Hubbry Logo
Non-Aligned MovementNon-Aligned MovementMain
Open search
Non-Aligned Movement
Community hub
Non-Aligned Movement
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Non-Aligned Movement
Non-Aligned Movement
Non-Aligned Movement
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is a forum of 121 countries that are not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc. It was founded with the view to advancing interests of developing countries in the context of Cold War confrontation.[5] After the United Nations, it is the largest grouping of states worldwide.[2][6]

Key Information

The movement originated in the aftermath of the Korean War, as an effort by some countries to counterbalance the rapid bi-polarization of the world during the Cold War, whereby two major powers formed blocs and embarked on a policy to pull the rest of the world into their orbits. One of these was the pro-Soviet socialist bloc whose best known alliance was the Warsaw Pact, and the other the pro-American capitalist group of countries, many of which belonged to NATO. In 1961, drawing on the principles agreed at the Bandung Conference of 1955, the Non-Aligned Movement was formally established in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, through an initiative led by Yugoslav president Josip Broz Tito, Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, Ghanaian president Kwame Nkrumah, Indonesian president Sukarno, and United Arab Republic president Gamal Abdel Nasser.[7][8][9]

This led to the first Conference of Heads of State or Governments of Non-Aligned Countries.[10] The purpose of the organization was summarized by Fidel Castro in his Havana Declaration of 1979 as to ensure "the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries" in their "struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as against great power and bloc politics."[11][12]

The countries of the Non-Aligned Movement represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations' members and contain 55% of the world population. Membership is particularly concentrated in countries considered to be developing countries, although the Non-Aligned Movement also has a number of developed nations.[13]

The Non-Aligned Movement gained the most traction in the 1950s and early 1960s, when the international policy of non-alignment achieved major successes in decolonization, disarmament, opposition to racism and opposition to apartheid in South Africa, and persisted throughout the entire Cold War, despite several conflicts between members, and despite some members developing closer ties with either the Soviet Union, China, or the United States.[13] In the years since the Cold War's end in 1991, the movement has focused on developing multilateral ties and connections as well as unity among the developing nations of the world, especially those in the Global South.[13]

History

[edit]
See also: Cold War

Origins and the Cold War

[edit]
The aligned countries on the northern hemisphere: NATO in blue and the Warsaw Pact in red.
refer caption
Josip Broz Tito, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Gamal Abdel Nasser, pioneers of the Non-Aligned Movement during the Brioni Meeting

The term 'Non-Alignment' was used for the first time in 1950 at the United Nations by India and Yugoslavia, both of which refused to align themselves with any side in the multi-alliances involving Korean War.[14] Drawing on the principles agreed at the Bandung Conference in 1955, the Non-Aligned Movement as an organization was founded on the Brijuni islands in Yugoslavia in 1956 and was formalized by signing the Declaration of Brijuni on 19 July 1956. The Declaration was signed by Yugoslavia's president, Josip Broz Tito, India's prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Egypt's president, Gamal Abdel Nasser. One of the quotations within the Declaration is "Peace can not be achieved with separation, but with the aspiration towards collective security in global terms and expansion of freedom, as well as terminating the domination of one country over another". According to Rejaul Karim Laskar, an ideologue of the Congress party which ruled India for most part of the Cold War years, the Non-Aligned Movement arose from the desire of Jawaharlal Nehru and other leaders of the newly independent countries of the third world to guard their independence and sovereignty "in face of complex international situation demanding allegiance to either two warring superpowers".[15]

The movement advocates a middle course for states in the developing world between the Western and Eastern Blocs during the Cold War. The phrase itself was first used to represent the doctrine by Indian diplomat V. K. Krishna Menon in 1953, at the United Nations.[16][unreliable source?]

But it soon after became the name to refer to the participants of the Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries first held in 1961. The term "non-alignment" was established in 1953 at the United Nations. Nehru used the phrase in a 1954 speech in Colombo, Sri Lanka. In this speech, Zhou Enlai and Nehru described the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence to be used as a guide for Sino-Indian relations called Panchsheel (five restraints); these principles would later serve as the basis of the Non-Aligned Movement. The five principles were:

  • Mutual respect for each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty.
  • Mutual non-aggression.
  • Mutual non-interference in domestic affairs.
  • Equality and mutual benefit.
  • Peaceful co-existence.

A significant milestone in the development of the Non-Aligned Movement was the 1955 Bandung Conference, a conference of Asian and African states hosted by Indonesian president Sukarno, who gave a significant boost to promote this movement. Bringing together Sukarno, U Nu, Nasser, Nehru, Tito, Nkrumah and Menon with the likes of Ho Chi Minh, Zhou Enlai, and Norodom Sihanouk, as well as U Thant and a young Indira Gandhi, the conference adopted a "declaration on promotion of world peace and cooperation", which included Zhou Enlai and Nehru's five principles, and a collective pledge to remain neutral in the Cold War. Six years after Bandung, an initiative of Yugoslav president Josip Broz Tito led to the first Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, which was held in September 1961 in Belgrade.[17] The term non-aligned movement appears first in the fifth conference in 1976, where participating countries are denoted as members of the movement.[18]

At the Lusaka Conference in September 1970, the member nations added as aims of the movement the peaceful resolution of disputes and the abstention from the big power military alliances and pacts. Another added aim was opposition to stationing of military bases in foreign countries.[19]

In 1975, the member nations which also were part of the United Nations General Assembly pushed for the Resolution 3379 along with Arab countries and the support of the Soviet bloc. It was a declarative non-binding measure that equated Zionism with South Africa's Apartheid and as a form of racial discrimination. The bloc voting produced a majority in the United Nations that systematically condemned Israel in the following resolutions: 3089, 3210, 3236, 32/40, etc.

Some Non-Aligned member nations were involved in serious conflicts with other members, notably India and Pakistan as well as Iran and Iraq.

Cuba's role

[edit]

In the 1970s, Cuba made a major effort to assume a leadership role in the world's non-alignment movement. The country established military advisory missions and economic and social reform programs. The 1976 world conference of the Non-Aligned Movement applauded Cuban internationalism, "which assisted the people of Angola in frustrating the expansionist and colonialist strategy of South Africa's racist regime and its allies." The next Non-Aligned conference was scheduled for Havana in 1979, to be chaired by Fidel Castro, with his becoming the de facto spokesman for the Movement. The conference in September 1979 marked the zenith of Cuban prestige. Most, but not all, attendees believed that Cuba was not aligned with the Soviet camp in the Cold War.[20]

However, in December 1979, the Soviet Union intervened in Afghanistan's civil war. Up until that time, Afghanistan was also an active member of the Non-Aligned Movement. At the United Nations, nonaligned members voted 56 to 9, with 26 abstaining, to condemn the Soviet Union. Cuba voted against the resolution, in support of the USSR. It lost its nonaligned leadership and reputation after Castro, instead of becoming a high-profile spokesman for the movement, remained quiet and inactive. More broadly the movement was deeply split over the Soviet–Afghan War in 1979, as many members of the Non-Aligned Movement, particularly the predominantly Muslim states, condemned it.[21]

Post-Cold War

[edit]
Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev and Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro at the 18th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Baku on 25 October 2019

With the end of the Cold War, the Non-Aligned Movement transformed. The breakup of Yugoslavia (a prominent founding member) in 1991–1992 also affected the movement; the regular Ministerial Meeting of the Movement, held in New York during the regular yearly session of the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1992 suspended Yugoslavia's membership.[22][23][24] The various successor states of Yugoslavia have expressed little interest in membership, though Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia retain observer status. India, another founding member, appears to have downgraded its emphasis on the movement.[25]

Membership applications from Bosnia and Herzegovina and from Costa Rica were rejected in 1995 and 1998 respectively.[24] In 2004 Malta and Cyprus ceased to be members when they joined the European Union, as required. Azerbaijan and Fiji are the most recent entrants, both having joined the Movement in 2011. Azerbaijan and Belarus, which joined in 1998, remain the only members on the continent of Europe.

Since the end of the Cold War, the Non-Aligned Movement has felt forced to redefine itself and to reinvent its purpose in the new world-system. A major question has been whether any of its foundational ideologies, principally national independence, territorial integrity, and the struggle against colonialism and imperialism, apply to contemporary issues. The movement has emphasized its principles of multilateralism, equality, and mutual non-aggression in attempting to become a stronger voice for the Global South, and an instrument that can promote the needs of member-nations at the international level and strengthen their political leverage when negotiating with developed nations. In its efforts to advance Southern interests, the movement has stressed the importance of cooperation and unity amongst member states.[26] However, as in the past, cohesion remains a problem, since the size of the organization and the divergence of agendas and allegiances present the ongoing potential for fragmentation. While agreement on basic principles has been smooth, taking definitive action vis-à-vis particular international issues has been rare, with the movement preferring to assert its criticism or support rather than to pass hard-line resolutions.[27]

The movement continues to see a role for itself: in its view, the world's poorest nations remain exploited and marginalized, no longer by opposing superpowers, but rather in a uni-polar world,[28] and it is Western hegemony and neo-colonialism that the movement has really re-aligned itself against. It opposes foreign occupation, interference in internal affairs and aggressive unilateral measures, but it has also shifted to focus on the socio-economic challenges facing member states, especially the inequalities manifested by globalization and the implications of neo-liberal policies. The Non-Aligned Movement has identified economic underdevelopment, poverty, and social injustices as growing threats to peace and security.[28]

The 16th NAM summit took place in Tehran, Iran, from 26 to 31 August 2012. According to the Teheran-based Mehr News Agency, representatives from over 150 countries were scheduled to attend.[29] Attendance at the highest level included 27 presidents, two kings and emirs, seven prime ministers, nine vice-presidents, two parliamentary spokesmen and five special envoys.[30] At the summit, Iran took over from Egypt as Chair of the Non-Aligned Movement for the period 2012 to 2015.[31]

In 2016 Venezuela hosted the 17th NAM Summit.[32][33]

Azerbaijan, host of the 18th NAM summit in 2019, holds the Non-Aligned Movement presidency pending the 19th NAM summit, which took place in Kampala, Uganda in January 2024.[34]

Organizational structure and membership

[edit]

The movement stems from a desire not to be aligned within a geopolitical/military structure and therefore itself does not have a very strict organizational structure.[3] Some organizational basics were defined at the 1996 Cartagena Document on Methodology[35] The Summit Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned States is "the highest decision making authority". The chairmanship rotates between countries and changes at every summit of heads of state or government to the country organizing the summit.[35]

Requirements for membership of the Non-Aligned Movement coincide with the key beliefs of the United Nations. The current requirements are that the candidate country has displayed practices in accordance with the ten "Bandung principles" of 1955:[35]

  • Respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
  • Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations.
  • Recognition of the movements for national independence.
  • Recognition of the equality of all races and of the equality of all nations, large and small.
  • Abstention from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of another country.
  • Respect for the right of each nation to defend itself singly or collectively, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.
  • Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country.
  • Settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.
  • Promotion of mutual interests and co-operation.
  • Respect for justice and international obligations.

