In the contemporary international circumstances non-alignment or to put it more precisely its role and usefulness in general has become a highly controversial issue, certainly more so than earlier. Thus, the movement is passing through a critical period in its life. It finds itself today at the crossroad and seems to be finding it difficult to comprehend the path it has to rake. It is trying to find its identity, reorient its perception and endeavor to determine the role it has to play in the changed context of international relations. This has resulted in a heated debate about the validity and contemporary relevance of NAM and non-alignment as foreign policy behavior in this post cold war “unipolar world”. Expressions of doubt about its relevance and efficacy have assumed extra vigor after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Socialist Block. Its traditional critics gleefully pronounced that non-alignment buried under the debris of Berlin wall and the exercises of the NAM are no more than flogging on the dead horse. According to the critics, NAM is no longer relevant because of the changed international environment. It is engaged that the policy of Non-alignment had some utility in the period of cold war bipolarity, because it was child of cold war in the reaction of certain countries to the cold war. The two main contenders for political ascendancy had almost reached the point of extermination. It was the desire to preserved independence as distinct from merely formal sovereignty, which led some nation to resist absorption into one or the other power blocks. Presently the international system is no longer bipolar and the clod war is over, so what is its relevance today is a great question. In spite all these above statement regarding its irrelevant, the relevance of NAM in international affairs is unquestionable. As a mater of fact, the policy of Non-Alignment was not wholly related to a bipolar world and the clod war between the two supper power and the block they lead. It just happened that the Non-Alignment flowered in the immediate post-world war. Therefore, whatever the world is bi-polar or multipolar or unipolar, non-alignment as a foreign policy choice option of the small Third World countries will remain valid. In other words the policy will last as long as the sovereign nation system last.
It is readily admitted that some member of the NAM have not exactly confirmed either to policy or to the criteria of membership. They have also not complied with the recommendation appeals of NAM. This certainly does not affect the continuing validity of the Non-Alignment in the same way that the UN Charter and United Nation are not invalidated by the sins of omissions and commissions of the organization its 192 members sates. As in the case of UN, the objectives of NAM are largely of a long-term nature.
The declaration of the Jakarta Summit conference 1992 assured, NAM has contributed to the ending of bipolar in the world and to the elimination of the cold war. These new developments have in fact fully vindicated the validity and relevance of Non-Alignment. They affirmed NAM’s role is ensuring” its full participation in the building of the new world order”. No wonder, then that the membership of the NAM has more than quadrupled from about 25 states in 1961 to 120 today.
As a matter of fact, although Non-Alignment had emerged as new, additional foreign policy behaviors in the years of the cold war and the bipolar world, its continued relevance had little to do with either of the context. It is significant that the relevance of the policy was reaffirmed by the Non-Alignment minister conference held in Accra in 1991. It was again made clear at the Non-Alignment summit conference held in Jakarta in Sept. 1992, Durban, 1998, Kulalampur 2003, Havana, 2006 and Sharm-el-Sheikh Egypt in 2009.
It is very true that humanity survived amidst the conflicts in the Stone Age, the Iron Age, in Gun Powder Age and also in the Age of Warships, and Bombers Plane, but there could be no hope of survival in the age of nuclear bombs. Therefore, war could no longer be treated
as politics by other means as war in the 21st century would not leave behind any survivors, victors or vanquished. So, NAM is then a pioneer nuclear destruction. Although a threat of a war “a nuclear war has certainly disappeared with the end of the cold war, yet the number of nuclear powers have increased. The world is still divided between the nuclear have and the have-nots. But NAM from the very beginning and even in more in last meets at Havana in 2006 and Sharm-el-Sheikh Egypt 2009 demanded for the complete elimination of all nuclear weapons within a time bound framework as well as asserted for the right over peaceful use of nuclear power. The movement also stood opposed to the treaties on WMD (Weapon of Mass Destructions) which were not universal in nature.
