing puritans!” Yanks on Brits: “Those cynical opportunists!”) The Brits recognized Red China in 1950; it took us another 29 years. There’s a case to be made on both sides, and for that matter a case to be made that the Brit approach is better for a declining commercial power, while the Yank style better serves a world-bestriding superpower. Ceteris paribus I like the Brit way better; but of course ceteris is never really paribus.