Non-Aligned Movement is an idea that emerged in 1950. NAM is the second-largest platform globally in terms of country membership after the UN. It currently has more than 120 members. Azerbaijan is the president of the grouping from 2019-2022 and the meet is being organized under the leadership of President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev. The title of the summit is “We stand together against COVID-19”. Indian Prime minister Narendra Modi participated in a video conference meeting of non-alignment movement (NAM) on COVID crisis.

The new interest is not a throwback to seeing the NAM as an anti-Western ideological crusade. Nor is it a pretence of valuing the movement but treating it as a ritual to be performed every three years. It is based on the bet that the NAM remains a critical diplomatic forum for the pursuit of India’s international interests.

Body:

Significance:

• This is the first time PM Modi is taking part in a NAM meeting since taking 2014 when he first became the Prime Minister. The last time any Indian PM participated at Tehran NAM meet was 2012 with the then PM Manmohan Singh was present.
• Both in 2016, 2018 summits of NAM, India was represented at Vice President level.
• The last NAM Summit happened in 2019 in Azerbaijan, before that it was 2016 in Venezuela

India’s past experience with the policy of non-alignment: 

• NAM played an important role during the Cold War years in furthering many of the causes that India advocated: Decolonisation, end to apartheid, global nuclear disarmament, ushering in of new international economic and information orders.
• NAM enabled India and many newly born countries in 1950’s and 1960’s their sovereignty and alleviated the fears of neo-colonialism.
• South-South Co-operation: 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, effectively supported independence movements in third world country.
• Soft-Power Leadership: NAM made India a leader for many countries who didn’t want to ally with the then global powers USA or USSR. India became a soft-power leader which still holds good till date.
• Balanced friendship: India’s non-alignment gave her the opportunity to get the best of both the global superpowers of the time in terms of aid, military support etc. This was in line with her objectives of national development.

However, NAM’s authority has slowly eroded in recent past:

• The end of cold war lead to unipolar world and now tending towards multi-polarity. The NAM is now reached irrelevance.
• NAM could not push for reforms in the global bodies like UN, IMF, WTO. Thus, it has dissuaded many developing countries from pursuing it.
• Disputes within the Global South countries. Example: India-Pak, Iran-Iraq. This has paved way for the blocs to enter.
• Inability to find solution to the West-Asian crisis. Withdrawal of one of the founder members- Egypt, after the Arab Spring.
• Most of the members are economically weak; hence they have no say in world politics or economy.

Rationale behind India’s renewed interest in the NAM:

• A new Cold War is beginning to unfold, this time between the US and China.
• As the conflict between the world’s two most important powers envelops all dimensions of international society, India has every reason to try and preserve some political space in between the two.
• In the last few years, Delhi paid lip-service to the NAM but devoted a lot of diplomatic energy to forums like BRICS.
• Given the Russian and Chinese leadership of BRICS, Delhi inevitably began to tamely echo the international positions of Moscow and Beijing rather than represent voices of the Global South.
• As a nation seeking to become an independent pole in global affairs, India could do more with forums like the NAM in mobilizing support on issues of interest to Delhi.
• An independent Indian line backed by strong support within the NAM can make a big difference to the outcomes of the impending contentions at the World Health Assembly later this month on reviewing the WHO’s performance during the COVID crisis.

Way forward:

There are now new kinds of alignments, more likely to be defined by economics and geography than by ideology. To be aligned is now a virtue, a sign of good leadership. Countries, especially small ones, can and should aim for multiple alignments of their interests. There is now no country in the world that can claim to be non-aligned.

Conclusion:

India is a large and globalized economy with “big stakes in all parts of the world”. Its foreign policy must focus on a pragmatic assessment of India’s interests and the best means to secure them — including partnerships and coalitions — against current and potential threats. A newer, reformed NAM 2.0 can be looked at to continue NAM as our foreign policy.