The relevance of NAM continues as it looks after the interest of all Third World countries for which the movement was created. The beginning of the Non-Alignment can be traced to Afro-Asian resurgence a reaction against European colonial systems and prior to that in the struggle of underdeveloped countries against the hegemony of grate European powers since the birth of nation state system. These oppressed, suppressed, and dominated states struggled hard for freedom from the colonialism, imperialism and great power domination to choose their own path in the internal development and external policies. That is why they accorded a high place to international peace, security and cooperation. It was a coincident that just when theses countries begin to gain independence, they found themselves in bipolar worlds. Seeking membership of either block meant compromised on newly owned freedom by sovereign states, as well as an increased in international tensions, which is turned threatened the prospects of development- socio-economic and political.
The concept ‘Third World’ is important to form an understanding of what is meant by the ‘spirit of Bandung’ or Non-Alignment, which formed in the Belgrade Conference in 1961 where NAM was formed. The concept ‘Third World’ has both a materialistic and an cultural meaning. In materialistic terms, Marc argues that “if the affluent industrial countries of the modern world are grouped into those of the ‘West’ and those of the ‘East’, … then the poor countries constitute a ‘Third World’ whose small command over resources distinguishes them from both”.
The cultural meaning of the term “stressed the importance of the formation of a Third World consciousness, formed by common ideas, and an awareness of a common history, in relation to the West. Thus, in some accounts the Third World has existed because it provided an identity that was important to those both inside and outside its borders”. (9) Richard Wright, a black American novelist, who attended the Bandung Conference described it as “vibrant, vital, a coalition of the dispossessed”.(10) The two meanings are best illustrated in the 1952 article by , Alfred Sauvy, in which he coined the term ‘Third World’. Sauvy wrote: “The Third World has, like the Third Estate, been ignored and despised and it too wants to be something”. (11) Just like the Third Estate during the French Revolution, he saw the decolonised states as “ignored, exploited, scorned”, but eager to carve out an independent role for themselves. (12).
Although the term Third World has lost currency since the 1970s when other terms, such as ‘underdeveloped countries’, ‘developing countries’, and ‘South’ or ‘Global South’, became more widely used, revisiting the term conveys a sense of the conceptual foundations on which non-alignment rests. Nehru, then Prime Minister of India and a respected statesman, had also attended the Congress of Oppressed Nations in Brussels in 1927. As his brainchild, in essence non-alignment means the pursuit of equality in world affairs through pooling the diplomatic resources of Third World states in international forums. Equality should here be understood in political-economic terms. Equality for colonised or oppressed people and states translated into the right to self-determination and this dominated the agenda in the first decade of NAM’s existence. NAM was, for example, a front of political solidarity by supporting liberation struggles and making abstinence from military pacts or alliances a criterion of membership. (13) Inherent in a foreign policy orientation of non-alignment was a post-colonial claim to the rights of statehood awarded to independent states in the Westphalian system, and the mutual respect embodied by multilateralism as proclaimed in the UN Charter.
For most Third World states the framework of national development in the 1950s and 1960s was largely provided by modernization theory. The latter presumed that modernised Western liberal democracy was the end-state of development. Rostow famously elaborated on the stages through which a traditional society needed to pass to become a modern economy and Lipset linked economic development to democracy and Western education. The focus on endogenous factors to explain a world economy skewed in favour of the West came under attack during the Cairo conference in 1964, when delegates emphasised exogenous factors, for example, the structure of dependent relationships between rich and poor countries (also captured by the term neo-colonialism) that ‘underdevelops’ the Third World. NAM would become, as Amin notes, “the trade union for economic claims with respect to the North” in the 1970s. He summarizes the components of this political-economy of non-alignment as follow:
–a will to develop the productive forces and to diversify production, especially through industrialization;
–a determination that the national state should have leadership and control of the process;
–a belief that technical models are ‘neutral’, though requiring control, and that there is no alternative but to reproduce them;
–a belief that the development process mainly requires not popular initiative but only popular support for state action;
–a belief that the process does not fundamentally clash with trade participation in the world capitalist system, even if it brings temporary conflicts with it.
