Non-aligned spirit searching for relevance in changing world

The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The Bandung Asian-African Conference in 1955 was a milestone for the development of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), a political grouping that now takes in nearly two-thirds of the United Nations' membership.

Indonesian president Sukarno spearheaded efforts to create the conference with the initial support of the then prime ministers of Burma, Ceylon, India, and Pakistan. He brought together the leaders of 29 states, mostly former colonies from the continents of Africa and Asia, to discuss common concerns and to develop joint policies in international relations.

Sukarno, along with Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Egyptian prime minister Gamal Abdul Nasser led the conference.

At the meeting, these leaders of the Third World shared their similar problems of resisting the pressures of the major powers, maintaining their independence and opposing colonialism and neo- colonialism, especially Western domination.

Following this meeting, a preparatory meeting for the First NAM Summit Conference was held in Cairo from June 5-12, 1961. Where the invitations for country's to attend for Bandung were on a regional basis, those for the first NAM summit were based on each invited country's commitment to a set of shared principles.

When the summit took place later that year in Belgrade, 25 states, 11 each from Asia and Africa, along with host Yugoslavia, Cuba and Cyprus, participated. At the conclusion of the meeting, the group agreed to oppose colonialism, imperialism, and neo- colonialism

The world's non-aligned nations declared their desire not to become involved in the East-West ideological confrontation of the Cold War. Instead, they would focus on national struggles for independence, the eradication of poverty, and economic development.

The term "Non-Alignment" was coined by Nehru during his speech in 1954 in Colombo.

Since its inception, the movement has attempted to create an independent path in world politics that did not result in member states becoming pawns in the struggles between the major powers of the USSR and the United States.

While the organization was not intended to be as close an alliance as NATO or the Warsaw Pact, it never had much cohesion and many of its members were induced to or unable to resist aligning with one or other of the great powers.

One of the most obvious transgressors, Cuba, was closely aligned with the USSR during the Cold War.

Cairo hosted the second meeting in 1964, which was attended by 46 nations with most of the new members being newly independent African states. Much of the meeting involved discussions about the Arab-Israeli conflict and the India-Pakistan conflict.

There were 54 nations represented in the third meeting in 1969 in Lusaka, which resulted in an agreement to form a permanent organization to foster economic and political ties.

Countries that hosted the following NAM's conferences were Algeria, Sri Lanka, Cuba, India, Zimbabwe, Indonesia, Colombia, South Africa and Malaysia.

The end of Cold War in the 1990s, marked by the withering away of the communist regime in the former Soviet Union and the fall of Berlin Wall made many question the relevance of the movement.

By the summit in Kuala Lumpur in 2003, the NAM members acknowledged the changing world the group had to respond to in order to ensure its continuing usefulness.

"After more than 40 years from its founding, and having undergone many challenges and vicissitudes, it is timely and appropriate to comprehensively review the role, structure and work methods of our Movement in keeping with the times and the new realities, aimed at the further strengthening of our Movement," the Kuala Lumpur declaration says.

With the end of the Cold War, the group found the trend towards unilateralism in politics and the rise of international terrorism, its new challenges.

Growing globalization and the rapid advance of science and technology that had enabled the rich and powerful countries to exercise an inordinate influence in determining the nature and direction of international relations, including economic and trade relations, were major talking points.

"The continued relevance of the Movement will depend, in large measure, on the unity and solidarity of its members as well as its ability to adapt to these changes," the declaration says.

N. Krishnan, a member of the Indian Foreign Service and an expert on multilateral diplomacy and international organizations, said while the developing world was largely supportive of mutually beneficial global integration, it has major concerns that were not being addressed by the new global agenda.

These included an equitable balance between the rights and obligations of investors -- particularly multinationals -- the extra-territorial application of domestic laws, an intrusive and calculated invoking of human rights violations, and the opening up of national economies tied to grants of aid and trade concessions.

"Non-aligned countries are increasingly exposed to pressures to conform to an agenda which is being defined and driven by others," he says in one of his essays.

Krishnan also notes that several non-aligned countries were destroying weaker neighbors, facing widespread HIV/AIDS infections, having problems in eradicating corruption, and committing 'ethnic cleansing' or other forms of human rights violations.

"All this needs correcting, (or) NAM will be in trouble. We must put our houses in order," he said.