Introduction to Non alignment movement
Non-Alignment Movement
Questions:
§ Do you agree that Non-Alignment Movement
has lost its relevance (significant or importance) in the post cold war period?
Justify.
§ Non-alignment as a movement represented
a viable (practical) international phenomenon at one time. What in your view
were the fundamentals that were missing which led to the movement losing its
stream?
§ The Non-Alignment Movement
started at a height of cold war. Would you justify its relevance and continuity
in the present day world?
Chief
Protagonists: India, Yugoslavia, Indonesia, Egypt and Ghana
Formal
Establishment date: 1961
Members
in the beginning: 25 (Belgrade Summit, 1961)
Number
of members at present: 118
Staffs:
No
Organs:
chairman, Bureau, Summit, Foreign Minister level Meeting, Anti-imperialist
movement
US
alliance: 40 countries
USSR
alliance: 40 countries
sumimit: 15th in Egypt (2009)
Headquarter:
Based on UN headquarter
Flexible organization structure meet time to time to garner
Age of NAM: About 5 decades support for specific
issues and also to promote their
objectives.
1. Objectives of Non-Alignment
Movement
2.
Principles
of Non-Alignment Movement
3.
Achievements
of Non-Alignment Movement
4.
Failure
of Non-Alignment Movement
5.
Challenges
of Non-Alignment Movement
6.
Relevance
in Post-cold war scenario
7.
Neutrality
of Non-Alignment Movement
8.
Steps
needed to strengthen Non-Alignment Movement
9.
Role
of Nepal in Non-Alignment Movement
10. Characteristics of Non-alignment
Movement
11. Bases and Causes of Non-Alignment
Movement
12. Growth and Role of Non-Alignment
Movement
13. Critical Evaluation of
Non-Alignment Movement
What is Non-Alignment?
Ø Positive concept/ political
concept/ economic concept (promotes certain values and goals)
Ø Active and dynamic policy
Ø Not aligning with any block but
being friendly to everyone
Ø Positive neutrality (need not be
neutral at all circumstances/ situation)
|
Non-Alignment Movement
Camp
of Peace, goodwill and co-operation
|
Capitalist
Camp
Communist Camp
Non-Alignment
is one of those phenomenons which appeared on the international scene after
Second Word War when the world was divided into two hostile power blocs. The
contradictions of the cold war created the situation in which it became
essential for the newly independent states to declare their determination to
avoid military alliances dominated by the two super powers. These newly independent
states refused to join the existing military alliances notwithstanding
(although), their former allegiances and economic and military weakness. These
nations were interested to play active role in the shaping of their own future
and to influence world affairs in general. These nations felt that the only way
through which they could achieve their goal was to adopt a policy of
non-alignment.
Concept
Outstanding
contribution of newly independent states of Asia, Africa and Latin America is
giving of concrete shape to the abstract concept of non-alignment. This concept
gained currency (prevalence) in 1955 at Bangdurg Conference, albeit (although)
it was upper most in the mind of Pandit Nehru as early as 1946. However, as a
movement it was formally established in 1961 at Belgrade Conference. It was as
such a post-war phenomenon of the time when cold war at its height and the
world was divided into two power blocs. Some of the newly independent countries
visualized the danger to their newly gained independence in aligning with
either of the two blocs. Their involvement in cold war was fraught /burdened
with gloomy prospects of their economic, social and political development. They
wanted to conserve their scarce natural and capital resources for the reconstructing
of their backward economics. This could be feasibly /possibly only if they
shunned alliances and power struggle and strived for peaceful atmosphere.
The
pioneers of the notion of non-alignment
were Nehru
of India, Tito of Yugoslavia, Nasser of Egypt and Sulcharno
of Indonesia. It became a significant movement that if influenced the
nature of international relations in diverse ways. Thus, non-alignment both as
a foreign policy of the most new nations and as an international movement
remained a critical factor in contemporary international relations, for many
years. Non-Alignment Movement began its chequered history as the foreign policy
strategy of the newly independent states after Second World War. Now many
Non-Alignment Movement nations have developed so far that former colonizers
raise their brows. States from Asia, Africa, Europe, the Arab worlds, Latin
America and the Caribbean gathered under the umbrella of Non-Alignment Movement
with the Herculean task of preventing total annihilation (total destruction) of
mankind due to containment (control) policy of US and expansionist policy of
USSR.
Meaning
The
term non-alignment has a specific meaning. Many western scholars tagged it as
neutrality or neutralism Schwarzenberger made many synonymous terms- isolationism,
non-commitment, neutrality, neutralization, unilateralism and non-involvement.
