I certainly see that point. But to me it still looks like a 1968 type conflict using 1848 tactics: A coalition of labour and liberal intellectuals - with varying relative strength depending on the country you are looking at. Going up against regimes that never read the 20th century playbook for how to contain popular uprisings, and therefore responded with 1848-style repression. Plus a dose of pre-modern tribal conflict thrown in for good measure, in the countries where such social units still exist in strength.

1989 was much more of a "collapsing empire can't hang on to its tributaries" thing. In that sense, 1989 is more similar to the late '90s to early '00s anticolonial movement in Latin America.

(Incidentally, an important reason the 1989 colonial revolts didn't feature as much squabbling over borders was probably that Europe had spent the 141 years since 1848 shedding blood, tears and treasure in the effort to create ethnically "pure" states.)

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.