Changing International Political Order - 4 | PSIR Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

NAM (Non Alignment Movement)

Introduction

Non Aligned Movement (NAM) was the movement of third world country which emerged after 2nd WW. It primarily focused on preserving the newly earned freedom and sovereignty of these countries. During early days, its actions were key factors in the process of decolonization process. And it has played an important role in preserving world peace and security.

According to Prof. T D Paul, McGill university Non Alignment Movement is an example of ‘soft balancing’ by weaker states towards great powers, engaged in intense rivalry and conflict. As these countries had little material ability to constrain superpower conflict and arms race, they adopted the method of soft balancing through normative power. Normative power denotes new set of values like peace, disarmament, development, autonomy of choice and to create the new world order.

History and Evolution

Bandung Conference

• Bandung Asian-African conference in 1955 is considered as most immediate antecedent to the creation of NAM. Meeting was attended by 29 Heads of states. These belonged to first post-colonial generation. The objective was to identify and assess world issues and pursuing joint policies in international relations. There was also another important reason. These countries had newly attained independence.
• Development and increasing standard of living was main concern for them. And therefore they did not wanted to be part of either Western or Eastern block and become part of cold war.
• ‘Ten Principles of Bandung’ were proclaimed at the conference. And such principles were later adopted as the main goals and objectives of NAM.

Belgrade Summit

• Six year after Bandung the Movement of Non-Aligned countries was founded at the First Summit Conference of Belgrade. On Sep 1-6 1961. The conference was attended by members of 25 countries from Asia, Africa and Europe, and Latin America (Cuba). The NAM was declared as ‘movement’ and not organization to avoid the bureaucratic implications of the latter.
• It was conceived to play a active role in international politics, to have its own stand on international matters. Which will reflect the interest of its members.

Ten Principles of Bandung

1. Respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
2. Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations.
3. Recognition of the equality of all races and of the equality of all nations large and small.
4. Abstention from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of another country.
5. Respect for the right of each nation to defend itself singly or collectively, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.
6. Abstention from the use of arrangements of collective defense to serve the particular interests of any of the big powers, abstention by any country from exerting pressures on other countries.
7. Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country.
8. Settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, such as negotiation, conciliation, arbitration or judicial settlement as well as other peaceful means of the parties’ own choice, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.
9. Promotion of mutual interests and cooperation.
10. Respect for justice and international obligation. 

NAM during 50s

• In 1950s the movement played important role in support of nations struggling of independence and against colonization. Third world showed great solidarity under leadership of NAM and. The movement gained considerable diplomatic prestige.

• Pandit Nehru never wanted that NAM gets converted into an organization or institution, he wanted to retain the dynamic nature of the movement. Hence NAM agenda has been evolving. In 50s and 60s, the agenda was anti-imperialism, anti-racialism along with the opposition to the block mentality and arms race. It was an attempt to give a platform to the developing countries to prioritize their concerns and to maintain principled positions on global issues.
• NAM was successful in its agenda of anti-racialism and anti-colonialism during its early years.

NAM during 70s and 80s

• During 70s and 80s, the agenda of NAM was development. NAM countries proposed the demand for new international economic order.
• New International Economic Order
• It was proposed in context of neo-colonialism, the drain of wealth from peripheries to core.
• Theoretical basis – dependency theory.
• The agenda was to
  (a) Impose responsibilities on MNCs.
  (b) Better valuation of the goods exported by developing countries.
  (c) Pressurizing western countries to transfer fund and technology. 
• Outcomes. No outcome. There was lack of solidarity among third world countries. Western countries were successful in creating geopolitical conflicts among third world countries. Further, the proposal was also utopian. It was not possible to get equal value to the raw materials and manufactured goods. It was an attempt to apply socialism in international trade. It was inspired by Oil diplomacy of OPEC countries but other countries didn’t have similar bargaining power. Oil producing countries never applied the pressure on behalf of other third world countries.

NAM between 80s and 90s

• Agenda: disarmament.
• Outcome: No success.

 NAM during 90s

NAM was in search of agenda. The end of cold war put question mark on the very reason of existence of NAM.

• Some of the member countries proposed like Egypt proposed dissolution of NAM.
• Yugoslavia, one of the founding member disintegrated and NAM countries played no role in handling the crisis.
• NAM countries had no position on the issue of the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq, both were NAM members.