*
Isolationism stands for policies of aloofness (unfriendliness) varying from the known
isolation of the US before First World War to postures of in offensiveness in
international affairs,
*
Non-alignment refers to politics of detachment (lack of involvement/ indifference) for
other powers in a triangular or multi-corner relationship,
*
Neutrality describes the political and legal status of a country
at war with respect to the belligerents. It has little meaning expectant the
time of war.
*
Neutralization means a permanent neutral status of a particular state which it can’t give
up under any circumstances, e.g. Switzerland is neutralized state.
*
Unilateralism is identified with policies of
calculated risks such as the destruction of own thermo-nuclear weapons at one’s
own stance.
*
Non-involvement means keeping away from the ideological struggle between the different
super powers, though permitting a certain degree of flexibility when absolutely
unavoidable.
Non-alignment has a broader
meaning and thus has a distinct character. It means that a nation pursuing such
a policy need not be neutral under all
circumstances. It can participate
actively in world affairs under exceptional circumstances. Unlike
neutrality, non-alignment arms at keeping away but it keeps away not from a particular conflict or issue but from a
persisting international tension like cold war. Since, military alliances
were an important aspect of cold war, non- alignment naturally insisted on
shunning from these alliances. Any military alliance - either bilateral or
multilateral – formed during cold war days was a violation of non-alignment
movement. It is, therefore, a foreign policy perspective that advocates freedom
from commitment to any power blocs, it stresses on the independence of choice
and action in external affairs.
The policy of non-aligning with
any bloc, but at the same time being friendly to everyone, so that it might be
feasible to have a moderating impact on international relations, came to be
popularly called as non-alignment. It would enable a nation to judge each issue
on mort and decide upon its course independently without being influenced by
any previous commitment or blocs.
Non- alignment is neither a
passive nor a negative policy. It should be understood like the meaning of some
terms “ahinsa”, “apramad” which have positive meanings.
As a positive concept it has several dimensions. It naturally opposes
certain values and promotes others which are in harmony with its basic
orientation. The chief goals of it in the 50s and 60s were decolonization and
the preservation of international peace, of late, it has been contributing
positively for attaining a new international economic order and a new
information order based on equity, justice, freedom and the eradication of
exploitation and domination. It is positive since it strives for certain values
and goals.
As an activist and dynamic policy
it takes specific sides on merit of each case. This implies that issue bound
tilts in non-alignment are considered legitimate and the concept, therefore,
does not imply equidistance from both the super powers. But at the same time it
rejects the idea of natural allies recently coined to justify certain alliance
of the non-aligned states with certain powers. It is thus an active policy as
it envisages an active role for the non-aligned countries in world affairs, Zambian president Kenneth Kaunda elaborated on the goodness of this concept in 1964,
in these words:
“It is a determination to
preserve independence, sovereignty, to respect such independence and
sovereignty in other state and to decline to take sides in the major
ideological struggles which rend the word….. We will not hitch our carriage to
any nation’s engine and be drawn along their rain way line.”
The criteria of non-alignment
determined as easily as June 1961 at Cairo were:
1)
A
country should follow an independent policy based on peaceful co-existence and
non-alignment, or should be showing a trend in favor of such a policy.
2)
It
should consistently have supported movements for national independence.
3)
It
should not be a member of multi-lateral military alliances concluded in the
context of Great Power Conflicts.
4)
If
it has conceded military bases, these concessions should not have been made in
the context of Great Power Conflicts.
5)
If
it is a member of a bilateral or regional defense arrangement, this should not
be in the context of Great Power Conflicts.
The disintegration of alliance system in
recent years is indeed a vindication of the non- aligned position. Subsequent,
to the process of disintegration, non-aligned movement, increasingly
concentrating on economic issues and emancipation.
Characteristics
of Non-Alignment Movement
The
conceptual imperatives and main features of non-alignment can be enumerated as
below:
1. Adverse to military alliances F= friendship and equality
2.
Adverse
to cold war R= Revolutionary outlook
3.
Adverse
to ideological polarization
O= Own path of development
4.
Own
path of development G= Growing Institutionalization
5.
Revolutionary
outlook
6.
Friendship
and equality
7.
Support
to UNO
8.
Able leadership
S= Support to UNO
9.
Doubtful
genuineness A4= Adverse to military alliances
10. Alignments within non-alignment Adverse to cold war
11. Not “Double Alignment Adverse to ideological polarization
12. Growing institutionalization Able Leadership
D=
Doubtful Genuineness
A= Alignments with non-alignment
N= Not
“Double Alignment
1. Adverse to military alliances
Non-alignment opposed military
alliances and arms race because both of them charge the atmosphere with war
hysteria, ANZUS (51), NATO, SEATO (54-77), CENTO (58-79), Warsa Pact, Manila
Pact, Baghdad Pact, etc. were opposed by it and misuse of world resources by
building up arms was also negated by it.
