Non-Alignment

The global environment that India faced after independence was very different from what existed before the Second World War. The major players on the world stage before the War, namely, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Japan, lay subdued, their vast empires shrunken or shrinking fast. The United States, which had followed an isolationist policy, keeping aloof from active international involvement, became dramatically active. The Soviet Union had acquired unprecedented influence in Eastern Europe besides gaining recognition as a powerful state for crushing the German might on the Eastern Front where most of the German military casualties had occurred. If the US demonstrated its nuclear weapon capability in 1945, the USSR followed suit with its own nuclear test in 1949. The Cold War that began in the wake of the Second World War had no precedent in history. Almost the entire developed world was divided into two opposing nuclear-armed blocs, with the US and the USSR leading as ‘super powers’. The balance of power diplomacy of the pre-war years thus disappeared from the industrialised countries. The Third World became a surrogate field for super power competition. Meanwhile, decolonisation was proceeding apace, and more and more independent countries were emerging, mostly in Asia and Africa. China was aligned with the Soviet Union till the mid-fifties. India found itself the largest country with the ability to manoeuvre between the two blocs.

At this point of time, the Soviet Union did not possess the economic or military support capability to influence the countries emerging from the colonial yoke. It was the West, which tried to incorporate the newly independent countries into its strategic grouping. Alignment with the West was economically attractive, but it would have created a dependent relationship, which was seen by most of the newly independent countries as obstructive to a self-reliant development. The idea of aligning with the communist bloc was not possible for India, in spite of its socialist leanings; it could not visualise a Chinese-type restructuring of the society and economy, being basically attuned to a liberal democratic political vision. Political non-alignment was, therefore, prudent as well as pragmatic.

The principles of non-interference in the domestic affairs of other countries and maintenance of one’s own sovereignty (which are the basic postulates of India’s foreign policy) evolved into the crystallisation of the concept of non-alignment. The term ‘non-alignment’ got currency in the post-Bandung Conference (1955). Non-alignment implies

Five Criteria of Non-alignment

The Preparatory Committee of the first non-aligned conference laid down the following five criteria of non-alignment:

(i) A country should follow an independent policy based on peaceful co-existence and non-alignment.

(ii) It should have consistently supported national freedom movements in other countries.

(iii) It should not be a member of multi-lateral military alliances concluded in the context of super-power conflicts.

(iv) If it has conceded military bases, these concessions should not have been made in the context of super-power conflicts.

(v) If it is a member of a bilateral or regional defence arrangements, this should not be in the context of super-power politics.

Five Pioneering Leaders of the NAM

(i) President Tito (original name Josip Broz) of Yugoslavia

(ii) President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt

(iii) President Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana

(iv) President Sukarno of Indonesia

(v) Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru of India

the active refusal of a state to align itself with either party in a dispute between two power blocs. In the conference of non-aligned powers—the first non-aligned movement or NAM summit—held in Belgrade in 1961 and attended by 36 Mediterranean and Afro-Asian powers, Jawaharlal Nehru explained the essence of non-alignment: “We call ourselves the conference of non-aligned countries. Now the word non- aligned may be differently interpreted but basically it was used and coined almost with the meaning: non aligned with greater power blocs of the world. Non-aligned has a negative meaning but if you give it a positive connotation it means nations which object to this lining up for war purpose, military blocs, military alliances and the like. Therefore, we keep away from this and we want to throw our weight, such as it is, in favour of peace”.

Non-alignment is the characteristic feature of India’s foreign policy. India was one of the founder-members of NAM. In the Cold War era, India refused to favour any super power and remained non-aligned. Non-alignment, however, is not to be confused with neutrality. A neutral state remains inactive or passive during hostilities between two blocs. Neutrality is maintained basically in times of war, whereas non-alignment has relevance both in times of war and peace. Neutrality is equivalent to passivity, a neutral country has no opinions (positive or negative) on issues at all. However, adherence to non-alignment is to have positive and constructive opinions on international issues. India has firmly and convincingly asserted its ‘non-aligned’ and not ‘neutral’ stand on various issues. Non-alignment as one of the principles of India’s foreign policy attempts to promote international peace, disarmament and territorial independence. It aims at democratisation of international relations by putting an end to imperialism and hegemony and establishing a just and equal world order.

Chapter 37

First General Elections

With the Constitution coming into force in 1950, India no longer had a dominion status and could sever any remaining links with Britain; it was a sovereign democratic republic. The provisions of the Constitution relating to citizenship and Article 324 (the Election Commission) were brought into force on November 26, 1949, while the rest of the Constitution came into force on January 26, 1950. The next year, the government wanted to go in for general elections to constitute the House of the People—the Lok Sabha—as provided for in the Constitution.

The founding fathers of the Indian Constitution incorporated certain aspects of the electoral procedure in the Constitution itself (Part XV, Articles 324 to 329).