NAM at a crossroads: Analysing India’s diplomatic choices and priorities

Gurjit Singh 

India’s evolving role in the Non-Aligned Movement and its strategic choices at the recent Kampala Summit underscores the challenges and changing dynamics within the organisation

India’s championing of the Global South at the G20, including the induction of the African Union as a member, brought forth the salience of existing institutions in the Global South. One of these is the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). India, though a founder of this movement, has been distancing itself due to the maverick nature of some recent chairmen.Advertisement

The External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, represented India at the NAM summit in Kampala, Uganda, fulfilling a promise he had made during his visit to Uganda in April 2023. Besides him, Minister of State RR Singh led the Indian delegation at the ministerial segment. Another Minister of State, V Murleedharan, participated in the meeting of the G77 that followed. Jaishankar could not participate in the G77 meeting as he was committed to a joint commission meeting in Nigeria, where he met with the new leadership.You May LikeLatest Technology NewsWirewinkRead More  by Taboola Sponsored Links 

In some ways, the participation of the EAM is, protocol-wise, the lowest since 2012. That was the last time an Indian prime minister attended a NAM summit when Manmohan Singh went to Iran. In 2016, the summit in Venezuela saw India represented by then vice president Hamid Ansari. In 2019, the chairmanship shifted to Azerbaijan, and India was again represented by then vice president, Venkaiah Naidu. Although the EAM ranks lower in protocol than the vice president, his persona and stature reflect India’s current standing in the Global South more accurately.Advertisement

Domestic compulsions made it impossible for Prime Minister Narendra Modi to go, but Modi has never participated in a NAM summit since 2014. Before that, Indian prime ministers always attended NAM summits, except Chaudhary Charan Singh in 1979.

When Cuba assumed the chair of NAM in 1979, eyebrows were raised. India was then requested to take up the chair in 1983 instead of Iraq, which was at war. This move restored the prestige of NAM for several years.Advertisement

Since the summit is held once every three years, the sequence of chairs from Iran, Venezuela, to Azerbaijan shows a lack of willingness among major countries to chair NAM. Recent chairs were not mainstream countries that added stature to the movement; instead, they were countries seeking sustenance from the chairmanship.

In Uganda, there is a mix of several factors, but the level of participation and engagement remains largely the same. NAM has 120 members, 20 observers, and 10 international organizations in attendance. It is the largest gathering of countries outside the UN. This marks the seventh time that NAM is hosted in Africa. Egypt hosted twice, and five others have now hosted. Among the previous chairs, South Africa and Zimbabwe had presidents, Algeria at the level of the prime minister, Egypt with the foreign minister, and Zambia through its defence minister. This lacks a pattern of commitment from past African chairs.Advertisement

For Uganda, this was the largest diplomatic event since hosting the Commonwealth Summit in 2007. Presently, Uganda is in the crosshairs of Western countries due to its overt anti-gay laws. The summit was held at the Speke Resort Munyonyo on the banks of Lake Victoria. The theme of the summit is ‘Deepening Cooperation for Shared Global Affluence.’ Uganda will hold the leadership until 2027.Advertisement

South Asia, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and the Maldives were all represented by foreign ministers. The Sri Lankan president and the prime minister of Nepal attended. Among the BRICS members, the South African President participated, Brazil as an observer, and China and Russia, though not NAM members, sent senior delegates. Among the new BRICS members, Iran had its first vice president, Ethiopia its prime minister, Egypt its foreign minister, Saudi Arabia its deputy FM, and the UAE its Minister of State.Advertisement

Between the last summit in Azerbaijan and now, two major crises emerged in Ukraine and Gaza. Gaza, in particular, adds a new dimension to NAM, as all countries are united in their condemnation of Israel and support for a Palestinian state, including its admission to the United Nations. NAM received full support from the UN Secretary-General’s statement and the chair of the African Union Commission. This was not a summit without a conflict to coalesce around. The Kampala Declaration’s condemnation of Israel and its activities in Gaza is vehement. Ukraine was deftly avoided because it is part of the big power rivalry with which NAM does not want to get involved again.Advertisement

Important issues, like the reform of the multilateral system, including the UN Security Council, and international financial institutions, were discussed. They largely followed the lead provided by the G20 Leaders’ Declaration because consensus on that already exists. The Kampala Declaration also sought the implementation of the SDGs, food security, dealing with pandemics, terrorism, and the like. The current emphasis on each of them differs because of circumstances, but the issues are consistent in the NAM agenda.Advertisement

How much will NAM influence international politics for now and attain the outcomes it desires? Most of the declaration is a reiteration of known positions, even on the Gaza issue. NAM members voted in their own ways in the UNGA. It is unlikely that the declaration is going to make a big difference to individual positions that countries adopt or their engagement with the big powers and China.Advertisement

The cohesive demand and voice are clear. India utilized the voice of the Global South, but it had the G20 Summit as a process to articulate those priorities. Where will NAM now place these priorities? Cohesion is often missing when negotiating at the UN, at the WTO, at the Climate Change Conference, and the like.Advertisement

The fact that out of 120 countries, only 90 participated, with 30 sending high-level delegations, perhaps speaks for itself. NAM summits are losing their lustre. Like India, many countries are not attending at high levels. Wouldn’t it be better for them to start working at the ministerial level and become more functional and cohesive?Advertisement

The writer is a former ambassador to Germany, Indonesia, Ethiopia, ASEAN and the African Union. He tweets @AmbGurjitSingh. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost_’s views._