Abstract

After the end of Second World War, the two power bloc was raising in world politics and the revelry between the blocs was on top. The Cold War politics emerged as a bitter experience of international relations. Both blocs were mollifying the other countries of the world. It had to become stronger because of many newly independent countries. For the sake their independence many countries choose the third path to avoiding war and keeping their independence, they framed NAM (Non-alignment Movement). Most of these countries was belong to Asia and Africa and also newly independent. The US (United States) and European countries criticized NAM and revoked it as a group of opportunist countries. The NAM emerged as an international platform as a third alternative of two power blocs. The NAM was the international phenomenon of developing and third world countries. Non-alignment grew out of the cold war bitter relationship between US and USSR. Some developing and third world newly independent countries refused to post Second World War world politics through the eyes of their erstwhile colonial rulers. Indian Prime Minister Nehru was one of the paramount leaders of NAM since its inception. After the demise of British rule in India, India also refused to join any bloc in Cold War time. Nehru did not want to enter in two bloc politics due to India’s national interests. He thought that Indian independence could diminish if India going toward any blocs and adopted Non-alignment as an instrument of foreign policy. He also made effort to discuss other world leader to formulate NAM as platform of collective voice of newly independence countries. The paper also aims to explain India’s contribution to the Non-alignment Movement.
 The first formal conference of NAM was in Bandung in 1961. Nehru and others NAM leaders uttered against new imperialism in Asia and Africa in Bandung Summit by the western countries. Some countries raise questions about the importance and relevance of NAM and produce it as a callous movement after the end of the Cold War. However the broader membership of NAM proved its relevance and importance. Most of the world countries adopted NAM membership due to its popularity and momentous agenda. While the Cold War strategic environment underestimates Non-alignment movement and the two power blocs tried to demoralize Non-alignment movement, however the Non-alignment movement was accomplishing their work with a greater momentum.
 Non-alignment, both as a foreign policy perspective of most newly independence states of Asia, Africa and Latin America and as well as an international movement was a critical factor of contemporary international relations. The Non-alignment movement was the collective voice of developing and third world countries since the first official meeting of its leaders in Belgrade in 1961. The policy of the Non-alignment has been being the issue of debate in international politics since its origin. In 1970’s, its importance and relevance had questioned, with the emergence of détente in international relations. The US and European countries did not consider the NAM movement at that time. Both power blocs were also questioned the role of NAM in cold war era. The western countries always tagged NAM as a collaboration of opportunist countries. It was such a big thing that NAM survived in fracas of cold war. The study tried to remove skepticism on Non-alignment and NAM in post-Cold War arena. It is also suggesting a new way for making the movement effective and relevant in present context.

Highlights

  • Non-alignment, both as a foreign policy perspective of most new states of Asia, Africa and Latin America and as well as an international movement is a critical factor of contemporary international relations

  • Non-alignment has often compared with isolationism (Monroe Doctrine)[12] a policy had been adopting by the US to deals its Latin American neighbours

  • ‘‘Non-alignment has been responsible to ever changing international relations and that it has been permissive of diversity and multiplicity of approaches consistent with a hard-core unity on same irreducible, minimum principles.’’14 Since the end of the Cold War and the formal end of colonialism, the Non-aligned Movement has been forced to redefine itself and reinvent its purpose in the current world order

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Non-alignment, both as a foreign policy perspective of most new states of Asia, Africa and Latin America and as well as an international movement is a critical factor of contemporary international relations. In April-July 1945, while the constituent conference of the United Nations was in session in San Francisco, a number of representatives of Asia and Africa put forward the idea of amplification the unity of two continents and turned to Jawaharlal Nehru for the right initiative. (Indonesia) on April 18, 1955 on the eve of Afro–Asian Conference in at the initiative of India, Indonesia, Burma, Sri Lanka and Pakistan discussed the common tribulations of the two continents and outlined the ways and means by which the newly liberalized nations wanting to promote economic, cultural and political co-operation and defend their right to sovereign independence.[4] The NAM was an international organization of states taking into account themselves not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc. India was largely successful its efforts to keeping NAM united and dynamic

India’s Role in NAM
Implications of NAM in post-Cold War Era
Recent Developments
Findings
Conclusion and Suggestions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call