Policies and ideology

[edit]

Chairpersons[36] of the NAM have included such diverse figures as Suharto,[37] a militaristic[38] anti-communist; Nelson Mandela, a democratic socialist and famous anti-apartheid activist; Mohamed Morsi, a conservative Islamist; Josip Broz Tito, a Marxist–Leninist, Yugoslav leader; and Ernesto Samper, a Colombian social liberal. Consisting of many governments with vastly different ideologies, the Non-Aligned Movement is unified by its declared commitment to world peace and security. At the seventh summit held in New Delhi in March 1983, the movement described itself as "history's biggest peace movement".[39] The movement places equal emphasis on disarmament. NAM's commitment to peace pre-dates its formal institutionalization in 1961. The Brioni meeting between heads of governments of India, Egypt and Yugoslavia in 1956 recognized that there exists a vital link between struggle for peace and endeavours for disarmament.[39]

During the 1970s and early 1980s, the NAM also sponsored campaigns for restructuring commercial relations between developed and developing nations, namely the New International Economic Order (NIEO), and its cultural offspring, the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO). The latter, on its own, sparked a Non-Aligned initiative on cooperation for communications, the Non-Aligned News Agencies Pool, created in 1975 and later converted into the NAM News Network in 2005.

The Non-Aligned Movement espouses policies and practices of cooperation, especially those that are multilateral and provide mutual benefit to all those involved. Almost all of the members of the Non-Aligned Movement are also members of the United Nations. Both organizations have a stated policy of peaceful cooperation, yet the successes the NAM has had with multilateral agreements tend to be ignored by the larger, western- and developed- nation-dominated UN.[40] African concerns about apartheid were linked with Arab-Asian concerns about Palestine[40] and multilateral cooperation in these areas has enjoyed moderate success. The Non-Aligned Movement has played a major role in various ideological conflicts throughout its existence, including extreme opposition to apartheid governments and support of guerrilla movements in various locations, including Rhodesia and South Africa.[41]

Current activities and positions

[edit]

Reform of the UN Security Council

[edit]

The movement has been outspoken in its criticism of current UN structures and power dynamics, and advocating for the reforming of the United Nations Security Council, stating that the organization has been used by powerful states in ways that violate the movement's principles. It has made a number of recommendations that it says would strengthen the representation and power of "non-aligned" states. The proposed UN reforms are also aimed at improving the transparency and democracy of UN decision-making. The UN Security Council is the element it considers the most distorted, undemocratic, and in need of reshaping.[42]

Self-determination of Puerto Rico

[edit]

Since 1961, the organization has supported the discussion of the case of Puerto Rico's self-determination before the United Nations.[citation needed] A resolution on the matter was to be proposed on the XV Summit by the Hostosian National Independence Movement but did not progress.

Self-determination of Western Sahara

[edit]

Since 1973, the group has supported the discussion of the case of Western Sahara's self-determination before the United Nations.[43] The movement reaffirmed in its meeting (Sharm El Sheikh 2009) the support to the Self-determination of the Sahrawi people by choosing between any valid option, welcomed the direct converzations between the parties, and remembered the responsibility of the United Nations on the Sahrawi issue.[44]

Sustainable developments

[edit]

The movement is publicly committed to the tenets of sustainable development and the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals, but it believes that the international community has not created conditions conducive to development and has infringed upon the right to sovereign development by each member state. Issues such as globalization, the debt burden, unfair trade practices, the decline in foreign aid, donor conditionality, and the lack of democracy in international financial decision-making are cited as factors inhibiting development.[45]

Criticism of US foreign policy

[edit]

In recent years the organization has criticized certain aspects of US foreign policy. The 2003 invasion of Iraq and the War on Terrorism, its attempts to stifle Iran and North Korea's nuclear plans, and its other actions have been denounced by some members of the Non-Aligned Movement as attempts to run roughshod over the sovereignty of smaller nations; at the most recent summit, Kim Yong-nam, chairman of North Korea's parliamentary standing committee, stated, "The United States is attempting to deprive other countries of even their legitimate right to peaceful nuclear activities."[46]

NAM Centres

[edit]

Centre for South-South Technical Cooperation

[edit]
"Non-Aligned Movement Centre for South-South Technical Cooperation" redirects here. For South-South Cooperation, see South–South cooperation.

The Non-Aligned Movement Centre for South-South Technical Cooperation (NAM CSSTC) as an intergovernmental institution, which enables developing countries to increase national capacity and their collective self-reliance,[47] forms part of the efforts of NAM.[48] The NAM CSSTC is located in Jakarta, Indonesia with a South-South Technical Cooperation focus.[49] The NAM CSSTC was set up a few years after the Cold War to promote development in developing countries and to accelerate growth. From 18 to 20 October 1995, in Cartagena de Indias, 140 nations gathered and accepted a final document stating in paragraph 313 of the Final Document the establishment of the Centre for South-South Technical Cooperation in Indonesia.

The organization aims to achieve the development goal of developing countries to achieve sustainable human development and enable developing countries to be equal partners in international relations, in accordance with the Final Document.

The NAM CSSTC's main body is the board of directors.[50][51] In addition, the Board of Directors has a consultative arrangement with a Governing Council under the leadership of the Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia and its members include Ambassador of Brunei, Ambassador of Cuba and Ambassador of South Africa. The head of the administrative officer of NAM CSSTC is accredited by Ronny Prasetyo Yuliantoro, Director, current Indonesian diplomat and Ambassador of the Republic of Indonesia to the Islamic Republic of Iran, who began his term of office on 1 July 2018.[52] The organization is financed by Indonesia's volunteer contributions.[53][54] The NAM CSSTC, its officers, consists of a full-time staff who are not affiliated with any other governmental institution except their head of the administrative officer, who is typically nominated from Echelon-I or Echelon-II staff from the Indonesian ministries. Some say the organization is a major endeavour to build NAM member countries' capacities.[55]

History
[edit]

A few years before the NAM CSSTC was set up, the NAM summit in 1992 in Jakarta to discuss efforts to strengthen collective autonomy and to review of the international economic environment in order to step up South-South cooperation.[56]

After the admission of Brunei Darussalam to the NAM during the summit, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia called for a South-South Technical Cooperation Centre (now known as the NAM CSSTC) to be established by the Government of the Republic of Indonesia and the Government of Brunei Darussalam with the aim of organizing different training, research and seminar programmes and activities. The programme activities, aimed at eradicating poverty, encouraging SMEs and the application of information communication technologies.

Programmes
[edit]

The NAM CSSTC carries out its activities through cooperation with NAM member countries' training centres and specialists and other multilateral organizations. Examples include Workshop on IUU fishing eradication,[57] dispatch of agricultural experts to Myanmar[58] and international tissue culture training.[59]

Evaluations
[edit]

NAM CSSTC reports quarterly to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia and the NAM Coordinating Bureau in New York. Annually, the Ministry and the Bureau will be given additional details on programmes and events, including their assessments.[60]

Other NAM Centres focus on the health, human rights (Center for Human Rights and Cultural Diversity) and technology (Centre for Science and Technology of the Non-aligned and Other Developing Countries) sectors are each located in Cuba, Iran and India.

Youth Organization

[edit]
"Non-Aligned Movement Youth Organization" redirects here. For Youth Organizations, see Youth organizations.

Non-Aligned Movement Youth Organization (NAMYO) was established in October 2021.[61][62]

Cultural diversity and human rights

[edit]

The movement accepts the universality of human rights and social justice, but fiercely resists cultural homogenization.[63][citation needed] In line with its views on sovereignty, the organization appeals for the protection of cultural diversity, and the tolerance of the religious, socio-cultural, and historical particularities that define human rights in a specific region.[64] [failed verification]

Working groups, task forces, committees

[edit]

Currently, the NAM Working Groups (WG) are chaired by the following countries:[65]

  • Algeria – WG Reform of the UN and revitalization of the General Assembly
  • Egypt - WG on the Reform of the UN Security Council
  • Indonesia – WG on Disarmament
  • Cuba – WG on Human Rights
  • Morocco – WG on peacekeeping operations
  • Iran – WG on Legal Matters
  • Venezuela – WG on Unilateral Coercive Measures
  • Bangladesh – Peacebuilding Caucus

Other Working groups, task forces, committees:[66]

  • Committee on Palestine
  • High-Level Working Group for the Restructuring of the United Nations
  • Joint Coordinating Committee (chaired by Chairman of G-77 and Chairman of NAM)
  • Non-Aligned Security Caucus
  • Standing Ministerial Committee for Economic Cooperation
  • Task Force on Somalia

Summits

[edit]
1st summit, Belgrade
16th summit of the NAM, Tehran

The conference of Heads of State or Government of the Non-Aligned Countries, often referred to as Non-Aligned Movement Summit is the main meeting within the movement and are held every few years:[67]

Date Host country Host city Slogan
1st 1–6 September 1961 Yugoslavia Belgrade
2nd 5–10 October 1964 United Arab Republic Cairo
3rd 8–10 September 1970 Zambia Lusaka
4th 5–9 September 1973 Algeria Algiers
5th 16–19 August 1976 Sri Lanka Colombo
6th 3–9 September 1979 Cuba Havana
7th 7–12 March 1983 India New Delhi
8th 1–6 September 1986 Zimbabwe Harare
9th 4–7 September 1989 Yugoslavia Belgrade
10th 1–6 September 1992 Indonesia Jakarta
11th 18–20 October 1995 Colombia Cartagena
12th 2–3 September 1998 South Africa Durban
13th 20–25 February 2003 Malaysia Kuala Lumpur
14th 15–16 September 2006 Cuba Havana
15th 11–16 July 2009 Egypt Sharm el-Sheikh International Solidarity for Peace and Development
16th 26–31 August 2012 Iran Tehran Lasting peace through joint global governance
17th 13–18 September 2016 Venezuela Porlamar Peace, Sovereignty and Solidarity for Development
18th 25–26 October 2019[68] Azerbaijan Baku Upholding the Bandung principles to ensure a concerted and adequate response to the challenges of the contemporary world[4]
19th 15–20 January 2024[69] Uganda[70] Kampala Deepening Cooperation for Shared Global Affluence[71]

A variety of ministerial meetings are held between the summit meetings. Some are specialists, such as the meeting on "Inter-Faith Dialogue and Co-operation for Peace", held in Manila, the Philippines, 16–18 March 2010. There is a general Conference of Foreign Ministers every three years. The most recent were in Bali, Indonesia, 23–27 May 2011 and Algiers, Algeria, 26–29 May 2014.