NAM’s efforts to bring about a New International Economic Order (NIEO) based on this ideology of development during the 1970s were especially exerted in the UN. The struggle for global equity through independent national development was, due to the Cold War emphasis on ‘high politics’ (security issues), relegated to a secondary position. Nevertheless, NAM together with the Group of 77 (G77–largely made up of NAM members) succeeded to keep Third World issues on the agenda in most UN forums and agencies due to their numerical strength. In the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), NAM and the G77 promoted the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) to rectify the perceived imbalances in information and communication flows between the North and the South.
In the UN General Assembly NAM played a significant role in transferring the permanent seat in the UNSC previously filled by the Republic of China (Taiwan) to mainland China, as well as to garner support for other national independence struggles. Wiese argues that although it was not NAM’s original intention to become caught up in the Cold War, the movement soon realized that it could bring its political leverage to bear in international forums to gain more influence for developing countries.
Here Non-Alignment with its emphasis on independent, judgment, independent decision making and independent actions provided them with a suitable alternative foreign postulates. Thus, cold war as dominant theme of post-second world war international relations certainly influenced and shaped the emergence of Non-Alignment, but it was by no means the cause of that emergence. Besides the opposition of cold war and bloc politics which NAM propagated was not its main goal but rather a means to promote the positive cause of the protection and preservation of newly attained independence of the member’s states. For the socially backward, economically weak and politically fragile nonaligned countries of Third World countries, international peace could not be achieved under threatening shadows of the cold war and therefore had to be avoided.
Thus, the major thrust of NAM is the creation of a new world based on rational, democratic, equitable and non-exploitative inter-states relation. It commitment has been not just against bloc divisions of cold war but for one world for universal peace and development. The end of the cold war has ended a period of strategic confrontations but an era of stable global peace is yet to be created. In fact the cold war is dead but not the regional conflicts and crisis. The East-West conflict has dissolved but intense economic and technological competition is emerging among several strong nations. The Non-Alignment countries have to learn to maneuver among them and to successfully face the menace of new colonialism that is sought to be imposed through various WTO round. Thus, the NAM continued to be relevance so long as there is exploitation, war, hunger, poverty and disease on the earth.
Those who took the path of Non-Alignment were people who found the existing ideas of nationalism, national interest, international relations, human dignity and freedom inadequate to meet the challenges of post-second world war reality. The post colonial reality which was suffused with the awareness that imperialism had not only failed to solve any human problem but had also violated all norms and values of civilized harmonious human existence. It had stunned the natural growth of land and people that came under its way. It had also developed an insatiable appetite for dominating others to satisfy which it had gone to wars, destroyed human life and precious resources and prepared to repeat the performance the new world needed as strategy to bridle this monstrous march to destruction. So here NAM can give the strategy to do so.
End of the East-West confrontation or of ideological polarization does not mean the end of the NAM just as the phase of thaw in great power conflict and détente did not make it irrelevant. It is pertinent to recall in this context the analysis of world situation made at the Cairo summit of 1964. “Taking note of the welcome improvement in the international situations the head of the state or govt. pointed out that, despite the presence improvement in international relations and notwithstanding the conclusion and signature of the treaty of Moscow, source of tension will exist in many parts of the world”.
What were those sources of tensions? The conference declared “imperialism, colonialism and new colonialism constitute a basic source of international tension and conflicts because they endanger world peace and security”. Thus, when the world is got rid of bloc conflict, because one of the bloc ceased to exist, the struggled against imperialism and the mindset it represents will, have to be continued and the NAM will remain relevant as an instrument of that struggle for all age to come like Platonic ideal state will remain ideal for all age to come.
A comprehensive assessment of the theory and practice of NAM through the last three decades reveals that it remains relevant to the changing world scenario irrespective of the fact that whether there is cold war or détente, whether the world is unipolar, bipolar, or multipolar. The uniqueness of NAM lies in the fact that its goals do not merely serve the national interest of member state but it stand to promote the cause humanity. They are universalistic in nature. It would not be an exaggeration to say that recent positive developments on international scene reflect the spirit of NAM.
Non-alignment is a political concept that strives for the remodeling of the international society, as a whole, and not merely any single aspects of it though inevitably the nonaligned nation had stressed particular aspects at a particular period of time.