These countries belong to one camp – the camp of peace, goodwill and
cooperation.
2. Adverse to cold war
Power blocs undermined the
existence of newer national identities and the nations were considered as
satellites. Cold war in any form set at naught the developmental needs of the
new states and undermined the prospects for peace.
3.
Adverse to ideological polarization
They remained adverse to the
ideological polarization between socialism and capitalism. These rigidities
were merely the means to legitimize state-centric devices of the super powers.
4. Own path of development
They refused to accept the economic, political
and social systems of either bloc in two. They were eager to develop their
economy, polity and society in conformity with their own outlook and way of
life. They considered to be kept free to take plus points from any country or
any system in order to have a healthy and quick development.
5. Revolutionary outlook
Non-aligned countries attained
independence after a revolutionary struggle with their colonial powers.
Independence satisfied their aspiration for political freedom but they were far
behind the economic development. They adopted revolutionary method to achieve
fast progress. Some succeeded and other faced hurdles in their mission. Some
had to abandon democratic methods and others had to resort authoritarian
techniques to achieve quick results.
6.
Friendship and equality
Non-alignment is also concerned
with friendly relations among all nation-states on the principle of equality,
justice, and reciprocity. They followed the theories of national
self-determination and peaceful co-existence in order is achieving the
cherished values of the international polity and brotherhood.
7. Support to UNO
They endeavor to strengthen UNO. It aims at
importing new vigor and vitality to the UN in order to prevent it from becoming
a battlefield of super-power rivalry and misapprehensions.
8. Able Leadership
Able leaders like Nehru, Tito,
Nasser, Sukarno, etc. have been its torch bearers in the post-war period. Under
the brilliant leadership of these personalities that Non-Alignment Movement
became popular and assumed the form of a worldwide movement.
9.
Doubtful genuineness
Westerners blamed it to be not
genuinely non-aligned because they had close relationship with two blocs. Blocs
were doubtful on genuineness of the non-aligned countries.
10. Alignment within non-alignment
Many groups formed on the basis of
regionalism, religion, ideology, security considerations and economic
co-operations have raised their heads within this movement. In non-aligned
meeting or in the UN, many countries supported their respective patrons. Many
south Asian nations have recently grouped themselves to make identical views on
several issues, different from Indian views. These countries are apprehensive
of Indian’s big brother attitude.
11.
Not “Double Alignment”
Non-aligned countries can have
friendly relationship with both power blocs which are neither the violation
of non-alignment nor the “opportunism”. Some critics alleged it to be a
“double alignment”. Having friendly relations with both blocs these countries
can have assistance from both blocs and these nations may continue to play
their role in the easing of international tensions.
12. Growing institutionalization
It was not a separate third blocs
but a third area which would be “an area of peace”. So, the secretarial
was not built because it would put on a straight jacket of
institutionalization. Non-alignment movement is not an organization but
a movement that recognized the need for a backup system that could provide
service and continuity.
In 1973’s Algiers Summit, Co-ordination
bureau was set up, Summits is held in the interval of
every three years. Foreign ministers of each country meet before each summit to
prepare the agenda of summit. It hints the gradual institutionalization of
non-alignment.
Basis and Causes of Non-alignment Movement
Two types of bases upon which this policy is relied:-
A.
Negative Basis
B. Positive Basis
A. Negative Basis
1. Dissolution with military
alliances
Single negative base of it is its opposition to
military alliances and cold war politics military pacts accelerated arms
race, enhanced rivalry and tensions and thus were considered harmful for world
peace. This was the basic reason for adopting non-alignment policy by
newly independent nations.
B. Positive Basis
2. Ideological Basis
These nations thought it better to
evolve their own ideologies and system except (capitalism and communism)
that may conform is their indigenous need and traditions and fulfils the
aspirations of their people. So, they promoted to pursue the path of
non-alignment.
3. Independent Foreign policy
The principle of freedom of
opinion or independence of judgment in the conduct of foreign affairs
was the main basis on which the edifice (construction) of non-alignment was
erected.
4. Economic basis
Many nations were economically backward and were in dire
need of capital and technical knowhow for achieving the goal of economic
development and self-reliance. This goal could possibly be achieved in a better
way if they maintained cordial and friendly with both blocs and gain maximum
economic benefits from without any political string. Though these countries
were charged as having “double alignment”, they succeeded to flow help from
both power blocs.
