The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), born in the intense heat of the Cold War era, served the mankind for a quarter of a century. True, this movement had served the intensely divided world between East and West as champion of peace and extinguisher of the rancour and

acrimony between the two leading military blocs — one led by NATO and the other by the Warsaw Pact.

Undoubtedly, the movement made a great service as a protecter and promoter of national interests and independence of the host of newly-emerging nations of the Africa and Asia. Unmistakably, its unforgettable contributions as an unflinching champion of smaller and weaker countries of these continents for their self-sustaining political image and sovereign identity, and also as intermediary of peace between the then hostile political opponents, had gone down in history as exemplary achievements during the Cold War.

However, its importance started declining from the mid-eighties, with the beginning of détente between the US and the then Soviet Union, culminating in establishing entente between those principal rivals in the late eighties. Its role diminished drastically when the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, subsequently hastening the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, leaving NATO as the only military organisation with no other serious military rival to match it.

As a consequence of the Soviet Union’s collapse, NAM faced confusion and bewilderment, not knowing which direction to take. In its recent performance no meaningful socio-economic agenda has been tackled. It had been highly limited in its activities — mainly as perceived initiator and promoter of opinion for peace and security. This movement has been veering around in the past decade to brace itself to steer the direction of the socio-economic concern of its member states. However, no tangible result could be felt. No declarations made by several summits could produce any convincing outcome to testify its relevance in the changed situation.

Certainly, there exist innumerable problems on the global scale. Democratising the international relationship and international system, in particular, making the decision process of the United Nations’ development programmes and security questions more democratic, eliminating governance gaps in the globalisation process in a visible way, finding greater say in the decisions of the international economic order, financial management and trade matters — these remain elusive for the Third World countries. Added to these problems are

environmental degradation, growing hunger and disease, terrorism and extremism, yawning gap between rich and poor countries etc. that still rule the day. The Non-Aligned group of 116 members with its huge population account for 61 per cent of the members of the UN. This sheer strength can exert influence on world affairs, if a unified approach for common goals is embraced.

Challenges are not insurmountable and problems are not without solutions. NAM, if it wishes to keep its reputation, must gear up to face the stark realities of today’s free market-oriented world. If it shies away from tackling those myriad problems, it will soon become a movement of the past, not leaving any legacy for the posterity of the developing and underdeveloped countries. Numerous challenges and problems thus stand in the way of the Non-Aligned Movement, but the challenges enumerated above deserve immediate attention. The periodic holding of the summit is a great event drawing attention of the media worldwide. Such an event of wider attention must prove itself as an occasion for achievements for the needy countries and the people. Occasion lost means opportunity wasted.

The holding of XIV summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Cuba this September should not go as a mere occasion of lining up of a long convoy of world leaders on a pilgrimage for some perfunctory performance of rituals. People expect it to show some ability to make a greater contribution to the world, if it intends to keep its relevance intact. Nepal, since the inception of the movement in September 1961, had been participating in the summit at the highest level. However, this time around Nepal is attending the summit at a lesser level. Intellectuals and experts have shown diminished interest in the movement. Both the government and the public seem apathetic towards it. All these reflect the malaise, discordant note and political haziness in Nepal, sadly indicating lesser importance attached to the movement.

However, the role of non-alignment as our external policy has not yet diminished in the context of Nepal’s geo-strategic

position despite the antiquity and inadequacies of the movement. Nepal with like-minded countries needs to rejuvenate and reinvigorate the movement with innovative ideas and matching actions to make it strong and relevant.

Shrestha is an ex-foreign ministry official