The 7th Summit was originally planned for September 1982 in Baghdad, the Iraqi capital, during the Iran-Iraq War.[72] On 21 July of that year, the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force executed the "Baghdad Operation", an effort to disrupt that proposal by showing Baghdad's airspace was unsafe.[73] Two McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II planes bombarded Al-Dura refinery with Mk82 bombs. One plane returned damaged and the other (along with its pilot) was lost to Iraqi defensive fire.[74] Combined with threats by an Iranian-backed terror group to kill the visiting heads of state, the effort was successful. On 11 August, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein announced that he would support Cuba's suggestion of a summit in New Delhi to be held in 1983. "Iraq will take part in the conference even if held in Tehran... We propose that the seventh conference be held in India."[75]

The Non-Aligned Movement celebrated its 50th anniversary in Belgrade on 5–6 September 2011.[76][77]

An online summit titled "United Against Covid-19" conducted on 4 May 2020, on the initiative of the chairman of the NAM for the 2019–2022 period, addressed mainly the global struggle to fight the COVID-19 pandemics and supporting NAM to increase its role in dealing with and mitigating the outcomes caused by this disease in NAM, as well as other countries.[78][79]

The Non-Aligned Movement celebrated its 60th anniversary in Belgrade, on 11–12 October 2021.[80]

Chair

[edit]

A chair is elected at each summit meeting.[36]

Image Chair[citation needed] Country (holding the Presidency) Party From To
Josip Broz Tito (1892–1980) Yugoslavia League of Communists of Yugoslavia 1961 1964
Gamal Abdel Nasser (1918–1970) United Arab Republic Arab Socialist Union 1964 1970
Kenneth Kaunda (1924–2021) Zambia United National Independence Party 1970 1973
Houari Boumediène (1932–1978) Algeria Revolutionary Council 1973 1976
William Gopallawa (1896–1981) Sri Lanka Independent 1976 1978
Junius Richard Jayewardene (1906–1996) United National Party 1978 1979
Fidel Castro (1926–2016) Cuba Communist Party of Cuba 1979 1983
Zail Singh (1916–1994) India Indian National Congress 1983 1986
Robert Mugabe (1924–2019) Zimbabwe ZANU-PF 1986 1989
Janez Drnovšek (1950–2008) Yugoslavia League of Communists of Yugoslavia 1989 1990
Borisav Jović (1928–2021) Socialist Party of Serbia 1990 1991
Stjepan Mesić (born 1934) Croatian Democratic Union 1991
Branko Kostić (1939–2020) Democratic Party of Socialists of Montenegro 1991 1992
Dobrica Ćosić (1921–2014) FR Yugoslavia Independent 1992
Suharto (1921–2008) Indonesia Golkar 1992 1995
Ernesto Samper (born 1950) Colombia Colombian Liberal Party 1995 1998
Andrés Pastrana Arango (born 1954) Colombian Conservative Party 1998
Nelson Mandela (1918–2013) South Africa African National Congress 1998 1999
Thabo Mbeki (born 1942) 1999 2003
Mahathir Mohamad (born 1925) Malaysia United Malays National Organisation 2003
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (1939–2025) 2003 2006
Fidel Castro[81] (1926–2016) Cuba Communist Party of Cuba 2006 2008
Raúl Castro (born 1931) 2008 2009
Hosni Mubarak (1928–2020) Egypt National Democratic Party 2009 2011
Mohamed Hussein Tantawi (1935–2021) Independent 2011 2012
Mohamed Morsi (1951–2019) Freedom and Justice Party 2012
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (born 1956) Iran Alliance of Builders of Islamic Iran 2012 2013
Hassan Rouhani (born 1948) Moderation and Development Party 2013 2016
Nicolás Maduro (born 1962) Venezuela United Socialist Party 2016 2019
Ilham Aliyev (born 1961) Azerbaijan New Azerbaijan Party 2019 2024
Yoweri Museveni (born 1944) Uganda National Resistance Movement 2024 Incumbent

Coordinating Bureau

[edit]

The Coordinating Bureau, also based at the UN, is the main instrument for directing the work of the movement's task forces, committees and working groups. Day-to-day work of NAM is being carried out by Working Groups, on behalf of the Coordinating Bureau.[65]

Members, observers and guests

[edit]

Current members

[edit]
Non-Aligned Movement member countries by year joined

The following countries are members of the NAM, arranged by continent, showing their year of admission:[2]

Africa

[edit]

Currently, every African country is a member of the Non-Aligned Movement.

  1. Algeria (1961)
  2. Angola (1976)
  3. Benin (1964)
  4. Botswana (1970)
  5. Burkina Faso (1973)
  6. Burundi (1964)
  7. Cameroon (1964)
  8. Cape Verde (1976)
  9. Central African Republic (1964)
  10. Chad (1964)
  11. Comoros (1976)
  12. Democratic Republic of the Congo (1961)
  13. Djibouti (1983)
  14. Egypt (1961)
  15. Equatorial Guinea (1970)
  16. Eritrea (1995)
  17. Eswatini (1970)
  18. Ethiopia (1961)
  19. Gabon (1970)
  20. Gambia (1973)
  21. Ghana (1961)
  22. Guinea (1961)
  23. Guinea-Bissau (1976)
  24. Ivory Coast (1973)
  25. Kenya (1964)
  26. Lesotho (1970)
  27. Liberia (1964)
  28. Libya (1964)
  29. Madagascar (1973)
  30. Malawi (1964)
  31. Mali (1961)
  32. Mauritania (1964)
  33. Mauritius (1973)
  34. Morocco (1961)
  35. Mozambique (1976)
  36. Namibia (1979)
  37. Niger (1973)
  38. Nigeria (1964)
  39. Republic of the Congo (1964)
  40. Rwanda (1970)
  41. São Tomé and Príncipe (1976)
  42. Senegal (1964)
  43. Seychelles (1976)
  44. Sierra Leone (1964)
  45. Somalia (1961)
  46. South Africa (1994)
  47. South Sudan (2024)[82]
  48. Sudan (1961)
  49. Tanzania (1964)
  50. Togo (1964)
  51. Tunisia (1961)
  52. Uganda (1964)
  53. Zambia (1964)
  54. Zimbabwe (1979)

Americas

[edit]
  1. Antigua and Barbuda (2006)
  2. Bahamas (1983)
  3. Barbados (1983)
  4. Belize (1981)
  5. Bolivia (1979)
  6. Chile (1971)
  7. Colombia (1983)
  8. Cuba (1961)
  9. Dominica (2006)
  10. Dominican Republic (2000)
  11. Ecuador (1983)
  12. Grenada (1979)
  13. Guatemala (1993)
  14. Guyana (1970)
  15. Haiti (2006)
  16. Honduras (1995)
  17. Jamaica (1970)
  18. Nicaragua (1979)
  19. Panama (1976)
  20. Peru (1973)
  21. Saint Kitts and Nevis (2006)
  22. Saint Lucia (1983)
  23. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (2003)
  24. Suriname (1983)
  25. Trinidad and Tobago (1970)
  26. Venezuela (1989)

Asia

[edit]
  1. / Afghanistan (1961)
  2. Bahrain (1973)
  3. Bangladesh (1973)
  4. Bhutan (1973)
  5. Brunei Darussalam (1993)
  6. Cambodia (1961)
  7. India (1961)
  8. Indonesia (1961)
  9. Iran (1979)
  10. Iraq (1961)
  11. Jordan (1964)
  12. Kuwait (1964)
  13. Laos (1964)
  14. Lebanon (1961)
  15. Malaysia (1970)
  16. Maldives (1976)
  17. Mongolia (1993)
  18. Myanmar (1961)
  19.   Nepal (1961)
  20. North Korea (1975)
  21. Oman (1973)
  22. Pakistan (1979)
  23. Palestine (1976)
  24. Philippines (1993)
  25. Qatar (1973)
  26. Saudi Arabia (1961)
  27. Singapore (1970)
  28. Sri Lanka (1961)
  29. Syria (1964)
  30. Thailand (1993)
  31. East Timor (2003)
  32. Turkmenistan (1995)
  33. United Arab Emirates (1970)
  34. Uzbekistan (1993)
  35. Vietnam (1976)
  36. Yemen (1990)[84]

Europe

[edit]
  1. Azerbaijan (2011)
  2. Belarus (1998)

Oceania

[edit]
  1. Fiji (2011)
  2. Papua New Guinea (1993)
  3. Vanuatu (1983)

Former members

[edit]
  1. North Yemen (1961–1990)[85]
  2. Cyprus (1961–2004)[86][87]
  3. Yugoslavia (1961–1992)[22][88][89]
  4. South Yemen (1970–1990)[85]
  5. Malta (1973–2004)[87]
  6. Argentina (1973–1991)[90][91]

Observers

[edit]

The following countries and organizations have observer status:[2]

Countries

[edit]
  1.  Argentina[92]
  2.  Armenia[92]
  3.  Bosnia and Herzegovina[92][93]
  4.  Brazil[92]
  5.  China (1992)[94]
  6.  Costa Rica[92]
  7.  Croatia[92][93][95][96]
  8.  El Salvador[92]
  9.  Kazakhstan[92]
  10.  Kyrgyzstan[92]
  11.  Mexico[92]
  12.  Montenegro[92][93]
  13.  Paraguay[92]
  14.  Russia (2021)[97][98][99]
  15.  Serbia[92][93]
  16.  Tajikistan[92]
  17.  Ukraine[92][93]
  18.  Uruguay[92]

Organizations

[edit]
  1. Association of Southeast Asian Nations
  2. African Union
  3. Afro-Asian People's Solidarity Organisation
  4. Arab League
  5. Commonwealth Secretariat
  6. Hostosian National Independence Movement
  7. Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front
  8. Organisation of Islamic Cooperation
  9. South Centre
  10. United Nations
  11. World Peace Council

Former observers

[edit]
  1.  Vatican City (1970)[100]

Guests

[edit]

There is no permanent guest status, but often several non-member countries are represented as guests at conferences.[101] In addition, a large number of organizations, both from within the UN system and from outside, are always invited as guests.[102]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Non-Aligned Movement

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is an intergovernmental organization of 120 developing countries that formally eschewed military alliances with either the Western or Eastern blocs during the Cold War, aiming instead to safeguard national sovereignty and pursue independent foreign policies. Founded at the inaugural summit in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, from September 1 to 6, 1961, under the initiative of leaders including Josip Broz Tito, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Gamal Abdel Nasser, the movement drew foundational principles from the 1955 Bandung Conference, emphasizing respect for sovereignty, non-aggression, non-interference, and peaceful coexistence. The Belgrade Declaration further outlined commitments to disarmament, opposition to colonialism and racial discrimination, and promotion of economic development without superpower domination. While NAM amplified the collective voice of newly independent states in global forums like the , facilitating decolonization pressures and the formation of the for economic advocacy, its non-alignment was often compromised in practice, as numerous members, including after its 1979 admission, maintained substantial military, economic, and ideological ties with the , prompting criticisms of selective neutrality tilted against Western interests. Post-Cold War, the movement shifted focus to , South-South cooperation, and critiques of unilateralism, though its relevance has been debated amid evolving geopolitical dynamics, with recent summits under Uganda's 2024–2027 chairmanship addressing issues like and reform. Despite these adaptations, NAM's structure as a consensus-based forum without binding decisions has limited its efficacy in resolving internal divergences or influencing major power relations decisively.

