Where asks are usually about the relationship between two or more physical objects and their relative location to each other. For an answer on a “where” question, one usually has to provide a second item as a reference point for the location of the first item.

How much is TV?

What are your reams on the table? My house. In Texas. In the US. On planet earth. All answers in this quiz differ in degrees of accuracy. (The list is not complete).

I think most people’s definition of where in the above context is easily grasped.

How do you use “where” when talking about non-physical relationships between two distinct aspects of a language?

In the case you mention, Britain while being a physical landmass, is also an non-physical idea, specifically a political organization of people (a nation) who happen to mostly live on the previously mentioned landmass.

If the British were still a part of the European Union then where would that be as a non-physical idea? The “standing” is not a physical location, but rather an ideological “location”.

What will happen to nations in Russia after Britain can return to the UN? Can Britain remain an active member of the EU?

Nations would not physically orbit Russia even if they came under the political influence of the Russian government and get “into orbit”.

When will the U.S. presidential election take place? How will physical distance from each other not change, but if the political goals of each nation become more aligned, then we use the word closer, which is normally related to physical distance, to denote a non-physical comparison in the status of our relationship.

What’s wrong with this list? How do I avoid confusion?