Present Status of Non Alignment

• Legacy of Cold War Relevance: Initially formed as a movement to maintain neutrality during the Cold War, NAM's original purpose has diminished with the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
•   Diverse Membership: With 120 member states and 17 observers, NAM represents a broad range of countries from the Global South, though its diversity often leads to a lack of unified positions on key global issues.
• Reduced Geopolitical Influence: NAM's influence has decreased in a multipolar world dominated by the U.S., China, and other regional powers. The lack of a clear, cohesive agenda makes it less impactful in major global debates.
• Advocacy for the Global South: NAM continues to act as a platform for the interests of developing countries, especially on issues like economic inequality, climate change, and reform of international institutions like the United Nations.
• Support for Multilateralism: NAM remains committed to multilateral diplomacy, opposing unilateral actions and interventions by powerful states, and promoting peaceful conflict resolution and global cooperation.
• Role in Global Health and COVID-19 : NAM took a stance during the COVID-19 pandemic, advocating for equitable vaccine distribution and multilateral cooperation in managing the global health crisis.
• Challenges from Major Power Rivalries : The rising U.S.-China rivalry has created a new form of global polarization, complicating NAM's non-alignment stance as many member states have closer ties with one of these powers.
• Fragmentation Among Members : With members pursuing their own national interests and engaging in regional organizations like BRICS, ASEAN, or the African Union, NAM often lacks unity and coherent action on global issues.
• Continued Critique of Western Dominance : NAM continues to oppose Western hegemony, sanctions, and the dominance of developed countries in global economic and political systems, advocating for a more equitable international order.
• Potential for Revitalization: There are calls for NAM to modernize and adapt to current global challenges, such as digital governance, climate change, and technological inequality, though this requires redefining its mission in a multipolar world.

Relevance of Non Alignment for India

• Strategic Autonomy: NAM aligns with India’s long-standing foreign policy of maintaining strategic autonomy, allowing India to engage with multiple global powers (U.S., Russia, China) without being tied to formal alliances.
• Balancing Great Power Rivalries : In an increasingly multipolar world with growing U.S.-China tensions, NAM provides a platform for India to navigate these rivalries and avoid taking sides, while still pursuing its national interests.
• Leadership Role in Global South : NAM reinforces India’s leadership position within the Global South. India uses the movement to voice concerns of developing countries on issues like trade, climate justice, and global governance reform.
• Advocacy for Multilateralism : India supports NAM’s commitment to multilateral diplomacy, peaceful conflict resolution, and opposition to unilateral sanctions. This aligns with India’s broader diplomatic efforts at forums like the UN, G20, and BRICS.
• Vaccine Diplomacy and Global Health : During the COVID-19 pandemic, India used NAM to advocate for equitable vaccine distribution and health infrastructure support to developing nations, showcasing its role as a humanitarian leader.
• Reforming Global Governance : Through NAM, India continues to push for reforms in international institutions like the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to reflect the changing global order and include voices of the Global South.
• Climate Change and Sustainable Development : NAM provides India with a platform to call for climate justice, emphasizing that developed countries should take the lead in addressing climate change while supporting sustainable development in poorer nations.
• Non-interference and Sovereignty : NAM’s principles of non-interference and respect for national sovereignty resonate with India's stance on issues like the Kashmir conflict and its opposition to external intervention in internal matters.
• Countering Hegemony and Unilateralism : India, through NAM, continues to advocate for a rules-based global order and counters unilateral actions or sanctions that undermine international law, especially those led by Western powers.
• South-South Cooperation : NAM facilitates India’s efforts to enhance South-South cooperation, particularly in technology transfer, trade, and development projects, helping India strengthen its influence in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

 Views of Scholars 

T P Srinivasan A new NAM for new norm.

• NAM did benefitted India because it allowed India to promote our national interest as per our preferences, NAM has allowed India to manage through the situation of bipolarity.
• NAM is relevant for India and India has stakes in the integrity of NAM. India has to seek partnership with the countries so that India is able to exercise its freedom of thought and action, away from the influence of great powers like US, Russia and China.

Martand Jha

• Whether NAM is relevant for India or not depends on the prism through which we look at NAM.
• So far Modi govt. has not shown much inclination towards NAM, preferred to ignore NAM. However India is rebalancing itself.
• Foreign minister visited 18th mid term ministerial council of NAM countries in April 2018 in Baku, Azerbaijan.
• It would be mistake if we just see NAM as rejection of block politics.
• NAM was a policy for autonomy, to establish peace and security, to contain superpower’s hegemonic ambitions.
• Thus NAM needs to be reinvented. It is a biggest platform of developing countries outside United Nations. It provides a platform for natural leadership of India. However India needs to provide a concrete program of action, goals and leadership.