5. Strengthening UNO
Many Afro-Asian nations had
calculated the points behind league of Nation’s failure and so they remained
non-aligned to strengthen UNO and its Principles.
Growth and Role of the Non-Alignment
Movement
Non-Alignment
Movement Conferences
Owing to the above reasons, the
Non-Alignment Movement was originated in 1955 when Afro-Asian nations met at
Bandung (Indonesia) to thrash out the means of combating colonialism and
dealing with the situation arising out of the cold war and bi-polarism. Bandung
conference was a grand assembly stimulate co-operation among Afro-Asians. With
an Asian-Nehru, an African-Nasser and European-Tito leading them, the non-aligned countries became more
ambitious in international relations and hoped to be able to bring pressure to
bear on the super powers in cold war matters. This conference was followed by
the string of conferences along with the increase in the participating
countries and it famed the significance of Non-alignment movement worldwide. By
2003, Non-alignment movement’s membership rose to 116, and now presently its
members are 118. Lusalca Conference 1973,
decided to hold summit conference of Non-alignment movement countries after
every 3 years. Below is given the account of the evolution of Non-Alignment
Movement through different conferences:
Role in the 50s and the 60s
Non-alignment movement’s history began with moral
project. By opposing the cold war, supporting the end of colonialism and
racialism, calling for disarmament and endeavoring to settle disputes through
negotiations, the Non-alignment movement played its significant role in
achieving the goal of international peace.
Role in 70s
In 70s, process of détente assumed great
significance. Non-aligned countries boldly gave a call for New International
Economic Order (NIEO) whose attainment would mask the fall of neo-colonialism.
In the end of 70s, détente
suffered a serious setback and New Cold War appeared in the horizon due to
covert military relations between power blocs and some non-aligned countries.
But they were not ready to accept it. This new scenario caused intensification
of regional conflicts and the danger to independence and development of the
non-aligned countries.
Role in 80s
Now Non-alignment movement’s approach towards peace
and development witnessed a distinct change. They also strongly pleaded for
holing arms control talks. They demanded an early to racialism and apartheid in
South Africa. Demand for NIEO was slackened and rather they politely demanded
aid convincing that it would also help the donors. Co-operation rather than
confrontation became the key note to their appeal for aid.
Role in 90s
Communism collapsed in the Soviet Union and the East
Europe. Military alliances were disintegrated, ideological factors in
international relations receded in the background and cold war came to an end.
In this changed situation many felt that Non-alignment movement has outlived
its utility in the post cold-war era. There were proposals to either change
Non-alignment movement’s name to Third World movement or to merge it with G-77
to enlarge its options of economic co-operation.
Foreign
Minister meeting at Acora to prepare the agenda for Jakarta Summit 1992
rejected the above proposals. Rather the declaration stated that end of the era
of East-West clash had opened up unprecedented vistas for world peace and
co-operation. The Action Plan dealt with the reform of the UN, international
security and disarmament, regional conflicts, South Africa Fund, the process of
decolonization, the external debt problem, science and technology, North-South
and South-South co-operation. The plan document concluded that the recent
developments “constitute a crisis for the Non-alignment movement” and therefore
its member countries must endeavor (try/make an effort) to play a key role in
shaping the UN in the future and not submit themselves to the move for
marginalization.
Relevance / Important Points
The Jakarta Conference 1992
reiterated that the new challenge of Non-alignment movement was economic
struggle, but not the political struggle. The Jakarta message called for:
1.
A
New International Order through the UN, (Economic)
2.
Preparing
proposals for restructuring and democratization of the UN
system,(Institutional)
3.
Co-coordinating
efforts with G-77 and South-South cooperation, (Economic)
4.
Eliminating
all weapons of mass destruction, (Political)
5.
Co-operating
in areas of food, population, trade and investment, (Socio-Economic)
6.
Interdependence,
integration and globalization of the world economy, (Economic)
7.
Non-imposing
of conditionalities on others,
(Political)
11th
Summit of Non-alignment movement in Cartagena 1995, made a call for:
Ø
Establishment
of a world free from nuclear weapons, (Political)
Ø
Ensuring
an equitable international flow of trade and technology,(Economic)
Ø
Combating
terrorism and religious extremism, (Political)
Ø
Fighting
poverty, drug trafficking, environmental destruction, (Social)
Ø
Reforming
the UN,
(Institutional)
The
Summit was critical of economic conditions imposed on developing countries,
opposed interventionism and called for a joint fight against racism and
xenophobia which marginalized the Third World.