While power bloc and military pacts have not lost their luster, there are military alliances which continue to dominant global trade to political freedom. As the political independence, without economic emancipation is meaningless, the NAM is progressively putting more emphasis on economic independence. The Non-Alignment nations have been demanding for a legitimate share in world trades. The determination of the quality and quantity of foreign aid from developed to developing countries is also task for the Non-Alignment nation. Economic cooperation between developed and developing states forms part of the threefold strategy advocated by the NAM. These stands are: reliance on their resources, promotion of cooperation among non-alignment states themselves, fostering cooperation with the advanced states, with the subjects of promoting self reliance as would restrict exploitation and contribute towards resolution of the problems of world economy as a whole.
While the challenge of international peace continue to be the predominant concern, the immediate task facing the NAM with the creation of a new, just and equitable international economic and social order. The struggle of NAM is now entering a new phase when most developed nation of the world appeared to be accepting in principle the need for a new international order. The fundamental concern of NAM has always been with global question of decolonization and consolidation of freedom, disarmament and development of economies through mutual cooperation as well as through a more equitable and just new international economic order. All these are interrelated and to make the package of peace and prosperity for humanity.
Former Pm of Indian Narasimha Rao said the following words in June 1992 in a speech made in Tokyo “the pursuit of a Non-Alignment policy is even more relevant to ever before NAM basically consists of the espousal of the right of nations to independence and development, regardless of the bloc phenomena. Whether there is one bloc or more at a given movement the urge of a nonaligned country would continue to maintain its independence, to take decisions according to its light not tagging itself in advance to other”. Again the Cartegena submit 1995 reaffirmed the “validity of the NAM and its fundamental principle” and the various norms of international life “peace, independence, sovereign equality, non-intervention in internal affairs”. It declared against poverty, hunger, illigacy, racial discrimination and xenophobia, terrorism, nuclear weapon, environmental degradation, foreign occupation. Further in the Foreign Minister summit of April 1997 in New Delhi IK Gujral said,” NAM affords its members s forum where they can discuss their common problems, evolve solutions and work out positions in trying to tackle the international problems of peace, security, development, environmental safety, human rights etc. Delhi Conference announced: the UN and the Security Council should become more representative of its increased memberships, non-discriminatory, time bound nuclear and general disarmament should be the objective towards which the movement should endeavors.
The Foreign Minister of Colombia Dr Maria Emma Mejiva Velez perhaps best reflected the thoughts of may people regarding the relevance of NAM today when she narrated story of how she was asked by a young girl in her country, “what is NAM?” In seeking to answer this question she said that today Non-Alignment meant more than “not being aligned to the great power bloc”. It meant that nations were not to be aligned with military alliances and seeks to get involved in peace making like the Middle East. She also drawn the attention in this submit that NAM in today’s world has to address issues of the future rather than the past because anti-colonialism has been transformed into democratization of more nations and development has become identified with environmental protection.
Those who doubt its validity must contemplate why what began with a modest membership of 25 is able to boast of a membership of 118 today? Why it that many that opted for alignment has come round to adopt Non-Alignment approach? It cannot be dismissed as merely a fashion or herd mentality of the poor Third World countries. In fact non-alignment was evolved to strengthen the socio-economic and political strategic basis of the new countries. It was though Non-Alignment that they were trying to give meaning and content to their political independence. What says Rasheeduddin Khan, Non-Alignment can still play a positive role in major and continuing global concerns like disarmament, and development is fully correct. According to M.S. Raja, Non-Alignment is a dynamic policy and retains its continuing relevance in world affairs by adopting itself to changing international context and the needs of the nonaligned comity of nations. It is a policy and posture of universal relevance, validity and applicability”.
