NON- ALIGNMENT AS A BASIS FOR INDIA’S FOREIGN POLICY IS NO LONGER AN OPTION

      Maintaining a diplomatic relation with foreign country (state) on the basis of firm foreign policy which protects and promotes the interest of the motherland had been an integral part of the state since time immortal. We get its reference in Kautilya’s ‘Arthshastra’- Saptang theory and Mandala theory. We get its reference in Pluto’s ‘State’ and Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’. 

     This modern era is known for hegemony and cultural dominance. Countries are coming together on different issues ranging from local to international. No state can put her away from the wind of globalization. Therefore there is need to have firm foreign policy that will direct and guide the State’s diplomatic actions in international arena. India had been fortunate to have its firm foreign policy- NonAlignment Movement (NAM) since her independence. Unlike other newly formed states which were swayed by then political currents of world, India had been successful to maintain its sanctity due to NAM. Thanks to the then leadership of India. 

     When India got independence in 1947, she found that the evils of poverty, unemployment, no development, and persistent droughts were taking the toll on the lives of the people. There was an urgent need to concentrate on these challenges. At the same time, with the end of WW II there was degradation on the power of Britain and two new powers raisedUnited States of America (USA) and Union Of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). The struggle between the two powers had almost divided the world in two parts. Sidelining with any of the power mean opposing to other was the known notion of the time. Therefore, India lead by Mr. Nehru in association with then leaderships of the countries such as Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, and Yugoslavia formed a group which would stay away from the hassle of the time and would stand united for independence, sovereignty and democracy of the new countries. 

         The Non- Alignment Movement (NAM) is multilateral international organization formed with the initiative of then Prime Minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru. It implies non-associating oneself with either of the two Power blocs, namely, the Western block leaded by the U.S.A. and the Communist bloc led by Soviet Russia. It also advocated for Decolonization, End to apartheid, Global Nuclear Disarmament, ushering in of new international economic and Information orders, etc. Non alignment does not mean to stay neutral in the world politics. It is not even synonymous with ‘isolationism’, or ‘neutrality’. It was about only staying away from the two power groups. It is purposive non-involvement in power politics, avoidance of military alliances and pacts to retain freedom of judgment and to preserve national identity and interests. It ensures freedom to judge each issue on merits within framework of national sovereignty, independence and interests. 

                  Now we see, with the changing time changed the order of the world from uni-polar to multi-polar. There are not only two specific groups but more of which are based on economic interests, trade interests and security issues. The situation which was at the time of the inception of NAM is absent now, So there is notion that NAM does not hold as much ground as it held in past in terms of helping India to protect and promote its security and interests. With end of cold war, new groups formed promoting liberal economic order. India cannot stand at back foot. 

                  India had been already a part of some groups such as, BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) for protecting and promoting its interests on climate change; G4 for pushing through reforms of the UN Security Council; G20 for managing the world economy; BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and IBSA (India, Brazil and South Africa) to enhance economic coordination with countries that are similarly placed; and ASEAN, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and Russia-India-China grouping for pursuing political and security interests. These engagements in multiple forums for varying economic, political and security purposes have, made the Non-Aligned Movement “largely incidental” to India’s pursuit of its national interest since the end of the Cold War.

               During the period of the cold war era only, India had faced war with neighbors China and Pakistan. On both the occasion, NAM’s lack of utility for protecting and promoting India’s security and interests is clearly demonstrated by the diplomatic positions adopted by member countries during the various wars in which India has been involved. On each of these occasions, NAM members invariably adopted diplomatic positions that were not favorable towards or supportive of India. During the 1962 War, Ghana and Indonesia – two of the co-founders of NAM, adopted pro-China positions. Ghana, which had developed close economic ties with China, even cautioned the United Kingdom against giving military aid to India. Most countries of NAM refused to condemn China’s aggression. 

                  Three years later came the 1965 War with Pakistan. Indonesia not only adopted an anti-India position but also supplied some arms to Pakistan. NAM members from West Asia, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Kuwait, also adopted pro-Pakistan positions. Again, during the 1971 War. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Arab states were all pro-Pakistan. If India was disappointed about the diplomatic positions adopted by NAM members from West Asia, the situation was hardly better in South East Asia. Indonesia once again stood against India and it even compelled a more sympathetic Malaysia into backing Pakistan. In the light of such lack of support from NAM members for India at critical moments in its history, we can’t say that that NAM will stand with India in upcoming time. So, India would not remain isolated in the name of non alignment. 

                  With globalization, new challenges such as Environmentalism, climate change and most important the religious terrorism surfaced at geopolitical arena. These challenges could well be handled by aligning and partnering with more able and developed counties of the world. So, there shouldn’t be hesitation in shaking hands with powers that will help to kick out the problems such as terrorism, poverty and climate change, etc. 

                   With changing time, it would be better, if India changes its foreign policy with due consideration for protecting and promoting India’s interest in this dynamic world.