The
12th Summit at Durban 1998 came out with the declaration which deals
with:
*
Nuclear
non-proliferation
*
Disarmament
*
Security
*
Development
*
Human
rights
*
Environment
and transfer of technology
However there was no agreement on issues like
good governance, creation of safeguards for human rights and the problems
related to international trading arrangements being enforced through the WTO.
The
13th Summit at Kuala Lumpur in 2003 was an attempt to evolve a
consensus on the contours of a new Non-alignment movement political agenda. Top
agendas were the strategic challenges of worldwide terrorism and the
non-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), both were contemporary issues.
Economic globalization proved to be a less contentious issue.
The
14th Summit at Hawana in 2006, (September 15-16) issued the
Non-alignment movement political Declaration calling on member to “remain
united, firm and to shoulder a greater level of activism.”
15th
Summit at Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt in 1009, (September 1-6)
16th
Summit in Iran, 2012
Critical Evaluation of Non-Alignment
Movement
Ø
Achievements
Ø
Criticism/ Failure
Achievements
Achievements
of Non-alignment and its impact on international relations are summarized
below:
1. World peace
2.
End
of Cold War
3.
End
of Bi-Polarism
4.
End
of colonialism
5.
End
of racialism
6.
End
of military alliances
7.
Minimized
the arms race
8.
Preservation
of independence
9.
Strengthened
UNO
10. Universal international system
11. More economic aid
12. New economic order
13. New communication order
1. World Peace
These
countries launched an active international struggle for world peace in the days
of cold war, bi-polarism and militarism. They have made a principled
contribution towards the maintenance of world peace and prevention of global
and regional conflicts.
2. End of Cold War
Non-alignment
movement adhered to the principle of peaceful co-existence and denounced cold
war. In making big powers to realize the futility of engaging themselves in
cold war and in warning the weaker nations not to fall a prey to power rivalry,
Non-alignment movement played its role in ending the cold war.
3. End of colonialism
By
supporting the unconditional, immediate and total abolition of colonialism,
withdrawal of foreign troops from colonial territories, support for the people
fighting for the right to national self-determination and concerted efforts to
end all varieties of neo-colonialism and imperialist domination, Non-Alignment
helped in a rapid decolonization of the world.
4. End of Bi-polarism
Proliferation
of non-alignment movement helped in the ending of bi-polarism and emergence of
multi-polarism.
5. End of Racialism
Non-alignment
movement played a significant role in eradicating the evils of the human, race
– racial discrimination, apartheid in South Africa and hegemonies of all types.
6. End of Military alliances
Opposition
to military alliances and discouraging the newly independent nation to join in
the alliances were the objectives of Non-alignment. Grumbling of SEATO, CENTO,
Warsa Pact, etc. justify the stand taken by non-aligned countries.
7. Minimised the arms race
Non-alignment
movement made the world aware of the perilous implications of arms race both
conventional and nuclear. They ventured towards the idea of disarmament.
8. Preservation of independence
Non-alignment
movement endeavored to preserve the hard earned independence of the newly
liberated states. The non-alignment implies independence of judgment and the
countries following this policy judged events and problems on merits rather
than preconceived ideological notions and affinities.
9. Strengthened UNO
The
Non-alignment movement made notable influence on the decisions of the General
Assembly, even though they are helpless before the Veto powers. Majority
decisions can’t be taken without their support. Non-alignment has made the UN
peacekeeping functions conducive. It has also made the working of the UN more
participative and democratic. This world government is enlivened by it.
10. Universal international
system
Non-alignment
movement redefined the role of weak nations- making them subjects not the
objects of international relations and thus laid foundations, of a universal
international system based on the principle of equality and justice. It
converted the Euro-centric international relations into worldwide relations and
thus internationalized the international relations in true sense.
11. More economic aid
By
pursing the non-aligned policy, many countries were able to receive economic
aid and assistance for their development from both power blocs.
12. New Economic Order
Non-alignment
movement’s initiatives familiarized the need for a New International Economic Order
based on both political and economic equality. In this connection they are
endeavoring for North-South dialogue and South-South Cooperation.
13. New Communication order
Non-alignment
movement ended the monopoly of western agencies over the news dissemination
services. Western monopoly over mass media created a lot of distortion in
projecting the image of the non-aligned countries. Realizing the crucial role
of the dissemination of information and communications in enlarging mutual
understanding, they have set up the non-aligned News pool.
Criticism of Non-alignment
movement
Scholars
especially Western have bitterly criticized non-alignment as a selfish policy,
a baseless ideology and an opportunistic attitude,
Bad H2L f^n2l s2w
1. Ambiguous concept
2.
Not
a model of behavior
3.
Selfish
policy
4.