Historical Origins

The Bandung Conference and Early Foundations (1955)

The Asian-African Conference, commonly known as the , convened from April 18 to 24, 1955, in , , hosted by President . Organized by the five Colombo Powers—, , , Ceylon (now ), and Burma (now )—it gathered representatives from 29 predominantly Asian and African nations, many recently independent or pursuing . Key attendees included Indian Prime Minister , Egyptian President , Chinese Premier , and Burmese Prime Minister , alongside over 300 delegates focused on fostering solidarity against colonialism. The conference addressed peace, economic cooperation, cultural exchange, and opposition to colonialism or , amid tensions, with discussions emphasizing sovereignty and non-interference rather than formal alignment with either superpower bloc. Central themes revolved around rejecting , promoting , and resolving disputes peacefully, though internal divisions surfaced, such as on and regional conflicts like . Nehru advocated for active neutrality, warning against military pacts that divided the world, while Nasser and highlighted Afro-Asian unity as a counter to Western dominance. , representing China, pledged adherence to the five principles of —mutual respect for sovereignty, non-aggression, non-interference, equality, and —moderating earlier hardline communist positions to appeal to non-aligned sentiments. These exchanges underscored emerging preferences for independent foreign policies, influencing leaders who later founded the Non-Aligned Movement, though the conference itself avoided explicit bloc formation. The Final Communiqué, adopted on April 24, outlined concrete objectives including economic development aid, cultural collaboration, and respect, while condemning and atomic weapons proliferation. It enshrined the Ten Principles of , comprising respect for UN Charter purposes and ; and ; equality of races and nations; non-intervention; ; refraining from or ; peaceful dispute settlement; non-propaganda incitement; and adherence to and . These principles provided a doctrinal basis for non-alignment, emphasizing from great power rivalries and mutual respect among developing states, directly informing the Non-Aligned Movement's foundational tenets formalized six years later. Despite limited immediate institutional outcomes, symbolized Third World agency, galvanizing anti-colonial momentum and solidarity that challenged bipolar structures.

Formal Establishment at Belgrade Summit (1961)

The First Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, marking the formal establishment of the Non-Aligned Movement, convened from September 1 to 6, , in , . Hosted by Yugoslav President , the summit built on principles from the 1955 , aiming to unite nations rejecting alignment with either the Western or Eastern blocs. Preparatory meetings had occurred in from June 5 to 12, , to coordinate participation among newly independent states. Twenty-five countries participated, including , , Burma, , Ceylon, Congo-Leopoldville, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and as host. Three nations—, , and —attended as observers. The event was spearheaded by Tito, Indian Prime Minister , and Egyptian President , whose leadership emphasized sovereignty and independence amid decolonization pressures. The conference adopted the Belgrade Declaration, reaffirming nations' rights to unity, self-determination, and independence, while condemning colonialism and advocating peaceful coexistence. Participants urged major powers to pursue general and complete disarmament under United Nations auspices, including a ban on nuclear testing and representation for non-aligned states in negotiations. Letters were sent to the U.S. and Soviet presidents calling for nuclear restraint, particularly after the Soviet Union resumed testing on the summit's opening day. These outcomes solidified non-alignment as a platform for Third World solidarity, focusing on economic development, non-interference, and opposition to great-power dominance.

Development During the Cold War

Expansion Through Key Summits and Membership Growth

The Non-Aligned Movement's expansion during the was driven by its triennial summits, which served as forums for admitting newly independent states from decolonized regions in , , and . This growth reflected the appeal of non-alignment as a strategy for amid superpower rivalries, with membership increasing from 25 founding states in 1961 to over 100 by 1990. The second summit in , , from 5 to 10 October 1964, marked initial expansion, with 47 countries participating—nearly double the Belgrade attendees—and focusing on anti-colonial struggles and . Hosted by President , it solidified procedural norms for membership admission, emphasizing consensus among developing nations. Subsequent summits accelerated growth amid accelerating . The third summit in , , on 8–10 September 1970, hosted by , prioritized economic self-reliance and admitted several African states post-independence. The fourth in , , from 5–9 September 1973, under , shifted toward economic demands, incorporating more post-colonial members and establishing the Coordinating Bureau for ongoing coordination. The fifth summit in , , 16–19 August 1976, and sixth in , , 3–9 September 1979, further broadened representation, with the latter under emphasizing South-South solidarity and , drawing in Latin American and nations. By the seventh summit in , , 7–12 March 1983, hosted by , the movement positioned itself as "history's biggest peace movement," reflecting its enlarged constituency advocating nuclear disarmament and global equity. The eighth summit in Harare, Zimbabwe, 1–6 September 1986, continued this trajectory, reinforcing the NAM's role in diplomacy. This summit-driven expansion enhanced the NAM's collective bargaining power in international forums like the United Nations, where members coordinated votes on development and security issues, though internal ideological divergences occasionally challenged unity.

Engagement with Decolonization and Third World Solidarity

The Non-Aligned Movement positioned as a core priority, reflecting the recent independence of many founding members from European colonial rule and their shared opposition to ongoing . Emerging amid the post-World War II wave of , NAM leaders encouraged colonized peoples to pursue , coordinating diplomatic efforts to amplify anti-colonial voices in international forums like the . At the 1964 Cairo Summit, NAM issued a declaration committing to the complete elimination of , neo-colonialism, and , while explicitly condemning apartheid as an inhuman policy requiring international action for its eradication. This stance extended to practical support for liberation movements, including material and diplomatic aid to groups fighting Portuguese colonial forces in , , and , as well as the against South Africa's apartheid regime. By the 1970 Summit, NAM had formalized solidarity with southern African freedom fighters, urging member states to provide training, arms, and sanctuary to accelerate independence processes. NAM's engagement fostered Third World solidarity through South-South cooperation, enabling developing nations to collectively challenge economic dependencies inherited from colonial eras. This manifested in joint advocacy for the at the UN in 1974, aiming to redistribute global wealth and technology to redress structural inequalities. Resolutions from subsequent summits, such as the 1979 Havana Declaration, reinforced opposition to apartheid, , and related ideologies, linking them to broader struggles against foreign aggression and . These efforts amplified pressure on colonial holdouts, contributing to the dismantlement of apartheid in by the early 1990s and the independence of in 1990. Through coordinated UN voting blocs, NAM influenced key resolutions on decolonization, including those establishing the UN Special Committee on Colonialism in 1961 and expanding sanctions against Rhodesia's unilateral declaration of independence in 1965. This solidarity extended beyond Africa to Asia and the Middle East, supporting Algeria's independence in 1962 and framing the Palestinian cause as an anti-colonial struggle, though internal divergences occasionally tempered unified action. Overall, NAM's platform empowered Third World states to prioritize sovereignty and mutual aid, institutionalizing a counter-narrative to bipolar Cold War dynamics.

Post-Cold War Evolution

Decline in Relevance and Internal Challenges

The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 marked the end of the bipolar structure that had defined the Cold War, fundamentally undermining the Non-Aligned Movement's (NAM) core rationale of avoiding entanglement in superpower rivalries. With the disappearance of the Warsaw Pact and reduced ideological confrontation, many NAM members pursued pragmatic alignments based on economic and security interests rather than strict non-alignment, leading to a perceived obsolescence of the movement's foundational principles. This shift was evident at the 1992 Jakarta Summit, the first post-Cold War gathering, where declarations reaffirmed non-alignment's relevance amid globalization but highlighted struggles to adapt to a unipolar moment dominated by U.S. influence. Membership expanded significantly after 1991, growing from approximately 100 states in the late to over 120 by the , incorporating diverse nations from , , and , yet this numerical increase correlated with diminished collective influence due to heterogeneous priorities. Larger forums like the and regional bodies such as the or absorbed many of NAM's advocacy roles, diluting its diplomatic leverage; for instance, NAM's parallel efforts on economic redistribution faltered against neoliberal globalization, failing to deliver tangible South-South gains. By the 2012 Tehran Summit, internal discord over issues like the and Iran's nuclear program exposed fractures, with some members aligning closer to Western positions while others backed authoritarian regimes, eroding consensus-building capacity. Persistent internal challenges stemmed from ideological and geopolitical divergences among members, including socialist states like Cuba and Venezuela clashing with market-oriented reformers in countries such as India and Indonesia. Economic disparities exacerbated tensions, as wealthier members pursued bilateral trade deals with major powers—evident in India's growing ties with the U.S. via the 2008 civil nuclear agreement—while poorer states remained aid-dependent, hindering unified positions on global trade or climate finance. Leadership vacuums, such as the 1992 loss of Yugoslavia as a founding neutral voice following its breakup, compounded coordination issues, with chairmanships rotating among ideologically varied hosts like South Africa in 1998 and Venezuela in 2016, often prioritizing domestic agendas over collective action. These factors contributed to procedural inefficiencies, including infrequent ministerial meetings and reliance on summits every three years, which by the 2020s yielded mostly declarative outcomes amid rising multipolarity involving China and Russia. Despite efforts at the 2019 Baku Summit to refocus on sustainable development, the movement's inability to enforce non-alignment—seen in members' participation in BRICS or OPEC+—underscored ongoing relevance erosion.

