Insightful explorations of the relevance of Non-alignment

One of the most positive developments in current public discourse in Sri Lanka in relation to international politics is its focus on the need to re-define and critically re-assess the relevance of Non-alignment in contemporary times. This tendency should not come as a surprise in consideration of the fact that some sections of local opinion have dismissed the concept of Non-alignment as lacking in any substantive meaning at present.

Fortunately, some principal Sri Lankan think tanks and contributors to policy discourse on international politics are steadfast in examining and re-assessing the importance of Non-alignment in depth. One such institution is the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKI), Colombo. There was much to think about and discourse on for the public from the deliberations that were conducted on February 21st at the 3rd LKI Foreign Policy Forum on the theme, ‘Reassessing Non-alignment in a Polarized World’, at the LKI auditorium.

Subsequent to some introductory comments by Sri Lankan Foreign Minister M.U.M. Ali Sabry, a thought-provoking panel discussion was held, which in turn led to a lively Q and A, featuring a widely representative audience. The panel comprised, Ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha, Executive Director, LKI, Ambassador Bernard Goonetilleke, former Foreign Secretary and Chairman, Pathfinder Foundation, Prof. Gamini Keerawella, Executive Director, Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies, Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, Executive Director, Centre for Policy Alternatives and Uditha Devapriya, Chief International Analyst, Factum.

The considered view of this columnist on Non-alignment and issues growing out of it is that as long as underdevelopment persists in the South, Non-alignment cannot be dismissed out of hand as irrelevant. Currently there is a vibrant discourse worldwide on the ‘Asian Century’ and the promise it holds for the poorest countries of the South. No doubt, Asia is on the ascendant on a number of fronts, including economic growth, but is development, correctly conceived, occurring? This is the Question.

Despite the dynamic growth being witnessed in parts of the South, underdevelopment and its attendant ills are continuing to stalk a considerable number of the hemisphere’s countries. That is, re-distributive justice to the desired degree is continuing to elude the South, despite growth on a mega scale.

South Asia is a case in point. We in South Asia continue to be hamstrung severely by poverty, income inequality and ethnic and religious discord, for instance. However, we have in our midst in South Asia countries that could hold their own with the West on the growth front. This is the mega contradiction that’s staring South Asians ‘out of countenance’.

Non-alignment has more than a superficial connection with the above developmental problems. As far as the LKI forum is concerned, the credit goes to Amb. Aryasinha for pointing out that in its heyday in the sixties and seventies, NAM took on income disparities among countries as one of its areas of profound concern. This was the rationale for the formulation by NAM of the New International Economic Order (NIEO).

Equally significant was NAM’s New International Information Order (NIIO), which was seen as integral to the flowering of the NIEO, since development in the real sense could not be viewed in isolation from the information needs of the poor.

Non-alignment, defined in its initial decades, as basically making it incumbent upon the developing world to avoid getting embroiled in the tussle for global supremacy between the US and the USSR, and their rival military and defence alliances, on the face of it, had nothing to do with international development.

But it did have such a link, when scrutinized in depth. Because, once a developing country sought the patronage of either of the super powers, it was obliged to defend its patron’s interests in its part of the world and elsewhere, often at great cost to its own people. For example, when a developing country was thus inveigled into serving a super power’s security interests, it had to divert its financial and material resources from development to the procurement of armaments. The consequence was accelerated underdevelopment for the poor country concerned.

The above observations lend credence to Minister Ali Sabry’s comment that Non-alignment in its truer sense is the ability not to be ‘forced or coerced into a camp to take sovereign decisions.’ Thus, it could be found that Non-alignment could be creatively reinterpreted to serve the best interests of the global South currently, although some sections continue to view Non-alignment as deriving its substance from the Cold War rivalries of yesteryear.

Nor are the foreign policy challenges and complexities for the poorer countries showing a downturn in the contemporary world, although it was believed in some quarters at the turn of the century that we have arrived at the ‘End of History’, since the West and market economics emerged victorious from the Cold War.

In fact, these neo-liberal times are only aggravating the socio-economic worries of the poor and tempting some of them to, indeed, opt for the support of an international alliance or power bloc to survive. Accordingly, the current times pose formidable challenges for those states that continue to subscribe to Non-alignment and substantiate the observation of Prof. Gamini Keerawella that the remaining Non-aligned nations would need ‘to re-define their foreign policies.’

Two other views emerged at the LKI forum that call for close assessment. One was that of Amb. Bernard Goonetilleke who said, among other things, that the ‘Non-aligned countries must establish their own leverage for economic gain.’ The other view was that of Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu who said that, ‘Sri Lanka must pursue advancement through aligning with those countries that bring the greatest economic benefits, rather than sacrifice economic leverage, by adopting a Non-aligned foreign policy.’

The latter quote helps focus strongly on the foreign policy dilemmas that unrelenting economic pressures foist on developing countries. It prompts the observation that developing countries could go in for economic succour from external quarters provided they are not compelled to compromise their independence and sovereignty in the process; a most difficult challenge indeed.

What the foregoing commentary makes amply clear is that Non-alignment, although a most enlightened foreign policy principle, would need to be creatively re-interpreted by its adherents, going forward. Considering that underdevelopment and its ills are continuing to stalk the South, the challenge before the latter region is to have economic growth while not forgetting the crucial need for re-distributive justice. In other words, the essentials of development would need to always be in the forefront of Southern foreign policy discourse.