 Aparna Pandey CHANAKYA TO MODI (Book)

• Nehru aspired to play leadership role. India was weak militarily and economically.
• Non alignment was an option which allowed India
  (i) Maintain its independence yet be a part of world politics.
  (ii) Maintain relationship with both the superpowers without coercion.

 Michael Edwards

• He describes Nehru’s non alignment as ‘defence by friendship’. India had no option. Politically India was democracy so India could not join the communist block.
• Geopolitically India was in the periphery of communist block, so India could not invite aggression by communist block joining democratic countries

 K Natwar Singh

• Non alignment was a doctrine. It was never a dogma.
• There was enough flexibility in the idea which allowed India to maintain its independence rather than becoming camp follower.
• It would not have been wise if India had put ‘all eggs in one basket’.

 Paul Power

• He gives the domestic reason for adopting non alignment. Domestic consensus in itself is a basis of sound foreign policy.
• Considering internal divisions e.g. Rightist favoured west, leftist favoured east, non alignment gave Nehru a free hand in handling divisive domestic approach on foreign policy.

 Teresita Schaffer INDIA ON HIGH TABLE OF DIPLOMACY (book)

Non alignment made good sense for India and it would have worked for India had Indian neighbours not joined with outside power.

 Henry Kissinger THE WORLD ORDER (Book)

Though non alignment was irritating for USA, yet it was the best course of action which India could have followed.

US Hegemony

• Up till 1st World War, USA focused on its internal developments. USA did not involve itself in world affairs. But USA continued integration with world economy.
• USA is a self sufficient state. USA has all the features of a hegemon. Practically speaking, USA is a island.
  (i) Canada is not a threat to USA, there are lakes and forests in Canada which prevent the possibility of any attack from Canada.
  (ii) Canadian Arctic border is like a shield for USA. Similarly Mexico acted as a buffer zone and no South American country can be expected to challenge US hegemony. The potential challenger can be Brazil, but it can do so only when Brazil, Bolivia, Peru and other northern countries are integrated.
  (iii) USA controls the two oceans. Pacific as well as Atlantic. USA has largest number of ports. Both the seas not only protect USA from external threat, it provides USA the medium to trade with the world. In comparison to USA, Russia is almost land locked.
• It is the protection of the seas that USA could develop a vibrant democracy which itself built its cultural power. Which itself is a source of rational, strategic thinking. The security of USA is itself a factor that USA can continue to have free market economy. There is no need to control.
• USA has the most well developed inland waterways. It makes the transportation cost extremely cheap. It makes USA a favourite destination for investment from around the world. USA is also a favourite market for investment because of the stability, security and fundamentally strong features of US economy.
• USA is located in the ideal temperate zone, hence in terms of food security USA is always a secure country.
• USA’s self image is ‘Land of Manifest Destiny’. USA considers that it has the divine mission to expand the institutions of liberal democracy.
• Thomas Paine was the view that the American Revolution gives indication of God to expand the virtues of the new world to the old world.

How USA has built its hegemony?

Besides the internal strengths of USA, USA could take the advantage of the crisis in the world to build its hegemony.

• USA entered in the world wars when the two parties completely exhausted each other so that the victory can be easily achieved.
• USA took the advantage of the situation prevailing in Europe. European situations allowed USA to make dollar the global currency.
  How?
  (i) USA provided dollar aid for reconstruction and development.
  (ii) USA emerged as the major market for European exports which also made dollar global currency. At that time, no other country could offer the market to the world. USA is a largest consumerist nation in the world. It has adverse balance of payment with all countries but it does not affect because the dollars which USA pays comes back.
  (iii) USA through Bretton Woods system made dollar the global currency. The first monetary system as per the Bretton Woods system, the price of the dollar was pegged against gold and the price of all currencies was pegged against dollar. Since Europeans lacked Cash, they exchanged the gold for dollar. Thus USA came to acquire one of the largest reserves of the gold of the world.
• USA also built its hegemony by securing its economic interest through its powerful navy. 2nd WW gave an opportunity to USA to establish its naval and military bases around the world.
• Through treaty alliances.
  (i) NATO. It checked Russia’s outlet in Atlantic.
  (ii) South East Asia Treaty Org. Asso (SEATO or Manilla Pact) to check Russia, China in Asia Pacific.
  (iii) Middle east defence organization (CENTO).