The recently concluded 14th NAM submit in Havana further reaffirmed its relevance when it adopted Havana Declaration that condemned all forms of terrorism for whatever purposes and urges countries to refrain from extending political, diplomatic, moral or material support to terrorism under the UN charter and also asked them to fulfill global obligation not to give any support. The conference also condemned unilateralism and attempts to exercise hegemonic dominations in international relations. The declaration resolved to oppose and condemn the categorization of countries as “good and evil”, based on unilateral and unjustified criteria and the adoption of a doctrine of pre-emptive attack including by nuclear weapons. In the context of talk of “clash of civilizations”, the NAM countries also sought a “dialogue among culture, civilizations and religions”. The summit reaffirmed the inalienable rights of Third World countries to engage in research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination. On the north-south dialogue and cooperation the summit acknowledged the need for interaction among the leaders among the Third World for forging compatible or complementary responses on global issues for a greater action. It also expressed concerned over the continue impasse in negation all across all areas of Doha work program and asked the developed countries to show flexibility in breaking the deadlock.
Perhaps the most important role for NAM today lies in framing a concrete economic agenda for a just and fair international economic order. The globalization and liberalization trends worldwide have generated complex economic problems. The rich-poor divide has widened. The WTO rules and procedures have failed to provide adequate economic gains to the Third World. WTO summits have failed to reach a consensus on many issues. Its role in WTO negotiations to advance and protect the trading rights and opportunities of developing countries and in muscling up their negotiating position and skills would be the chief concerns. It should strive to reform and reorient the globalization process through a strong developmental agenda. NAM has an effective role to play in this regard provided member countries try to see the benefits from a unified angle without any partisan considerations.
Therefore, South-South cooperation should become a major economic plank of the movement. Its role in the present century would be strengthened by more South-South cooperation, which would mean, by and large, collaboration between and among the NAM countries and defending their interests from fast expanding economic and technological power of the North. NAM should develop a progressive agenda on the fundamental values of democracy, human rights and multiculturalism. The preservation and consolidation of democracy throughout its membership is a major challenge. NAM’s spectrum could be further enlarged with the increasing concern worldwide over environmental issues over green house gas emissions, health concerns especially AIDS, drug trafficking, rising instances of poverty, food crisis and unemployment mostly within the NAM members and LDC countries, the rising digital divide between the rich and poor and fight against all shades of extremism, xenophobia, ethnic nationalism and regional wars.
Ms Rice triggered a controversy in her July 27 speech by asserting that “Non-Alignment” had lost its meaning after the end of the Cold War and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. She had evidently been irked by the shrill anti-American rhetoric that emerged at the recent Non-Aligned Movement Summit in Havana. She even advised India the pioneer of NAM to move past old ways of thinking as NAM was a cold war concept and hence lost its meaning. She advised that instead of being aligned with interest and powers of one bloc or another like during cold war, there could now be a partnership of fellow democracies with common ideals and values. She thus asked India to ditch NAM and join US led global alliance of democracies. Rejecting the US contention that Non-Aligned Movement has “lost its meaning”, India quickly asserted that its relevance continues in promoting democratization of the international system and New Delhi was committed to its ideals.External Affairs Ministry said India’s “firm and abiding commitment” to non-alignment could not be questioned. “The Non-Aligned Movement played a significant role in ending apartheid and colonialism. Today, its relevance continues in promoting South-South cooperation and democratization of the international system,” (Indian express June 29, 2007).
Therefore, in the conclusion it can be said that, although the cold war has ended there is no end of justice. In fact cold was has assumed a new dimension with the recent emergence of Russia as the world is witnessing the ongoing confrontation between US and Russia over issues like eastward expansion of NATO, Kosovo’s independence as well the Georgian crisis. As there is the possibility of reappearance of war monger in the scene of world affairs peace making become a continuous process must be pursued every time by the NAM. In fact until the world is not free form war and world peace is not guaranteed, the real development of the Third World counties will remain only a distant dream. Further as colonialism has been replaced by the phenomenon or neo-colonialism in the form of economic exploitation by the MNC because of the process of LPG (liberalization, privatization, and globalization) the role of the NAM must play the positive role in making the globalization inclusive and must strive to achieve a faire, just international economic order. Therefore, Non-Alignment has not lost any of its relevance rather it has stood the test of time. It has served the useful purpose of protecting and preserving the interest of the Third World countries well in the past, so it is also expected to serve their interest well in the future to come. NAM can play the most important role in protecting the economic interest of the Third World countries as well as promoting south-south cooperation. Thus the philosophy of NAM is as relevant as ever for the Third World.