Opportunistic
and immoral
5.
Bloc
mentality
6.
Harsh
towards west, soft towards East
7.
Disunity
8.
Serious
dilemma
9.
Hypocrisy
10. Labour union approach
11. Factionalism
12. Like alliance system
13. Worthless declarations and
conference
14. No results.
1.
Ambiguous concept
What non-alignment
means? Is it positive or negative concept? The term “non-alignment” is in
common use but its true meaning hadn’t been analyzed. As a corollary, there is
no popular understanding of the concept among the majority of the people.
Western scholars took the job of analysis but recently non-aligned countries
scholars have endeavored to analyze if scientifically and vividly.
2.
Not a model of behavior
Non-alignment
movement’s profounder claim that it provides a model of international behavior
which all countries should adopt in the interest of peaceful relations. But
critics observe that it’s vacillating policy of unrealistic expediency, of
black mail, of irresponsibility and of opportunism.
3.
Selfish policy
Non-alignment is a
policy of selfishness of course; national interest is the main basis of all
foreign policies. Though there’s a general expression that non-aligned
countries are not self-seekers, we can say that like other concepts-
laissez-faire, balance of power collective security etc.- this too has come out
of expediency and self-interest.
4.
Opportunistic and immoral
For Westerners,
non-alignment was alignments with both cold war camps. The desire of
non-aligned countries to have friendship with both power blocs was
misinterpreted as a policy of “double alignment”.
5.
Bloc Mentality
Many non-aligned
countries are neither impartial nor judge issues on merit because they suffer
from bloc mentality. From time to time, they have chosen to associate
themselves with one or the other of the super powers, so closely that their
status as non-aligned might be under eraser, India, for example, in 1971, chose
to conclude a “treaty of peace and friendship” with the USSR.
6.
Harsh towards West, soft towards East
Change is that they
have been “harsh” towards the capitalist powers and “soft” towards the
communist powers. They are criticized on the ground of adopting a policy of
“double standard”; so, it has become a subject of criticism for western powers.
But fault lies with the westerner themselves too, because they always followed
colonial or orientalistic policies.
7.
Disunity
The diversity
inherent among Third World nations badly affected its cohesiveness.
Non-alignment movement countries had many interstate or regional conflicts
among themselves which they failed to resolve amicably. Of the 200 odd
conflicts in the1970s and 1980s, all of them involving Third World countries,
very few can be described as proxy wars promoted, by the superpowers. In any
case, the members are too diverse to have any impact.
8.
Serious Dilemma
The Non-alignment
movement is passing through a serious dilemma of more members and less
strength. The ideals of the movement have been diluted and it has been become
increasingly tough to establish unity of purpose and coordination of action
with the group.
9.
Hypocrsy
Relatively rich and
prosperous countries of Non-alignment movement are not kind enough towards
their backward colleagues in the Third World, though they severally attack the
Western developed powers on that ground
10.
Labour Union approach
In mid-70s, the
Non-alignment movement adopted a militant posture and radical rhetorics towards
the North, while demanding for a New International Economic Order. They took a
path of confrontation and converted movement for “NIEO’ into “Class war”
against the developed countries. But this labour union approach was not
fruitful and of late, they moderated the demand for NIEO. Now call for Class
War appears to have been replaced by the call for “co-operation”.
11.
Factionalism
Non-aligned countries
might be divided into three categories;
Radicals
(Pro-communist)
Conservatives
(pro-capitalist) and,
Independent
(Pro-non-alignment).
Roughly half of these
countries can be considered truly non-aligned. This was evident in Havana
Summit 1979, Groupism and differences were prevalent in 19th and 13th
summits too.
12.
like alliance system
To pretend that
Non-alignment movement is not an alliance, the non-aligned assembly decided to
have a chairman, a bureau, a regular calendar of meetings at different levels,
and a summit every three years. By this increasing institutionalization,
Non-alignment movement stepped into the diplomatic style of the two alliance
systems.
13.
Worthless declarations and conferences
Non-alignment
movement declarations are simply the reiteration of resolutions of the UN and
its agencies. Host country spends a lot for momentary prestige and
international publicity. It’s like a club and all it does, is to have summit to
make speeches which are seldom followed by any concrete action.
14.
No result
Despite its all
claims Non-alignment has nothing concrete to its credit in solving any
international or regional problems. It’s the UN which is working hard. The
Non-alignment movement to establish, a NIEO or, a, New World Information Order.