Adaptation to Multipolarity and Recent Developments (1990s–2025)

The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 marked the end of bipolarity, compelling the Non-Aligned Movement to adapt its framework from avoiding alignment in a two-power rivalry to navigating a unipolar order initially dominated by the United States. In the 1990s, NAM summits, such as the 10th in Jakarta in 1992 under Indonesian chairmanship, shifted emphasis toward economic self-reliance, South-South trade, and advocacy for a New International Economic Order, reflecting diminished ideological divisions but persistent developmental disparities. Membership grew modestly, reaching 113 states by the mid-1990s, with focus on issues like debt relief and technology transfer amid globalization's challenges. By the 2000s, as emerging powers like and gained prominence, NAM repositioned itself to promote multipolarity, critiquing unilateral actions such as the 2003 Iraq invasion and calling for UN Security Council reforms to enhance Global South representation. Chairmanships rotated among diverse members, including (1998–2003), (2003–2006), (2006–2009), (2009–2012), and (2012–2016), during which the movement condemned and supported Palestinian self-determination. The 16th Summit in in 2012, attended by 120 member states, underscored and opposition to interventionism, adapting non-alignment to issue-specific coalitions rather than strict bloc avoidance. This evolution acknowledged that post-Cold War realities favored flexible, interest-driven alignments over rigid neutrality. In the and , amid rising geopolitical tensions and the erosion of U.S. hegemony, NAM reinforced its role in fostering multipolar governance, with summits addressing , digital divides, and countering protectionism. The 17th Summit in Isla Margarita, , in 2016, and the 18th in , , in 2019, prioritized and multilateralism, with Baku's final document urging reforms in Bretton Woods institutions. 's chairmanship (2019–2023) navigated divisions over conflicts like , where members largely abstained from Western-led condemnations of , preserving consensus on principles. The 19th Summit in , , in January 2024, under the theme "Deepening Cooperation for Shared Global Prosperity," produced an outcome document reaffirming commitment to UN reforms, equitable resource distribution, and opposition to unilateral coercive measures, with around 90 of 120 members participating. Uganda's ensuing chairmanship (2024–2027) has sustained advocacy for multipolarity and Global South equity. As of October 2025, NAM leadership, during ministerial meetings, renewed demands for restructuring global institutions to reflect multipolar realities, emphasizing reformed UN mechanisms and resistance to great-power dominance. Despite internal divergences—such as varying stances on U.S.- rivalry, with members like pursuing strategic autonomy via partnerships like the Quad—the movement maintains influence through coordinated positions in forums like the UN , where it commands a near-two-thirds . This adaptation underscores NAM's pivot from War-era abstention to proactive engagement in a fragmented , prioritizing developmental sovereignty amid competing poles.

Core Principles and Ideology

Foundational Tenets of Non-Alignment


The foundational tenets of the Non-Aligned Movement were derived from the Ten Principles adopted at the Asian-African Conference in , , from April 18 to 24, 1955, which emphasized , , and peaceful international among newly independent states. These principles formed the ideological basis for non-alignment, promoting unity against imperialism without formal military commitments to either superpower bloc. The tenets were formalized at the First Summit in , , from September 1 to 6, 1961, where 25 founding members declared their commitment to independent foreign policies focused on national liberation, , and avoidance of entanglement in East-West conflicts. At its core, non-alignment required member states to refrain from joining military alliances or pacts that advanced the strategic interests of major powers, enabling pursuit of and multilateral diplomacy aligned with the Charter. This stance prioritized , —especially nuclear—and support for ongoing efforts, positioning NAM as a to bipolar dominance while upholding state equality and non-interference. The Ten Bandung Principles, which have guided NAM's political agenda since inception, include:
  • Respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
  • Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations.
  • Recognition of the equality of all races and of the equality of all nations, large and small.
  • Abstention from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of another country.
  • Respect for the right of each nation to defend itself, singly or collectively, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.
  • Abstention from using arrangements of collective defense to serve the particular interests of big powers or exerting pressure on other nations.
  • Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against national independence or sovereignty.
  • Settlement of international disputes by peaceful means, such as negotiation or arbitration, in line with the UN Charter.
  • Promotion of mutual interests and cooperation for equitable economic relations and development.
  • Respect for justice and international obligations.

Ideological Tensions and Shifts Over Time

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has historically encompassed a broad ideological spectrum among its members, from parliamentary democracies like to one-party socialist states like and authoritarian regimes in the , creating inherent tensions over the interpretation of non-alignment as independence from great-power blocs. This diversity manifested in disputes during the , particularly regarding the extent to which members could pursue bilateral ties with the superpowers without compromising the movement's core tenet of . A prominent example was 's deepening military and economic dependence on the after the 1962 , which involved Soviet deployment of nuclear weapons on Cuban soil and subsequent annual subsidies exceeding $4 billion by the 1980s, leading critics within NAM to argue that functioned as a Soviet proxy rather than a truly non-aligned actor. These tensions peaked in the late 1970s amid competition for leadership between and , the latter as a founding member viewing non-alignment through the lens of equidistance from both the and USSR to preserve . At the 6th NAM Summit in from September 3–9, 1979, attended by representatives from 93 countries, Cuban President advocated resolutions supportive of Soviet-backed interventions, such as in and , which clashed with Yugoslavia's vision of non-alignment as anti-hegemonic neutrality rather than selective alignment with the ; this prompted Yugoslavia and allies to challenge Cuba's chairmanship and even calls from some members to expel . Such rifts highlighted how ideological leanings—often socialist or anti-colonial in —coexisted uneasily with the movement's formal commitment to avoiding pacts, as evidenced by NAM's tolerance of Soviet aid to members like and while condemning alliances. The end of the with the Soviet Union's dissolution on December 26, 1991, fundamentally altered NAM's ideological landscape, obviating the binary choice between Western and Eastern blocs that had defined its raison d'être and forcing a pivot toward broader advocacy for developing nations' economic and political interests in a unipolar world dominated by the . Post-1991 summits, such as the 10th in in September 1992, reframed non-alignment as resistance to "neo-colonialism" and , emphasizing South-South cooperation, , and UN Security Council reform to counter perceived Western dominance, though this shift masked ongoing fractures from members' pragmatic deviations—like Egypt's 1979 with or India's growing defense ties with the . By the 2000s, amid rising multipolarity with China's economic ascent, NAM's ideology evolved to incorporate critiques of and calls for equitable , yet internal cohesion waned as ideological uniformity gave way to issue-based coalitions, with socialist holdouts like under Hugo Chávez from 1999 pushing anti-imperialist platforms while others, such as , balanced partnerships. This adaptation sustained NAM's institutional survival—evidenced by its expansion to 120 members by 2012 and ongoing summits—but diluted its doctrinal purity, as members increasingly prioritized bilateral gains over collective ideological discipline.

Organizational Structure

Membership Categories and Geographic Distribution

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) categorizes participation into three levels: full members, observers, and guests, with criteria rooted in the Bandung Principles of 1955, emphasizing independence from military alliances, support for national liberation, and opposition to , , and foreign domination. Full members possess voting rights and full participation in , while observers attend sessions without voting privileges, and guests are invited to specific high-level meetings with limited involvement. As of 2025, NAM comprises 120 full member states, primarily sovereign nations committed to non-alignment principles. Observer status extends to 17 countries, including , , , , and , which engage in deliberations but cannot vote or hold office, alongside 10 international organizations such as the and the League of Arab States. Guests, typically invited for expertise or regional representation, participate only in designated events without formal influence on outcomes. Membership admission requires consensus among full members and adherence to core tenets, excluding states in military pacts like or formal Warsaw Pact successors. Geographically, NAM's full membership is concentrated in the Global South, reflecting its origins in and solidarity. Africa hosts the largest contingent with 53 members, including , , , and ; Asia follows with 39, encompassing , , , and ; account for 26, such as , , , and ; and Europe has 2, namely and . This distribution spans over 4.8 billion people, or about 59% of the global , but only 15% of world GDP, underscoring the movement's focus on developing economies rather than economic powerhouses. No full members hail from , , or Oceania's developed states, aligning with the exclusion of aligned powers.

Leadership Mechanisms: Summits, Chairmanship, and Coordinating Bureau

The of Heads of State and constitutes the highest within the Non-Aligned Movement, convening in ordinary session every three years to evaluate progress on prior commitments, deliberate on pressing global challenges, and formulate collective positions through consensus-based declarations. Hosted by a , the sets the strategic agenda for the ensuing period, with outcomes intended for implementation by members at national and international levels. The most recent such gathering, the 19th , occurred on 19–20 January 2024 in , , under the theme "Deepening Cooperation for Shared Global Affluence." Chairmanship of the Movement transfers to the or of the summit host nation, establishing a three-year tenure aligned with the interval to the subsequent , though extensions have occurred in response to disruptions like the , as seen with Azerbaijan's term following the 18th in on 25–26 October 2019. The chair spearheads representation of NAM's interests in multilateral forums, facilitates coordination among members, and advances the organization's foundational principles amid evolving geopolitical dynamics. assumed the chairmanship in January 2024, succeeding , with the role emphasizing continuity through mechanisms like the Troika—comprising the previous, current, and incoming chairs—to address inter-summit priorities. The Coordinating Bureau operates as the Movement's primary technical and operational entity between summits, composed of permanent representatives accredited to the in New York from member states. It convenes monthly or as exigencies demand to oversee routine NAM activities, prepare documentation for ministerial and summit-level engagements, and maintain institutional coherence without a formal or permanent secretariat. The Bureau also incorporates specialized working groups chaired by designated members—such as those on UN reform led by or disarmament by —to handle discrete policy domains, reporting back to ensure alignment with broader directives. Ministerial meetings of the Coordinating Bureau, held four months prior to summits, at mid-term (18 months post-summit), and annually during the UN in September, further underpin this structure by refining agendas at the foreign ministers' level.
Recent ChairmanshipsCountryTermAssociated Summit
Uganda2024–202719th (Kampala, 2024)
Azerbaijan2019–2024 (extended)18th (Baku, 2019)
Venezuela2016–201917th (Porlamar, 2016)
Iran2012–201616th (Tehran, 2012)

Policies and Positions

Advocacy for Decolonization and Self-Determination Disputes

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) emerged as a key platform for advocating the complete eradication of , emphasizing the right of colonized peoples to and independence as fundamental to sovereign statehood. Formed amid the wave of post-World War II , NAM's founding leaders, including of , of , and of , positioned the movement to support national liberation struggles against lingering European empires and settler regimes. At the inaugural 1961 Belgrade Summit, participants condemned and pledged solidarity with independence movements in and , influencing United Nations resolutions that accelerated the process. NAM's advocacy intensified in the 1970s, targeting Portuguese colonies, , and under apartheid. The 1970 Summit produced a declaration prioritizing the dismantling of colonial structures, endorsing armed liberation where peaceful means failed, and rejecting pseudo-independence schemes like South Africa's Bantustans—a stance reaffirmed at the 1976 Summit. This support extended to practical measures, such as coordinating diplomatic pressure in the UN and providing material aid to groups like the and South West Africa People's Organization (). By 1990, NAM's efforts contributed to Namibia's independence from , marking a milestone in African , though critics noted the movement's reliance on Soviet-aligned rhetoric in some campaigns. In disputes, NAM has consistently championed the principle against perceived neo-colonial interference, applying it to cases like , , and East Timor. Since the 1964 Cairo Summit, the movement has backed , condemning Israeli control over occupied territories and supporting PLO representation in global forums—a position codified in multiple summit declarations and UN votes. For , NAM endorsed the Polisario Front's independence claim against , rejecting settlement proposals as violations of , as reiterated in the 2019 Baku Summit documents. Similarly, in East Timor, NAM advocated for separation from until its 1999 , highlighting abuses under occupation. These stances, while principled in opposing external domination, have drawn accusations of selective application, as NAM members like opposed similar claims in .

