INDIA AND THE COLD WAR
INDIA AND THE COLD WAR
As a leader of NAM, India’s stand was at two-fold:
i. Staying away from the two alliances.
ii. Inspire decolonised countries not to join any alliance.
-> India’s policy as NAM was neither negative nor passive in Cold War:
Neither negative: India chose to involve other members of the non-aligned group in this mission. Nehru reposed great faith in ‘a genuine commonwealth of free and cooperating nations’ that would play a positive role in softening, if not ending, the Cold War. As Nehru explained, non-alignment as not a policy of ‘fleeing away’.
Nor Passive: India actively intervened in world affairs to soften Cold War rivalries & tried to reduce the differences between the alliances and prevent from escalating into a full-scale war. Indian diplomats and leaders were often used to communicate and mediate between Cold War rivals such as in the Korean war. India repeatedly tried to activate those regional and international organisations, which were not a part of the alliances.
-> NAM served India’s interests in two ways:
(i)Allowed India to take international decisions and stances that served its interests.
(ii)India was often able to balance one superpower against the other.
-> India’s policy of non-alignment was criticised by foreign observer:
(i) Unprincipled: It was said that India refused to take a firm stand on crucial international issues by the name of pursuing national interests. Because India led the world protest against Britain over Suez canal issue in 1956. But when USSR attacked in Afghanistan, India couldn’t so.
(ii) Inconsistent and took contradictory postures: As India signed the Treaty of Friendship in August 1971 with the USSR for 20 years.
Indian Government clarification: ?
After 1991, non-alignment lost some of its earlier relevance and effectiveness. However, non-alignment contained some core values and enduring ideas:
(i) NAM was based on a historical affiliation and can become a powerful force if newly decolonised country come together. Concept of NAM state that poor/small countries of the world can pursue an independent foreign policy.
(ii) NAM can democratise the international system by thinking about an alternative world order to redress existing inequities.