Birth of Non Aligned Movement

Rivalry of Super Powers resulted in the formation of two hostile military blocs and an atmosphere of tension, distrust, and fear developed. As many former imperialist colonies were attaining independence, both sides tried to draw these new independent nations into their respective blocs. The ones joining the blocs were given economic and military aid and were expected to provide military and political support in turn in case of a conflict.

India did not wish to ally itself with either party because it was aware of the high price of military involvement and also that the new found freedom would become meaningless. Therefore, it tried to initiate a movement for world peace independently.

Our leaders realized that peace simply did not mean the absence of war. It also meant healthy cooperation amongst nations for the benefit of all. This policy, which was supported by many newly independent nations, came to be defined as the Non-aligned Movement. It meant an impartial approach towards world issues without being influenced by either bloc. It was the brain-child of Pt. Nehru of India, Marshal Tito of Yugoslavia, President Nasser of Egypt, President Sukarno of Indonesia and Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana.

Non-Alignment does not mean being neutral or not involved in foreign affairs. It means remaining apart from military and political groups while taking an active part in promoting world peace and understanding amongst nations. It also means taking an independent stand on international matters.

This movement became an important forum for those countries that did not want to support either bloc, but wished to work for the cause of peace and cooperation amongst nations.

Non-alignment is not Neutrality

Neutrality is an attitude of non-participation or refusal to take sides on any issue irrespective of its merits whereas alignment implies advance declaration of the sides disregarding the merits. Whereas a non-aligned country will judge each case as arises on its merits as it sees it and not as others see it. It is a concept of liberty and freedom at State level.

Neutrality is a concept relevant only in times of war; being aloof from war. Neutrality imposes certain limitations and confers some rights. A neutral country has to prove in practice its neutrality in war.

Non-alignment is a relevant both in peace and war. Non-alignment, on the other hand, believes in further­ing one's own interest in the light of the prevailing circumstances accord­ing to one's own independent judgment, both in peace and war. Non- alignment means freedom from obligations and commitments. Non- alignment does not debar alliance with a country to advance national interests. Even Nehru declared that, "We are free to join an alliance."

Speaking before the U.S. Congress in 1949, Nehru said, "India cannot and shall not be neutral where freedom is threatened or justice denied. To be neutral would be a denial of all that we stand for."

The conclusions of the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation and the treaty of Friendship between India and Bangladesh do not detract India from the path of freedom of choice to adjudge her own interests.

Secondly, neutrality is different from non-alignment in the sense that neutral countries acquired this status through or as a result of the provisions contained in either their respective municipal laws, or by international treaties and agreements.

This means the commitment of those countries to neutrality continues irrespective of governmental changes in those countries. The status of Switzerland as a neutral country stands even though the Government changes.

But in case of non-align­ment, the commitment of a country may change with change in Govern­ment. We find that India under the Janata Government opted for what they termed 'genuine non-alignment' which stressed policy of equi­distance.

Salient features of Non-aligned movement

Non-alignment upholds certain values- while opposing certain other values.

Non-alignment stands- for dissociation from military alliances that came into existence as a result of rivalry between the super-powers. Military alliances attempt to create spheres of influence, promote arms race and thus increase tension in the world.

It was on account of the membership of military alliances such as SEATO and CENTO that India opposed that entry of Pakistan into non-aligned movement at the time of the Colombo Conference held in 1976. It is now after having given up membership of military pacts that Pakistan could be admitted as a member at the Havana Conference held in 1979.

Rather, the alliances of which Pakistan was a member, have disintegrated. This has proved the truth of the contention that non- alignment is gaining ground against military alliances.

Non alignment recognizes that existence of a nation depends upon seeking its own national interest. It is in this context that Nehru stressed that your relations with a particular country can be more cordial and friendly.

Non-alignment is a synthesis of nationalism and internationalism. The ideals of the leaders of non- alignment were shaped by the traditions of their ancient civilisation as also the Western liberal ideas. It is the Gandhian concept of non-violence at the national level that was extended by Nehru to the international plane through the police of peaceful co-existence and non- involvement with military rivalry of big powers. Non-alignment was born out of conviction and sheer necessity of survival of the newly independent countries.

Non-alignment is concerned with the maintenance of peace in the world and the non aligned countries are against the use of force in settling international disputes. Peace is considered necessary for the eradica­tion of poverty and squalor from the world.

The root characteristic feature of the non-aligned is the independence of judgment which the non-aligned countries enjoy on international issues. They judge every issue on its own merit without any dictation from any other country. This has been asserted by many leaders of the non-aligned countries.

Nehru declared that non-alignment is "a policy of acting according to our best judgment. P.M. of Burma wanted to retain his "freedom of action in foreign affairs." Nkrumah of Ghana pointed out that "we must be free to judge issues on their merits."