Economic Policies: South-South Cooperation and Development Goals

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has advanced South-South cooperation as a primary economic policy framework, promoting trade, investment, and technical exchanges among developing countries to diminish reliance on industrialized nations and foster collective self-reliance. This strategy, rooted in principles of equality and mutual benefit, gained prominence during the 1970s amid calls for restructuring global economic imbalances, with NAM coordinating efforts alongside the Group of 77 (G77) developing nations at the United Nations. Central to these policies was NAM's endorsement of the (NIEO) at the Fourth Summit in on September 5–9, 1973, which demanded sovereign equality in international economic relations, national control over natural resources, stabilization of commodity export earnings through indexed pricing mechanisms, and increased concessional financing for development projects. The NIEO declaration, influencing a subsequent UN resolution on May 1, 1974, outlined specific goals such as technology transfers on preferential terms, for low-income members, and reforms to institutions like the to prioritize developmental needs over creditor interests. These measures aimed to address empirical disparities, where developing countries supplied 70% of global raw materials but captured only 20–30% of manufacturing value chains by the mid-1970s. To operationalize South-South cooperation, NAM supported the Buenos Aires Plan of Action adopted on August 30, 1978, at the UN Conference on Technical Cooperation among Developing Countries, which targeted a doubling of South-South volumes within a decade through preferential tariffs, joint industrial ventures, and schemes, alongside capacity-building in , , and . The movement later established the NAM Centre for South-South Technical and Economic (CSSTEC) in , , in 1995, to coordinate exchanges in science, , and , facilitating over 100 technical assistance projects annually by the early 2000s in areas such as and disaster management. NAM's development goals have emphasized poverty alleviation, sustainable resource utilization, and equitable access to global markets, aligning with but predating UN frameworks like the ; for instance, the 2000 Havana South Summit committed to halving hunger rates through intra-NAM agricultural cooperatives and initiatives by 2015. Policies have included advocacy for allocation favoring low-income members and opposition to unilateral sanctions that hinder economic flows, with empirical focus on causal links between resource sovereignty and growth, as evidenced by members' push for permanent resource producer cartels modeled on . Despite these aims, implementation has hinged on voluntary contributions, with documented trade among NAM states rising from $50 billion in 1980 to over $1 trillion by 2020, though intra-group shares remain below 15% of total external trade due to infrastructural and policy divergences.

Positions on Global Institutions and Reforms

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has consistently advocated for comprehensive reforms to the , emphasizing the need to enhance the representation of developing countries in decision-making bodies to address imbalances inherited from the post-World War II era. Central to this stance is the push for Security Council expansion, including new permanent seats for , , and , without extending veto powers to additional members, a position reiterated since the Colombo Summit Declaration. At the 19th NAM Summit in , , in January 2024, the Kampala Declaration called for strengthening the UN as the primary multilateral forum and undertaking "comprehensive reform of the multilateral architecture, including the ," to promote equitable participation and effective responses to global challenges. NAM critiques the Bretton Woods institutions—namely the (IMF) and World Bank—for perpetuating Western dominance through voting structures that favor advanced economies, thereby hindering equitable development in the Global South. The movement demands governance reforms in these bodies to increase the voice and quota shares of developing nations, aligning with broader goals of authentic multipolarity and fair resource allocation. This position was reinforced in October 2025 statements by NAM leadership, which highlighted the necessity of overhauling Bretton Woods mechanisms alongside UN reforms to foster inclusive global economic governance. Beyond the UN and financial institutions, NAM supports reforms to the (WTO) to establish a "universal, rule-based, open, transparent, predictable, inclusive, fair, non-discriminatory, and equitable multilateral trading system," opposing and unilateral measures that undermine developing countries' interests. Declarations from NAM summits, such as the 2019 Summit, underscore commitment to while rejecting unilateral sanctions and coercive diplomacy, viewing them as erosions of . Overall, these positions reflect NAM's emphasis on democratizing global institutions to prioritize and collective action among member states, though implementation has often stalled due to geopolitical divisions.

Stances on Geopolitical Conflicts and Foreign Policy Critiques

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has historically critiqued interventions perceived as hegemonic, particularly those led by the , such as the , which it condemned as a violation of and sovereignty principles. In the War on Terror, NAM members voiced opposition to unilateral actions, emphasizing through the over coalition-based military operations. This stance reflects a broader pattern of prioritizing state sovereignty and non-interference, rooted in post-colonial sensitivities, though it has drawn accusations of selective outrage by overlooking similar violations by non-Western powers. On the Israel-Palestine conflict, NAM has consistently advocated for , condemning Israel's military actions in Gaza as illegal and demanding an immediate , as articulated in declarations from the January 2024 Kampala summit under Uganda's chairmanship. The movement reaffirmed solidarity with , calling for the lifting of the Gaza blockade and protection of civilians, while rejecting Israel's occupation of territories seized in 1967. Such positions, reiterated in UN forums, underscore NAM's alignment with Global South narratives on , yet critics argue they equate aggressor and defender, ignoring Hamas's role in initiating escalations like the October 7, 2023, attacks. Regarding the 2022 , NAM adopted a neutral posture, with most members condemning the aggression in principle but abstaining from UN votes isolating and imposing few sanctions beyond Singapore's measures. Leaders from , , and pushed for dialogue and peaceful resolution without endorsing Western sanctions, prioritizing economic ties with for energy and fertilizers amid global inflation. This "active non-alignment" preserved but faced Western critique for enabling Russian impunity, as abstentions numbered over 30 from NAM states in early UN resolutions. Critiques of NAM's foreign policy highlight inconsistencies, such as vocal anti-Western rhetoric contrasted with muted responses to Soviet-era invasions (e.g., in 1979) or contemporary Chinese assertiveness in the , suggesting a tilt toward revisionist powers for economic or ideological affinity. Observers contend this erodes true non-alignment, transforming NAM into a platform for anti-hegemonic posturing that benefits authoritarian members like , , and while alienating democratic partners. Economically motivated neutrality in , for instance, prioritized short-term gains over principled opposition to territorial aggression, undermining NAM's moral authority in resolving conflicts. Despite these flaws, proponents defend such as essential for smaller states navigating multipolar rivalries, avoiding entrapment in great-power contests.

Specialized Institutions and Activities

NAM Centers, Youth Networks, and Technical Cooperation

The Non-Aligned Movement maintains several specialized centers to facilitate collaboration among member states. The NAM Centre for Science and Technology, headquartered in , , promotes mutually beneficial cooperation among scientists and technologists from non-aligned and other developing countries by establishing links between national and regional science and technology institutions, acting as a clearinghouse for technological capabilities and transfers, maintaining a registry of experts, and stimulating joint efforts through seminars, workshops, and fellowships. The NAM Centre for South-South Technical Cooperation, located in , , accelerates equitable development in the Global South via technical partnerships, including memoranda of understanding for projects, workshops on agricultural genebanks, applications for disaster mitigation, and scholarship programs with universities such as Universitas Gadjah Mada and Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang spanning 2023–2027. Additionally, the NAM Centre for Human Rights and Cultural Diversity, established in 2007 following the Tehran NAM Ministerial Meeting, serves as a platform for exchanging views, practices, and ideas to advance protection and , drawing mandates from NAM summits and ministerial meetings. Youth engagement within the NAM is coordinated through the NAM Youth Organization, an international platform uniting youths from member states that was founded in October 2021 and formalized as an organization via the Shusha Accords at the NAM Youth Summit in July 2022, attended by representatives from 63 countries. With over 60 national chapters and 513 members, the organization has completed 56 projects focused on capacity-building, non-formal learning, sustainable development, youth participation in global decision-making, and climate action, including regular youth forums, expert meetings, and high-level events to integrate young voices into NAM resolutions and discussions. Technical cooperation in the NAM emphasizes South-South mechanisms to enhance , primarily channeled through its centers via technology transfers, joint research, expert exchanges, and capacity-building initiatives in sectors such as , , and . These efforts align with broader NAM goals of pooling resources and fostering to address development challenges, including fellowships, publications on issues like and , and collaborative events that support objectives among the 121 member states. Despite these structures, implementation often depends on voluntary contributions and host country support, limiting scale compared to larger multilateral bodies.

