60 years after the 1961 Belgrade Conference of Non-Aligned Countries, the bipolar geopolitical order of the world has disappeared since 30 years, if it is counted from the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. Yet, the Non-Aligned Movement as alternative to bipolarism continues to operate. It is the largest grouping of states worldwide after the UN. 120 state members of the movement continue to organise periodically their summit involving their heads of state or of government. The most recent one was the 18th and took place on October 25-26, 2019 in Baku, Azerbeijan. How come the movement continues to survive while the bipolarism as its “raison d'être” does not exist anymore? Is there any “hidden meaning” of “non-alignment”? Is there any “non-alignment” on other issues than “bipolarism”?
In his view, Samir Amin affirmed that Bandung and Non Aligned Movement were essentially, since the beginning, “non-aligned” to imperialism, colonialism and domination that now metamorphosed into globalisation. “The real story of Bandung and Non-Alignment that arose from it showed that the peoples of Asia and Africa actually seized at the time an initiative by themselves and for themselves. The reader will find in what I have written a demonstration that the Non-Alignment was already a movement of countries non aligned on globalisation in contrast to the globalisation that the imperialist powers wanted to impose on countries that had regained their independence, substituting the deceased colonialism with a neocolonialism.” He continued: “Non-Alignment constituted a refusal to comply with the requirements of this renewed imperialist globalisation” (Samir Amin, The Revival of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, May 2014, article published at several websites including https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-revival-of-the-movement-of-non-aligned-countries/5383510). It is in line with his theory of “Delinking” defined in short as “the refusal to submit national development strategy to the imperative of globalization” (Samir Amin, A Note on the Concept of Delinking, Review, Fernand Braudel Center, vol. 10, no. 3, 1987, pp. 435–444. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40241067 ).
How about facts and realities? Do the state members of NAM agree with the view of Samir Amin? Are the NAM state members “non-aligned” to globalisation? Does the national development strategy of the NAM state members reflect a “delinking” phenomenon? How are the relations between NAM state members with former blocs of superpowers: the West Bloc (Western Europe and North America) and the East Bloc (Central and Eastern Europe, Russia, China), past and present? What are the role and the place of peoples and other non-state actors, civil society, social and solidarity movements, academics, workers, trade unions… in this global geopolitics?
It is to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Belgrade Conference of Non-Aligned Countries that those questions are chosen to be the main subject of presentation and discussion of the fifth edition of The Rise of Asia Conference Series. It encourages the participation of scholars from a wide range of scientific disciplines (area studies, cultural studies, ecology, economics, geography, history, humanities, languages, management, political and social sciences…) and practitioners from diverse professional fields (business, civil society, education, enterprise, government, management, parliament, public policy, social and solidarity movements…) as well as artists and writers, based in diverse geographical areas (Africa, North, Central and South America, Australia, Asia, the Caribbean, Europe, Oceania, Pacific…).
See more at http://www.bandungspirit.org/