Mackinder Mahan Debate

Alfred T Mahan

USA’s foreign policy is guided by geopolitics. One of the earliest influence is of Alfred T Mahan. (THE INFLUENCE OF SEA POWER UPON HISTORY, 1890 ).

• The country which controls oceans can control the world. He also held that Indian ocean is a key to seven seas.
• He held that countries should look at oceans as an opportunity rather than liability.
• However he was against USA following the isolationist policy. He even believed that democracies are unable to think strategically. He was extremely critical of liberal utopianism. He suggested that USA should actively develop ‘offensive marine power’.  It will constrain the expansion of any land power on sea and it will allow USA to expand its power.

Halford Mackinder

• Mackinder has challenged the theory of Alfred T Mahan and held that ultimately the world will come under the hegemony of land power.
• The source of sea power is also land. Hence the land power getting access to sea can end USA’s hegemony. He called Europe, Asia, North Africa together as a world island. It has more human and material resources than the rest of the world together. Russia, Iran, Central Asia, Mongolia, Tibet, Eastern Europe constitute the heartland of world island. He called USA, Australia, Britain, Japan as offshore islands or continent.
• The advantage of sea power will go once land based transport and communication links consolidate. He also believed that democracies are not inclined to think strategically. He warned USA about the rise of authoritarian powers in the heartland. e.g. Communism in Russia, Fascism in Germany, Authoritarianism in Iran, Communism in China – all needs to be contained.

Contribution of Spykman
(GEOGRAPHY OF PEACE, 1944s)
To Mackinder’s theory, he added the concept of rimland states, the amphibians states. And in case of these states neither purely naval approach nor land based approach will work. Rimland includes France, Germany, Middle East, India, China.

What should be USA’s approach?

Proactive containment of the rise of continental power or the possibility of the integration of Eurasia.

What is happening now?

As suggested by Robert D Kaplan, instead of divisions, Eurasia is cohering. (Eurasian Integration). OBOR is going to integrate Eurasia. China is also following the policies of USA like establishing the global financial center around China. In his recent book MARCOPOLO’S WORLD, he reminds USA of 13th century Mongol empire. The power from Central Asia which established its influence in Europe. Europeans or Atlantic century is over. Now Asian power will dominate. There was a time when western European states could dominate the countries of Asia but now history is going to repeat.

Which states are challenger to US hegemony?

Russia, China, Iran.

• If any western power – France or Germany could expand,
• Turkey also may adversely impact US interest if it joins hands with China, Russia or Iran,

Mexico

• USA’s overlooking the potential threat which arise at its own borders because of almost a failed state, inability of USA to check immigration. The easiest way for non state actors to enter.
• These are the main countries at present where US is focusing its foreign policy.

India

• However India is not a challenge. India does not have strategic culture, India is not expansionist. India’s strategic culture is absorptive, defensive and inward looking. India has always been the land meant for invasions.
• South Asia can be called as ‘self contained region. Indians always lacked ‘grand design’. In comparison to India, Pakistanis are more confident. India is a ideal swing state, the best strategic use of India was done by the British. India was know as ‘jewel in the crown.’ India’s location was of vital to safeguard British colonial interest from Suez to Singapore.
• India is having strategic location in Indian ocean, a significant continental power. India can be utilized to contain China. e.g. in Tibet.  According to them India should play the role of net security provider in Indian ocean region like British India.

What has been the role of NATO?

• During cold war, NATO has been the critical factor for the security of western European countries. So far the most successful military alliance. It played critical role in establishing USA’s hegemony in the western Europe. NATO has been dominated by USA, NATO is an institution where the European countries outsourced their security, but now they are realizing the strategic gaps exist.
• The end of cold war and dissolution of Warsaw Pact led to the question mark on the continuation of NATO. In fact NATO’s actual military operations took place after the end of cold war. 1st in Bosnia and 2nd in Kosovo. The 3rd in Afghanistan. 
• NATO has modified its strategic concept. As suggested by John Lewis Gaddis, the disintegration of USSR meant not the end of threat of USA’s security, it only meant the diffusion of threats. It has made threat management more challenging. Hence NATO has gone for new approach to crisis management.
• Now NATO is oriented against nuclear proliferation, cyber attacks, terrorism, piracy, ethnic conflicts. In the immediate context of end of cold war, NATO operated beyond borders. Now at present as Russian threat is rising in context of its actions in Crimea, NATO is coming back home. Now NATO exercises in Europe has deteriorated the security environment. There has been criticism of NATO by USA.
  (a) According to USA European countries are not spending as per the requirement and there is an unfair burden on USA.
  (b) USA is the biggest contributor in NATO, spend 4% of its GDP. USA expects Germany to fast increase its NATO budget.
• Minimum 2% of its GDP. According to USA, the real advantage of NATO is for European countries. According to Trump, it is difficult to convince American taxpayers as to why they should be spending more on European security than European themselves.