Working Groups, Task Forces, and Cultural Initiatives

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) operates specialized working groups to address targeted policy areas, coordinated under the NAM Coordinating Bureau to implement summit decisions and advance member states' collective interests. These groups focus on issues such as institutional reforms, security, and rights, with chairmanships rotating among members to ensure broad representation. Key working groups include those chaired by on the and revitalization of the General Assembly, which examines structural changes to enhance developing countries' influence; on reform of the UN Security Council, advocating for expanded permanent seats and veto limitations; on , promoting nuclear non-proliferation and arms control measures; on , emphasizing protection against unilateral sanctions and promotion of equitable global standards; on operations, coordinating NAM positions in UN missions; on legal matters, addressing disputes involving members; and on unilateral coercive measures, challenging as violations of . Additionally, leads the Peacebuilding Caucus, which supports post-conflict reconstruction efforts in member states. NAM methodology documents outline the use of ad hoc task forces, contact groups, and committees to improve coordination on emergent issues, such as technical or crisis response, ensuring flexibility beyond permanent working groups while maintaining alignment with core principles of non-interference and . These mechanisms facilitate preparatory work for summits and foreign ministers' meetings, with reports submitted to the Coordinating Bureau for endorsement. Cultural initiatives within NAM have historically emphasized media and to counter perceived Western dominance in global narratives. The Broadcasting Organization of Non-Aligned Countries (BONAC), established to promote equitable dissemination of broadcast information among members, aimed to foster objective coverage of developing world perspectives and reduce reliance on external agencies. Complementing this, the Non-Aligned News Agencies Pool (NANAP), active from to the mid-1990s, enabled cooperative news sharing to support balanced information flows and cultural self-representation. These efforts, including bilateral cultural agreements signed by founding members like with 28 NAM countries between 1958 and 1989, sought to build solidarity through shared artistic and informational exchanges, though their operational impact diminished post-Cold War.

Criticisms and Controversies

Accusations of Hypocrisy and Selective Alignment

Critics, particularly from Western governments and analysts during the , have charged the Non-Aligned Movement with hypocrisy, arguing that many members maintained alignment with the while professing neutrality. Cuba's 1973 admission to NAM exemplified this tension; despite its formal non-aligned status, received annual Soviet subsidies exceeding $4 billion by the late 1970s and served as a proxy in USSR-supported operations, including the dispatch of over 50,000 troops to starting in 1975 to bolster the Marxist regime against Western-backed factions. This alignment prompted protests from founding members like , which viewed Cuba's hosting of the 1979 NAM summit—attended by 95 countries—as a platform for advancing Soviet interests, leading to accusations that the gathering prioritized anti-Western rhetoric over true non-alignment. India, a co-founder of NAM, faced similar scrutiny for its 1971 Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Cooperation, which facilitated Soviet vetoes in the UN Security Council during the Bangladesh crisis and supplied advanced weaponry, such as MiG-21 fighters, tilting New Delhi's posture against Pakistan and the US. Observers noted that such pacts contradicted NAM's Belgrade Declaration principles of avoiding military alliances, with India's veto of UN resolutions condemning Soviet actions in Czechoslovakia (1968) highlighting selective application of non-intervention norms. The movement's positions on geopolitical conflicts further underscored claims of selective alignment, as NAM summits issued frequent denunciations of interventions—such as in , where resolutions at the 1961 Belgrade Summit demanded withdrawal—yet offered muted or divided responses to Soviet expansions. While the 1983 New Delhi Summit eventually criticized the 1979 Soviet invasion of , and other pro-Moscow members diluted the language, contrasting with the body's unified outrage over Western actions and exposing internal fractures over impartiality. In the post-Cold War period, accusations of hypocrisy have evolved to focus on uneven scrutiny of rising powers. NAM has repeatedly condemned and Israeli policies, as in the 2012 Tehran Summit's resolutions on , but issued no comparable collective rebukes against Russia's 2022 invasion of —despite principles of sovereignty—or China's internment of over 1 million in since 2017, with member states like and maintaining strategic partnerships with Beijing amid documented forced labor and cultural erasure. This pattern, critics argue, reflects pragmatic alignments driven by economic dependencies rather than ideological consistency, undermining NAM's claim to equitable global advocacy.

Ineffectiveness, Divisions, and Failure to Achieve Economic Self-Reliance

The Non-Aligned Movement's consensus-based decision-making process, requiring unanimity among its 120 member states, has frequently resulted in paralysis and an inability to enforce positions or mediate disputes effectively. This structural weakness, lacking binding mechanisms or enforcement powers, has rendered NAM summits forums for rhetorical declarations rather than actionable outcomes, as evidenced by its failure to resolve major geopolitical conflicts despite repeated condemnations. For instance, NAM could not prevent or halt intra-member wars such as the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq conflict, where both belligerents were founding members, or the 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pakistani wars between nuclear-armed rivals and . Similarly, the movement's response to the 1979 Soviet invasion of exposed deep fissures, with some members like maintaining neutrality toward the USSR while others, such as , aligned against it, underscoring the absence of collective will. Internal divisions have further eroded NAM's cohesion, stemming from ideological heterogeneity and competing national interests. Member states ranged from socialist regimes like , which hosted the 1979 summit and pushed anti-imperialist agendas, to more market-oriented or authoritarian governments, creating tensions over foreign policy directions and economic models. The influx of diverse ideologies since the 1961 Conference heightened these frictions, as documented in declassified analyses noting how expanded membership diluted original non-alignment principles. Territorial and sectarian disputes among members—exemplified by Arab-Israeli hostilities involving and other Arab states against (an observer until expelled)—prevented unified stances, while religious and ethnic cleavages, such as Sunni-Shia divides in the Iran-Iraq war, exacerbated fragmentation. Attendance at NAM summits has reflected this disunity, with the 2016 gathering drawing only eight to ten heads of state despite 120 members, signaling waning commitment and isolation of host amid domestic crises. Efforts to foster economic self-reliance through South-South cooperation largely faltered, as NAM failed to establish viable alternatives to Northern-dominated and systems. Despite advocating for a (NIEO) at the 1973 Summit, which called for resource and technology transfers, intra-NAM remained marginal, with members continuing heavy reliance on Western and Soviet markets for exports and imports. The absence of institutionalized mechanisms, coupled with divergent development models—ranging from import-substitution in to state-led in —hindered collective bargaining power, leading to persistent dependencies on foreign aid and loans. Critics, including analyses of post-colonial economies, argue this reflected a failure of collective rhetoric to translate into structural reforms, as evidenced by the non-emergence of an equitable global economic framework and ongoing vulnerabilities exposed during debt crises in the 1980s. By the 1990s, with the Cold War's end, many members pivoted toward IMF/World Bank conditionalities or bilateral ties with rising powers like , bypassing NAM's visions.

Tolerance of Authoritarian Regimes and Suppression of Internal Reforms

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has been criticized for accommodating authoritarian governments among its members, with many founding leaders exercising autocratic control. , who co-initiated the 1961 Belgrade Conference, governed through the one-party League of Communists from 1945 until his death in 1980, suppressing political opposition and maintaining centralized power without multiparty elections. , another key founder, seized power in via a 1952 military coup and ruled as president until 1970, dissolving political parties and relying on emergency laws to curb dissent. of , similarly instrumental in NAM's formation, adopted increasingly authoritarian measures by the early , balancing alliances with communists and the military while sidelining democratic processes. This foundational tolerance extended to later memberships, such as Cuba's admission in 1979 under Fidel Castro's one-party communist system, which featured systematic political imprisonment and media control. NAM summits have routinely elevated such regimes, amplifying their legitimacy without addressing internal repression. Cuba hosted the 14th NAM Summit in in September 2006, presided over by during Fidel's hospitalization, despite the host's status as the Western Hemisphere's sole one-party communist state with documented restrictions on free expression and assembly. , under Nicolás Maduro's administration marked by electoral manipulations and opposition crackdowns since 2013, hosted the 17th Summit in 2016 on , where security lockdowns isolated the event amid domestic protests against government authoritarianism. chaired NAM during the 2012 Tehran Summit, featuring participation from leaders of , , and —regimes accused of war crimes and abuses—while the host suppressed domestic unrest under its theocratic framework. The movement's core principles, including non-interference in internal affairs and respect for , have precluded collective pressure for democratic reforms or accountability within member states, fostering a shield against external critiques of authoritarian practices. NAM documents and declarations emphasize external over domestic governance, resulting in negligible attention to internal oppressions such as political imprisonments in or land seizures and election rigging in , a member since 1980 under Robert Mugabe's 37-year rule. Critics contend this selective solidarity enables dictators to invoke NAM rhetoric for legitimacy, prioritizing bloc unity against perceived Western interference over fostering through accountable institutions. In UN forums, NAM coordination has often opposed country-specific scrutiny of members, reinforcing internal impunity.

Achievements and Impact

Diplomatic Wins in Anti-Colonialism and Global Advocacy

The inaugural Conference of 1961 established the Non-Aligned Movement's foundational opposition to , with participants declaring the need to eradicate colonial rule and support national liberation movements worldwide. The Belgrade Declaration emphasized efforts to address economic imbalances inherited from and , positioning NAM as a voice for newly independent states seeking to prevent neo-colonial exploitation. This early diplomatic stance provided a platform for coordination among African and Asian nations, amplifying calls for in ongoing struggles such as those in Portuguese Africa and . Subsequent summits reinforced these commitments, as seen in the 1964 Cairo Declaration, which identified , , and neo-colonialism as primary sources of international tension and threats to peace. NAM's diplomatic advocacy contributed to accelerating processes by offering political solidarity and pressuring colonial powers through unified resolutions and international forums. For instance, the movement's support facilitated the of several African territories in the and , including in 1964, by endorsing liberation fronts and isolating holdout regimes diplomatically. In the anti-apartheid campaign, NAM achieved notable diplomatic wins by consistently condemning South Africa's racial policies and providing a forum for to garner global support against the regime. The movement's resolutions equated apartheid with , mobilizing member states to impose sanctions and back the , which contributed to the regime's international isolation by the 1980s. This advocacy extended to Namibia's independence in 1990, where NAM's pressure in the helped enforce Resolution 435, leading to the end of South African occupation. Overall, NAM's efforts in these areas enhanced the diplomatic leverage of developing nations, fostering a post-colonial consensus on and equity.

Long-Term Legacy: Contributions and Persistent Shortcomings

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has left an enduring imprint on by providing a platform for developing nations to assert collective influence outside superpower blocs, particularly through its coordination in forums where NAM members, comprising over two-thirds of UN membership, have shaped voting blocs on issues like and . This mechanism, evolving from NAM's foundational summits, enabled sustained advocacy for and equitable , influencing outcomes such as the UN's emphasis on resolutions in the 1960s and 1970s. Furthermore, NAM institutionalized South-South cooperation, fostering technical exchanges and joint initiatives in areas like and among its 120 member states, which helped mitigate some dependencies on Northern aid during economic crises in the late . These efforts contributed to a diplomatic legacy of , where NAM's principles of informed post-Cold War dialogues on , as seen in its 1992 Summit's push for reformed global security structures. Despite these diplomatic gains, NAM's long-term economic legacy reveals persistent shortcomings in achieving self-reliance, as member states failed to establish viable alternatives to Western-dominated financial systems, resulting in continued reliance on institutions like the IMF and World Bank for and development loans through the 1990s and beyond. Internal divisions, exacerbated by ideological rifts—such as Sunni-Shia tensions or Cuba's alignment with Soviet proxies—undermined collective action, evident in NAM's inability to mediate intra-member conflicts like the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988) or enforce goals outlined in the 1973 Algiers Summit. Post-Cold War, the movement's relevance waned as many members gravitated toward emerging powers like via forums such as , diluting NAM's non-alignment ethos and exposing its structural weaknesses, including the absence of binding mechanisms or a permanent secretariat with enforcement powers. Critically, NAM's tolerance of authoritarian among leaders—without promoting internal democratic reforms—perpetuated governance failures, correlating with stagnant GDP growth in core members averaging under 2% annually from 1990 to 2010, far below global averages. This inertia extended to neglecting pressing transnational challenges, such as coordinated responses to or , where NAM declarations remained rhetorical without actionable frameworks.