Notwithstanding the
above criticism, Non-alignment movement has played a crucial role in
international relations and has had several positive impacts on the world
affairs. Some scholars have recommended that Non-alignment movement has to seek
compromises, adjustments, accommodations and mutations in order to validate
itself in accordance with the growing complexities of the global scenario. It
is as much economically relevant today as it was politically relevant in the days
to cold war.
Relevance
of Non-Alignment Movement
Relevance of
Non-alignment movement has become a great subject of debate in post-cold war
contemporary world. There are two schools of thoughts. One believes that it is
no more valid in the present changed conditions. Another still has faith in its
relevance notwithstanding the changed world ambience.
1)
Irrelevant
and Invalid (Political Emancipation)
2)
Still
Relevant and Valid (Economic Emancipation)
1.
Irrelevant and Invalid (Political Emancipation)
Criticisms of
Non-alignment movement done by many scholars support the irrelevancy and
invalidity of Non-alignment movement.
Previously Western
scholars underrated its relevance but in the last few years non-western
scholars and leaders have also started realizing the redundancy and irrelevance
of this movement. The circumstances that led to the creation of this movement
have undergone a sea change. The following changes have rendered the relevance
of the Non-alignment movement doubtful:
*
Decolonization
has become, a fast accompli, ( action already done and can’t be changed)
*
Cold-War
has ended and détente is again burgeoning with new vigor and vitality.
*
Military
blocs have tumbled down
*
Military
bases have become a thing of the past owing to advance in science and technology
and its use for military purposes.
*
Collapse
of communism and communist bloc and resultants de-ideologisation of world
politics
*
Irreversible
trends towards peaceful co-existence and active economic cooperation.
*
Trend
towards disarmament has been gaining momentum since 1991. The aligned of the
East and West have taken steps towards 20-30% reduction in defense forces.
*
Now
USA is a core-power and Non-alignment movement countries want to leave this
movement. Argentina dropped out Non-alignment movement in1991, where is the
question of keeping aloof from rival blocs, if there’s only one power?
Non-Alignment
Movement turned out to be defunct (invalid) due to following reasons:-
1.
Out
–dated economic stand
2.
Lack
of economic pragmatism
3.
Duplicacy
4.
Leadership
vacuum
5.
Lack
of issues
1.
Out-dated economic stand
Non-alignment
movement has been trying to get aids from rich nations. It wants that rich
nations commit 0.7% of their GDP as aid. Instead of relying on aid,
Non-alignment movement member have to get more private investment into their
countries. “Not aid but trade” policy should be adopted.
2.
Lack of economic pragmatism
Non-alignment
movement members are rooted in the ideas of socialism and state-control which
are out-dated. They continue complaining about the IMF and the WTO but lack the
muscle to do anything. Rather than complain about the new trade regime, the
countries must adjust to changing realities.
3.
Duplicacy
Non-alignment
movement today competes with G-7, ASEAN and the common wealth which deal with
economic and trade issues. Non-alignment movement neither does that, nor takes
any diplomatic initiatives. It has no position even on issues like human
rights, child exploitation and gender issues. As a result, Non-alignment
movement members have to follow the Western dictates in this regard.
4.
Leadership vacuum
There’s no leadership
on global issues. There are many disagreements among members. Chariotnatic
leaders are no more there to provide it path and direction.
5.
Lack of issues
It could have provided
some leadership on things like nuclear non-proleferation, child labour, poverty
and terrorism besides other social and economic issues. It needs issues to
focus for playing effective role in the world politics in the future.
Even on the consensus
having items such as the drug trade, international terrorism and nuclear
non-proliferation, Non-alignment movement hasn’t been able to achieve anything.
This erodes the
credibility of the movement as an instrument to further the political and
economic interests of its members. Unless Non-alignment movement redefines its
terms of reference and chalks out a strategy to counter US influence on the
world, it will remain marginalized and irrelevant summit after collapse of cold
war have been unable to chart out the contextual plan. The summits have, thus,
been cosmetic in nature.
Some members of
Non-alignment movement even proposed to change its name as “Third World
Movement”. Egypt wanted to merge it with G-77. These proposals show that member
–states doubt the relevance and continuity of the movement. In Acora meeting,
there had been an impression that Non-alignment movement was now in a vacuum
and had to find a new rote and a new identity.
*
Create
new world order’ to save the globle from further economic recession
*
Combating
terrorism
*
Ensure
participation in international decision making and norm setting institutions
including financial institutions.
2.
Still Relevant and Valid (Economic Emancipation)
12th
Summit of Durban conceded that Non-alignment Movement is standing at the thresh
hold of new era-“an era that offers great opportunity yet pose special danger
for the developing world”.
Non-alignment
movement has assumed a novel role even in the changed context. It its political
relevance has become absolute, its economic significance has increased
manifold.