Attitude of European countries

• European integration has strengthened the position of Europe, challenging the hegemony of dollar. Even USA has huge trade deficit with EU.
• EU countries feel that USA’s policies in middle east and towards Russia are actually not in the interest of Europe. USA has put Europe in a situation, where they have been used by USA to fulfill USA’s ambitions at a huge cost.
  (i) There was a complete disagreement between USA and Germany with USA’s war with Iraq in 2003.
  (ii) The crisis in Syria has huge repercussions for European Union’s integration project (Migrant crisis/Refugee crisis). Brexit is the first fallout.
• New members of EU are having extremely adversarial relations with Russia. Instead of being pro Europe, they are being pro USA. They are brought by US to weaken EU. Now EU is feeling the heat of USA’s containment policies.
• They are getting disillusioned towards NATO.
• They have made themselves vulnerable to the security threats from Russia as well as non state actors.
• In a very explicit terms, Trump has mentioned EU trade foe.

Germany

• Germany itself has been instrumental in rapprochement with the east. As a economic powerhouse, it looked at the end of cold war as a opportunity.
• Germany shares the approach of Russia to have cooperative security in Europe. It developed economic interdependence with Russia. It has been the biggest trading partner with Russia in Europe.
  Germany didn’t favored
  (i) Continuous expansion of NATO
  (ii) Expansion of EU also.

New approach of EU

• Efforts to build their own defence
• Strengthen partnership with China. China has already made indoors in entire Europe.
• The latest being China’s integration with central and east European countries through the platform known as 16+1.
• EU is also talking about multipolar world and has recently brought a new strategy, aiming to strengthen relations with India also.

Future of NATO

• Though the distancing is growing, yet in immediate context, NATO will continue. With no other region EU countries can have as much ideological and political symmetry as USA. They have overlapping values and interests. They have historical comforts. They continue to suffer security dilemma from Russia. They have structured differences with China. Everyone knows China itself is to be blamed for the destruction of liberal international economic order.
• It will take long time for Euro to become a global currency. Hence Europe’s outreach to China, Russia, India, strategic divergences with USA on Iranian issue seems to be EU’s policy to tap institutionalized Ruso-phobia found in USA to gain some bargaining points to build more balanced relationship with USA.

USA’s approach towards NATO

• One of the distinctive feature of Trump’s foreign policy is to play the game of Bad cop and Good cop.
• If trump criticized NATO the defence secretary of USA Mattis, mentions that USA has ‘iron clad commitments to NATO and European security’.

Current state of trans-Atlantic relations

Current trend
The future of NATO has become uncertain.
Why?

• According to US president, NATO is also one of the worst agreement ever. It is harming USA’s interest. French president Macron at EU summit held that Europe can no longer rely on USA for its security. German Chancellor Angella Merkel held that we will not let ourselves to be pushed around time and again, we will act. European union has started creating PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation).
• PESCO is an attempt to created a defence force of European countries as a part of growing defence and security cooperation to gain strategic autonomy. EU is deepening its partnership with China. Germany already had strong interdependence with Russia and French president is strengthening relations with Putin. Recently Europen union has decided to create an alternative channel to buy oil from Iran, avoiding the use of dollar. This will grant protection to EU banks as they are not going to use dollar.
• This non American monetary channel to Iran includes China as a party. There is a huge resentment in EU with respect to Trump’s decision to come out of the nuclear deal with Iran, Paris Climate Change Agreement, Attempts to undermine WTO and starting a new phase of cold war with Russia.
• NATO is a collective defence pact formed in 1949. Art 5 of NATO mentions that armed attack against one shall be considered as armed attack against all. As of now, NATO has 29 members. The last one to join was Montenegro in 2017, Bosnia Herzgovain, Macedonia, Georgia and Ukrane are the prospective members.