NAM

• Intro: The term nonalignment was first coined by George Liska to describe the policies of the states which decided not to join either of the two power blocs. They sought a level playing field in global geopolitics that emerged in post war period

• Context-
• In 1955, in Bandung (Indonesia), newly independents states of Africa and Asia gathered to inaugurate a new approach to inter-state relations: non-alignment. Fresh out of the darkness of colonial rule, these new states, they felt, should not be sucked into alignments with the West or the East.
• Drawing on the principles agreed at the Bandung Conference in 1955, the Non-Aligned Movement was established in 1961 in Belgrade, SR Serbia, Yugoslavia through an initiative of the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, Ghanaian President Kwame Nkrumah, Indonesian President Sukarno, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser and Yugoslav President Josip Broz Tito
• For Nehru, NAM did not mean isolation or neutrality. He held that NAM stands for
• An active role in world affairs (like India's mediation in drafting an armistice in the Korean war)
• Friendship and cooperation with all countries
• Taking independent position based on merit of each issue and requirements of national interest.
• NAM provided a platform for the vision of an alternative world order.

• current developments:
• Online summit of NAM in the wake of COVID. Indian PM participated-
• Called for all NAM members to pool in their resources,experiences and best practices
• said today the humanity faces its most serious crisis. At this time, the NAM can help promote global solidarity
• Stating NAM as “world’s moral voice” he called for Nam countries for a cooperative global response in line with founding principles of the movement
• Suggested to promote human welfare and not focus on economic growth alone
• Said democracy, discipline and decisiveness can come together to create a genuine people’s movement to fight COVID-19

• critics: school of realism-

Says India was never truly non aligned. It aligned with the US in 50s and 60s and with the soviet after 1971 specifically to tackle its China challenge. In both cases alignment what is designed to help India build its own military and economic capabilities and deter malign behaviour from Beijing	Chairman, NSAB says Non alignment as a foreign policy concept is dead.	C Rajamohan Calls it is in a state of coma. It is passing through the crisis of identity and agenda deprivation. Said it was developed and used as a vehicle to pass through the troubled waters of cold war and hence no relevance now. Says India's obsession with NAM clouds its judgments in joining critical alliances.

• Praise NAM: school of liberalism

Aparna Pandey- helped India to maintain relationship with both superpowers without coercion.	T v Paul- NAM was an example of soft balancing by weaker states against superpowers through the use of normative power.	India’s policy of non alignment led to the prevention of South Asian region becoming a chessboard for cold war powers.
	Non alignment only meant a rejection of military alliance, not any other politico-economic or cultural-intellectual relations as India had all such interactions with major powers of both blocs
The decision to seek US assistance when the Chinese attack happened in 1962, the efforts to obtain military equipment from both the superpowers, the food aid from the US (PL-480) and the Friendship Treaty with the Soviet Union are notable examples of the policy initiatives that transcended the non-alignment constraints.

• Rethink on NAM-
• The new Cold war would be between US and China. Nehru after the 1962 conflict that “there could be no non-alignment with regard to China,” and that India had failed to understand and grasp ‘neutralist realism’ and had been pursuing ‘neutralist idealism’.
• 
  Thiruvalluvar- wisdom is to live in tune with the mode of the changing world.
• 
  PM Modi: there was a time when people were neutral by creating equal distance but now we are neutral by creating equal partnership.
• The present regime has redefined Non alignment from strategic autonomy to strategic alignment. India is now going for issue based partnerships.
• the meeting of JAI and RIC on the sidelines of G20 highlights that India is engaging with different world powers at the same time. 
• India is following “multiple engagements” in a multipolar world.
• As Jaishankar put it “Multilateralism is undoubtedly under strain today. It is important that our Movement that represents two thirds of the world’s population – continues to work together and take the lead in building multilateral governance structures” that are capable of meeting the 21st Century challenges.

• Relevance of NAM in 21st century-
• Question mark on relevance-
• The world is no longer bipolar but lopsided multipolar
• For critics India has never been non aligned. During the cold war it was close to USSR and now there is growing closeness to USA.
• Unable to address global problems and threats
• Alternative platforms like BRICS, SCO, G20 have emerged with overlapping agendas
• Since the end of colonialism and apartheid, it seems NAM is suffering from “agenda deprivation.”
• Relevant-
• 
• India has stakes in global south
• those who say the NAM is a relic of the Cold War must also acknowledge that a new Cold War is beginning to unfold, this time between the United States (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 giants.
• Through BRICS and Quad, the focus has been on great power politics rather than promoting the interests of the developing world.
• there is an acute awareness in Delhi that a rising China, which is now an observer of the NAM, has gained much ground in the ‘Global South’ with its Belt and Road Initiative and that India some catching up to do.
• Finally, as a nation wants to become an independent pole in global affairs, India could do more with forums like the NAM that can help mobilize support around issues of interest to Delhi. For example, an independent Indian voice backed by support within the NAM can make a big difference to the outcomes of the impending contentions at the WHO, UN, WTO , Breton woods,etc

• NAM 1.0 vs NAM 2.0-
• One talks of staying away, other talks of building partnerships
• Strategies may change but underlying essence remains same- ensure India's strategic autonomy and provide a framework to navigate through the complexities of great power politics
• From non alignment to multi-alignment
• Quote Jaishankar- cultivar china, manage Europe, engage Japan,etc

• NIEO
• Unequal international economic order has been present since historical times .
• This was pointed out by Dadabhai Nairoji in his poverty and British rule in India through his drain of wealth as theory
• to eliminate the widening gap between the developed and the developing countries and ensure steadily accelerating economic and social development and peace and justice for present and future generations.
• The present international economic order is found to be asymmetrical in its working. It is biased. It is favouring the rich-advanced countries. There has been over dependence of the South on the North. Rich countries tend to have major control over vital decision making in the matter of international trade, terms of trade, international finance, aids, and technological flows.
• The developing nations are now asserting their right to participate in the decision making processes of the international institutions like the IMF, World Bank, GATT, UNCTAD, etc
• This unequal relationship further increased after globalisation. Hence Joseph Stieglitz in his globalisation and its discontents calls for democratization of international organisations .
• the formal idea of the NIEO was put forward in the Algiers Conference of non-aligned countries in 1973. In 1975, a declaration for the establishment of NIEO was adopted along with a programme of action in the Sixth Special Session of the UNCTAD. 
• Inspired from Marxist concept of core and periphery (World systems theory of I Wallenstein)
• Samir Amin argued that wealth from developing to developed world was continuing through imperialist rent.
• The crucial aim of the NIEO is to promote economic development among the poor countries through self- help and South-South co-operation.
• The success of OPEC after 1973 crisis acted as a catalyst to pull together developing countries in support of a call for NIEO
• but it did not see any success due to the internal divisions within the developing world.

• Conclusion: PM modi at Shangri la dialogue- when nations stand on the side of principles and not behind one power or the other , they earn the respect of the world.