The world's poor need to learn the lessons of history
BY LYNN Ockersz
WHILE the coming together of some 90 states from the Asian and
African continents for the forging of "a new strategic alliance to boost
trade and tackle poverty", needs to be considered as most encouraging in
a global political economy which tends to disunite states rather than
unite them, a word of caution would need to be raised on the need for
consistent, concerted and decisive action on the part of these
continents from now on, for the fulfilment of their ambitious project.
Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi enjoys a Hula-Hoop dance
with a child as he visits Banda Aceh city 23 April, 2005, where it
was hit by tsunami last December. Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi
visited Indonesia to attend the Asia Africa Summit 2005 in Jakarta. |
To begin with, the very convening of the summit of the African and
Asian leaders in Jakarta over the weekend proved that at least from the
point of view of the majority of developing countries, the issues of the
early years of the new millennium are identical to those of the Sixties.
In a very vital sense, for these states, the majority of whom remain
in the Third World, nothing has changed in terms of the prospects of
economic development, from those early Cold War years of the Fifties and
Sixties when it was conceived as advantageous for the newly decolonized
poor of Asia and Africa to raise an independent voice and presence in
global politics.
As known, this led to the historic Bandung meet of 1955 and the
subsequent launching of the Non Aligned Movement, which gave the poor of
the world, a distinct political identity.
How the NAM fared in the Cold War years in now well known. The honest
truth is that nothing particularly substantial was achieved by NAM
because of a lack of commitment on its part to united, decisive and
disinterested action to achieve its core objectives.
It was very often a case of even key members of NAM tying themselves
to either of the rival, Cold War power blocs and speaking hypocritically
of being nonaligned in world politics. Some even joined
superpower-sponsored military alliances - South Asia not being an
exception.
Eventually, NAM summits came to be described "talk shops" by
particularly sections of the Western media and eventually NAM came to be
derided by the same quarters as a spent force. Particularly in the
immediate post Cold War years of the early Nineties, NAM was seen by
many as a lost cause.
While these interpretations of how NAM was developing were open to
question, the fact that nothing very substantial was achieved by the
Movement in terms of its founding ideals, seemed to prove its critics
right.
The coming together in Jakarta of principal Asian and African
countries, however, out of what seems to be a continuing commonality of
interests, indicates that the tables have been turned in this debate.
The economic compulsions of the Sixties, for instance, which
compelled NAM and its allies in the UN system, such as UNCTAD, and the
Group of '77, to campaign for a New International Economic Order, are
apparently continuing to be present in this age of economic
globalization.
For one, the global economy is proving a great divider, with the gulf
widening between the top economic powers and the majority of Third World
states, which are proving increasingly poor. Besides, the majority of
developing countries are proving incapable of negotiating the pressures
of the new global economy.
Therefore, as far as the majority of developing countries are
concerned, the challenges of the early NAM years remain and this is the
reason why a closing of ranks between the African and Asian continents
is seen to be necessary.
One could agree with Indian Premier Manmohan Singh that we need to
revitalize NAM to "make it a vehicle for rapid social and economic
transformation and emancipation of our lives".
However, this time round, the world's poor need to learn the relevant
lessons from their past if they are to bring a measure of material
relief to their masses.
They will need to charter an independent course in global politics
and strive for a measure of cultural autonomy if their core aims are to
be achieved. NAM would need to realize, in particular, that economic,
political and cultural independence reinforce each other. |