References

  1. https://www.nti.org/education-center/treaties-and-regimes/non-aligned-movement-nam/
  2. https://www.mea.gov.in/images/pdf/Members-and-other-participants.pdf
  3. https://nam.go.ug/history
  4. https://www.globalsouthstudies.org/keyword-essay/belgrade-the-1961-non-aligned-conference/
  5. http://cns.miis.edu/nam/documents/Official_Document/1st_Summit_FD_Belgrade_Declaration_1961.pdf
  6. https://www.mea.gov.in/Speeches-Statements.htm?dtl/20349/History%2Band%2BEvolution%2Bof%2BNonAligned%2BMovement
  7. https://doi.org/10.5149/northcarolina/9781469655697.003.0007
  8. https://www.orfonline.org/research/non-alignment-in-the-era-of-the-global-south
  9. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1953-1960/bandung-conf
  10. https://www.southcentre.int/question/revisiting-the-1955-bandung-asian-african-conference-and-its-legacy/
  11. https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/final_communique_of_the_asian_african_conference_of_bandung_24_april_1955-en-676237bd-72f7-471f-949a-88b6ae513585.html
  12. https://nam.go.ug/bandung-principles
  13. https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/jfkpof-104-004
  14. https://www.diplomacy.bg.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/The-60th-Anniversary.pdf
  15. http://cns.miis.edu/nam/documents/Summit_Summary/FINAL_UPDATED_1st_Summit_Summary.pdf
  16. https://www.mfa.gov.bn/Pages/The-Non-Aligned-Movement-%28NAM%29-.aspx
  17. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45072404
  18. https://internationalrelations.org/non-aligned-movement/
  19. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/nonaligned-movement-meets
  20. https://www.cvce.eu/en/recherche/unit-content/-/unit/02bb76df-d066-4c08-a58a-d4686a3e68ff/0397bac4-10f2-4b69-8d1a-366ca4a08c34
  21. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/asia-and-africa
  22. http://cns.miis.edu/nam/documents/Official_Document/2nd_Summit_FD_Cairo_Declaration_1964.pdf
  23. https://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/bitstreams/9666ec02-d982-4573-a732-546523d8d601/download
  24. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/the-non-aligned-movement-and-the-north-south-conflict
  25. http://cns.miis.edu/nam/documents/Official_Document/6th_Summit_FD_Havana_Declaration_1979_Whole.pdf
  26. https://polsci.institute/international-relations/non-aligned-movement-theory-practice-impact/
  27. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-187560/
  28. https://www.cfr.org/blog/nonaligned-movements-crisis
  29. https://diplomatist.com/2020/05/14/non-aligned-movement-in-the-21st-century-relevant-or-no/
  30. https://forumias.com/blog/non-aligned-movement-challenges-relevance-explained-pointwise/
  31. https://www.fikerinstitute.org/publications/the-non-aligned-movement-history-relevance-reform
  32. https://www.usip.org/publications/2023/05/new-nonaligned-movement-having-moment
  33. https://www.greeneuropeanjournal.eu/the-non-aligned-movement-then-and-now/
  34. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/396155161_The_Role_of_the_Nonaligned_Movement_in_the_Post-Cold_War_era
  35. https://valdaiclub.com/a/highlights/the-non-aligned-movement-in-the-multipolar-world/
  36. https://www.meer.com/en/87472-the-non-aligned-movement-and-the-21st-century
  37. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/rise-nonaligned-multipolar-world-matias-spektor
  38. https://www.namazerbaijan.org/
  39. https://nam.go.ug/
  40. https://peoplesdispatch.org/2025/10/20/non-aligned-movement-leadership-renews-calls-for-multilateralism-reforms-in-global-institutions/
  41. https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/news/non-alignment-in-an-era-of-multi-polarity-28-87.html
  42. https://www.e-ir.info/2020/12/19/cuban-cold-war-internationalism-and-the-nonaligned-movement/
  43. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025HRuAS..95S.111N/abstract
  44. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14682745.2024.2341229
  45. https://namchrcd.ir/portal/viewpage/16407
  46. https://www.worlddata.info/alliances/non-aligned-movement.php
  47. https://nam.go.ug/observer-countries
  48. https://www.csstc.org/v_ket1.asp?info=14&mn=1
  49. https://namazerbaijan.org/pdf/Members-and-observers.pdf
  50. https://nam.go.ug/working-mechanisms
  51. https://nam.go.ug/previous-chairmanship-documents
  52. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1868&context=jil
  53. https://pressbooks.ccconline.org/his2015/chapter/the-non-aligned-movement-nam/
  54. http://cns.miis.edu/nam/documents/Official_Document/5th_Summit_FD_Sri_Lanka_Declaration_1976_Whole.pdf
  55. https://unidir.org/files/2020-10/2019_NAM%2520Summit%2520final%2520doc.pdf
  56. https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2023/07/11/non-aligned-movement-counters-neo-colonialism/
  57. https://www.odu.edu/sites/default/files/documents/third-self-determination.pdf
  58. https://mofa.gov.bs/the-non-aligned-movement-and-the-group-of-77-south-south-cooperation-in-multilateral-diplomacy/
  59. https://www.partners-popdev.org/docs/PPD_South-South_Book.pdf
  60. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sanja-Jelisavac-Trosic/publication/354016118_The_Non-Aligned_Movement_Fight_for_the_New_International_Economic_Order/links/61546e1ffd7b3d121562db4c/The-Non-Aligned-Movement-Fight-for-the-New-International-Economic-Order.pdf
  61. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09614524.2025.2534149
  62. https://unctad.org/system/files/information-document/ecidc-2022-south-south-cooperation-roadmap_en.pdf
  63. https://www.southcentre.int/tag/non-aligned-movement-nam/page/2/
  64. https://archive.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/200-reform/41260-egypts-position-on-security-council-reform-on-behalf-of-the-non-aligned-movement.html
  65. https://sdg.iisd.org/news/non-aligned-movement-reaffirms-multilateralism-inclusive-trading-system/
  66. https://apnews.com/article/uganda-non-aligned-movement-israel-gaza-palestinian-22c852bd408cda0a904431d913728f32
  67. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/19/non-aligned-movement-criticises-israeli-war-in-gaza-at-kampala-summit
  68. https://www.heritage.org/global-politics/commentary/the-new-non-aligned-movement
  69. https://jia.sipa.columbia.edu/content/russia-ukraine-war-and-non-aligned-south-asia-steady-walk-amidst-great-power-politics
  70. https://www.greeneuropeanjournal.eu/engaging-with-the-global-south-on-ukraine/
  71. https://www.securityincontext.org/posts/the-global-south-and-the-russia-ukraine-war-nonalignment-and-western-responses-on-cusp-of-multipolar-world
  72. https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/09/10/nonalignment-superpowers-developing-world-us-west-russia-china-india-geopolitics-ukraine-war-sanctions/
  73. https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/blog/defence-non-alignment
  74. https://www.namstct.org/
  75. https://www.csstc.org/
  76. https://namchrcd.ir/
  77. https://www.namyouth.org/
  78. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80T00942A000900060001-9.pdf
  79. http://cns.miis.edu/nam/documents/Official_Document/NAM-Document-Methodology-Cartagena-1996.pdf
  80. http://cns.miis.edu/nam/documents/Official_Document/NAM-Document-Methodology-Havana-2006.pdf
  81. https://uia.org/s/or/en/1100056207
  82. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000065633
  83. https://yugoblok.com/nonaligned-movement4/
  84. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81B00401R002500060012-9.pdf
  85. https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/ncm-5/cpml-cuba.htm
  86. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp80t00942a000900060001-9
  87. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/non-alignment-movement-political-science-view
  88. https://www.usip.org/publications/2023/05/its-not-about-picking-sides-nonaligned-movement-and-russian-aggression
  89. https://dspace.pass.ps/bitstream/123456789/291/1/The_Non_Aligned_Movement_6_Decades_of_No.pdf
  90. https://www.dw.com/en/only-eight-foreign-leaders-confirm-attendance-at-lavish-venezuela-summit/a-19559457
  91. https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2016/9/18/venezuela-non-aligned-summit-fizzles-for-maduro
  92. https://www.pmfias.com/non-aligned-movement/
  93. https://frontline.thehindu.com/other/article30189478.ece
  94. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304019955_Collective_self-reliance_failed_idea_or_still_a_valuable_contribution_worth_considering
  95. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Non-Aligned-Movement
  96. https://openstax.org/books/world-history-volume-2/pages/14-3-the-non-aligned-movement
  97. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/08/non-aligned-with-reality-how-a-global-movement-for-peace-became-a-club-for-tyrants/261737/
  98. https://www.npr.org/2006/09/18/6095910/non-aligned-movement-defines-new-purpose
  99. https://www.cubanet.org/htdocs/CNews/y06/sep06/18e6.htm
  100. https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2016/09/19/inenglish/1474287044_430254.html
  101. https://fiveable.me/key-terms/ap-world/non-aligned-movement
  102. https://explaininghistory.org/2025/10/21/the-birth-of-the-non-aligned-movement-from-bandung-to-belgrade/
  103. https://www.southcentre.int/question/why-nam-is-still-relevant-today/
  104. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/war-peace/brics-and-the-legacy-of-the-non-aligned-movement/90043375
  105. https://thedialectics.org/td-explains-legacy-of-non-aligned-movement/
  106. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387424195_The_Non-Aligned_Movement_and_the_Unfulfilled_Promises
  107. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387424178_A_Legacy_of_Missed_Opportunities_of_the_Non-Aligned_Movement
  108. https://ris.org.in/sites/default/files/Mittal-2016-Non-Aligned%2520Movement-min.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.