First Foreign
Minister’s Meeting after the collapse of USSR made the 22- page declaration
entitled “A World in Transition for Diminishing Confrontation towards
increasing Cooperation” which emphasized that Non-alignment movement’s new
focus must be on eradicating poverty, hunger, malnutrition and illiteracy and
called on the international community to help. Non-alignment movement supported
the present efforts at strengthening the UN so as to render it “more
democratic, effective and efficient”. There was consensus for bridging
agreement between Non-alignment movement and G-77.
Now, Non-alignment
movement has not outlived its utility rather it’s becoming more popular. If it
hadn’t been so, why should more countries seek the Non-alignment movement
membership? Mongolia was granted admission. Germany requested to be allowed to
attend the session as a guest along with the Netherlands.
In the growing
multi-centric world order with the decline of prominent status of the
superpowers, limiting Non-alignment movement to a Third World Movement would
prevent it from getting a fair hearing from some of the emerging centers of
power. To confine it in terms of geographical boundaries will act as reversal
of its international role to that of a regional movement.
Though the slogan
“Non-Alignment Movement is dead” is prevalent among Western commentators,
Non-alignment movement is perhaps even more relevant now to international
relations and development than at any time in its history. All the developments
of a unipolar world are bound to make the non-aligned movement once again
relevant.
Non-alignment
movement is fundamentally a political concept. Nehru, Tito, Sukarno and Nasser
did not envisage full economic cooperation as part of Non-alignment movement.
But now the movement is shifting its emphasis from the political to the
economic arena. Obviously, if Non-alignment movement is to give priority to
economic problems, it is perhaps because it has little role to play in the
political arena.
In the post-cold war
period the Non-alignment movement is struggling hard to prove its worth by striving
to work for the following contemporary issues:-
1.
Setting
up a equitable New International Order of the UN (Economic)
2.
Restructuring
and democratization of the UN (Institutional )
3.
Strengthening
of the UNCTAD and UNIDO (economic)
4.
Co-coordinating
with G-77 and stressing South-South Co-operation (economic)
5.
Co-operating
in areas of food production, population, trade and investment (socio-economic)
6.
Ensuring
equitable international flow of trade and transfer of technology (economic)
consolidate the movement through necessary reform.
7.
Working
for non-proliferation and nuclear weapon free world (political)
8.
Combating
terrorism, extremism and racism(political)
9.
Fighting
poverty, drug trafficking and environmental degradation(social)
10. Opposing interventionism and
imposition of economic conditions on developing countries. (Political)
*
Cooperation
to make common stand in WTO negotiation
*
Adhere
to the principles and objectives of Non-alignment by its members and build a
common bargaining platform
Non-alignment
movement is neither willing to be marginalized nor invalidated. How far it
succeeds in this is in the womb of future. To withstand tide of change in the
world is indeed a great challenge for the Non-alignment movement. End of cold
war has replaced the “nuclear bomb” with “social bomb”, with poverty,
underdevelopment, violence and terrorism topping the priority list and getting
intertwined with the security problem of the South to which there can be no
military solution. Richest 20% of world population held 83% of the world wealth
and the poorest 20% hold only 1.4%
Developmental
prerequisites (fundamentals/ basics) of Non-Alignment Movement countries:-
1.
Internal
stability
2.
Territorial
security, and
3.
Material
and human resources
Objectives
of Non-Alignment Movement
1.
Preserve
the independence territorial integrity and sovereignty of states, (Political)
2.
Attain
general and complete disarmament under effective international
control,(political)
3.
Grant
right to self-determination to people under colonial or other forms of alien
domination,
4.
Achieve
equality among nations, (economic and political)
5.
Extend
full respect for international law, (law)
6.
Seek
pacific settlement of disputes, (law)
7.
Democratize
international relations, (political)
8.
Attain
economic and social development of member nations, (socio-economic)
9.
Set
up an equitable international order, (political)
10. Develop human resources,
(economic-social)
11. Protect and promote human rights
and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, (political)
12. Promote co-existence of different
systems, cultures and societies.
Principles
of Non-Alignment Movement
1.
Global
peace and disarmament
2.
National
independence and preservation of sovereignty, including right of
self-determination.
3.
Economic
equality among nations (NIEO)
4.
Politico-cultural
identity/equality (NIO/oppose cultural imperialism)
5.
Search
for universalism and multilateralism (support UN)
6.
Panchashed
7.
Equitable
access to information technology
8.
Sound
globalization process,
Thankyou for sharing such as nice article keep it sharing it will helpful for those people who are looking GC Tactical
ReplyDelete