Non-aligned countries believe in a democratic approach to international rela­tions by all the countries of the world.

Non-aligned countries are opposed to racialism and colonialism in any form. It was to condemn Dutch action on Indonesia and plead for the freedom of Indo­nesia that Nehru called a conference in New Delhi in 1954. It was at the Bandung Conference held in 1955 where the representatives from Asia and Africa condemned racialism and colonialism. Non-alignment opposed to racialism as practiced in South Africa.

Influence politics differs from power politics in the sense that influence believes in persuasion while power lies in compelling other by the use of force to do what he would not have done otherwise.

In spite of the fact that the new nations have obtained freedom, they are still dominated by the highly developed countries in the economic sphere. They are tied in the economic system that believes in exploitation of the poor and underdeveloped countries.

In spite of the fact that these new nations have made developmental plans, they have not been able to make a little progress. The produce of the poor, underdeveloped, countries is bought by the affluent nations at a very low rate, while the finished goods prepared from that very stuff imported from the underdeveloped countries is exported to them at very high prices. This leads to deficit in balance of payments.

The aid given by the developed countries to the under­developed nations is eaten back by the former to meet balance of pay­ments gap. The non-aligned countries plead for the replacement of this old system by a New International Economic System.

Concern for the new economic system was expressed for the first time at the Conference held at Algiers in 1970. Consequently, many of the new nations provid­ing raw-materials decided to come together and act in unison to increase the prices of their commodities.

It was this strategy at Algiers that gave birth to the demand for a New International Economic Order. This strategy which was later used with great effect by the OPEC (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) provided a major threat for world capitalist powers.

India’s Role in NAM

India played an important role in the multilateral movements of colonies and newly independent countries that developed into the Nonaligned Movement. The movement had its origins in the 1947 Asian Relations Meeting in New Delhi and the 1955 Asian-African Conference in Bandung, Indonesia. India also participated in the 1961 Belgrade Conference that officially established the Nonaligned Movement, but Nehru's declining prestige limited his influence. In the 1960s and 1970s, New Delhi concentrated on internal problems and bilateral relations, yet retained membership in an increasingly factionalized and radicalized movement. During the contentious 1979 Havana summit, India worked with moderate nations to reject Cuban president Fidel Castro's proposition that "socialism" (that is, the Soviet Union) was the "natural ally" of nonalignment.

Under Indira Gandhi in the early 1980s, India attempted to reassert its prominent role in the Nonaligned Movement by focusing on the relationship between disarmament and economic development. By appealing to the economic grievances of developing countries, Indira Gandhi and her successors exercised a moderating influence on the Nonaligned Movement, diverting it from some of the Cold War issues that marred the controversial 1979 Havana meeting. Although hosting the 1983 summit boosted Indian prestige within the movement, its close relations with the Soviet Union and its pro-Soviet positions on Afghanistan and Cambodia limited its influence.

The end of the Cold War left the Nonaligned Movement without its original raison d'être, and its membership became deeply divided over international disputes, strategy, and organization. During the 1992 Jakarta summit, India took a middle position between countries favoring confrontation with developed nations on international economic issues, such as Malaysia, and those that favored a more cooperative approach, such as Indonesia. Although New Delhi played a minor role compared with Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta on most issues facing the summit, India formulated the Nonaligned Movement position opposing developed countries' linkage of foreign aid to human rights criteria.

India also is a founding member of the Group of Fifteen, a group of developing nations established at the ninth Nonaligned Movement summit in Belgrade in 1989 to facilitate dialogue with the industrialized countries. India played host to the fourth Group of Fifteen summit in March 1994. At the summit, Prime Minister Rao and other leaders expressed concern over new trade barriers being raised by the industrialized countries despite the conclusion of a new world trade agreement.

Relevance of NAM in Unipolar World

With fall of USSR as super power the world has become unipolar revolving around US. During the cold war era NAM had helped in easing the tension due to increase in its membership, giving moral check on superpower overwhelming strength in UN assembly.

NAM is committed to the universal problem of peace and freedom, equality and fraternity. As long as it supports the cause of" socio-economic uplift of the developing country it will remain relevant. As long as there is exploitation, injustice, war, destruction, hunger and poverty, NAM will not lose its importance.

New International economic order needs its strengthening so that it can fight for the cause of the poor. To consider NAM as a byproduct of bipolar world is in itself a wrong premise. To eliminate the US hegemony, NAM can act as a safety valve to the developing nation.

The movement has succeeded to create a strong front on the International level, representing countries of the third world in the International organizations on top of which the United Nations.

Current Challenges facing the NAM include the necessity of protecting the principles of International law, eliminating weapons of mass destruction, combating terrorism, defending human rights, working toward making the United Nations more effective in meeting the needs of all its member states in order to preserve International Peace, Security and Stability, as well as realizing justice in the international economic system.