How did the Non-Aligned Movement’s (NAM) communication with its member countries promote its successes and failures during the Cold War?
Section A: Plan of Investigation
The goal is to understand the effect of the Non-Aligned Movement on the Cold War between East and West during 1949-1989. A structured foundation was formed by the first members of NAM: Nehru of India, Tito of Yugoslavia, Nasser of Egypt, Sukarno of Indonesia and Nkrumah of Ghana. NAM was created during the collapse of the colonial system and independence struggles of many countries at the height of the Cold War. NAM formed in an effort to dissolve differences between the Western Bloc and Eastern Bloc and to resolve tensions between the military powers after World War II. NAM’s members held more than half the world’s population and believed in peace and equality for all with no regard to any conflicts. Its fundamental ideologies warrant for additional investigation to analyze its effect in ending the Cold War.
Since NAM was organized, it has made efforts to stop the oppression by foreign occupation and violation of human rights. While promoting mutual interests, the organization embodied the fact that internal conflicts should be resolved by respective nations. Areas of investigation include researching the evolution of NAM, its principles, purpose and role during Cold War. Methods of study will include reading appropriate books, materials, online resources, articles and related documents.
Word Count: 207
Section B: Summary of Evidence
Transition from WWII to the Cold War
• Primary concerns after WWII include “rights of independent nation states and the Cold War …”.
• Third world countries avoided membership
• They sought an inde...
... middle of paper ...
...y and cooperative voting in the UN General Assembly, but they were never in a position that would allow them to challenge the dominance of the two major powers.
Word Count: 136
Section F: Bibliography
Works Cited:
Anthony, Anson. "NON ALIGNED MOVEMENT DOCUMENTARY." YouTube. YouTube, 01 Oct. 2012. Web. 13 Oct. 2013.
Arnold, Guy, and Guy Arnold. The A to Z of the Non-aligned Movement and Third World. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow, 2010. Print.
Gaddis, John Lewis. The Cold War: A New History. London [etc.: Penguin, 2007. Print.
Gentile, Sal. "Is a Nuclear-free Mideast Possible?" PBS. PBS, 12 May 2010. Web. 13 Oct. 2013.
"NAM Background Information." NAM Background Information. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2013.
Potter, William C., and Gaukhar Mukhatzhanova. Nuclear Politics and the Non-aligned Movement: Principles vs Pragmatism. Abingdon: Routledge, 2012. Print.
Symonds, Peter. "World Socialist Web Site ." US think tank report weighs up "grim future' of nuclear war (2013).
Clausewitz emphasizes that “war is a branch of political activity, that it is in no sense autonomous” (Clausewitz, 605). This principle is especially applicable to the post-war period of World War II. The political struggle between the ideologies of democracy and communism would entail global focus for the next 50 years, and the events that brought about the defeat of Germany shaped the landscape of this political struggle.
International organizations such as NATO and the UN are essential not only for global peace, but also as a place where middle powers can exert their influence. It is understandable that since the inception of such organizations that many crises have been averted, resolved, or dealt with in some way thro...
Scott D. Sagan, the author of chapter two of “More Will Be Worse”, looks back on the deep political hostilities, numerous crises, and a prolonged arms race in of the cold war, and questions “Why should we expect that the experience of future nuclear powers will be any different?” The author talks about counter arguments among scholars on the subject that the world is better off without nuclear weapons. In this chapter a scholar named Kenneth Waltz argues that “The further spread of nuclear weapons may well be a stabilizing factor in international relations.” He believes that the spread of nuclear weapons will have a positive implications in which the likely-hood of war decreases and deterrent and defensive capabilities increase. Although there
At the end of the catastrophic World War II on October 24, 1945, fifty-one nations gathered to officially form the United Nations, an organization that promoted peace and security for all of its members. Despite the success of establishing a worldwide peace-keeping force, tensions were high between the powers of the Western Bloc (the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Eastern Bloc (the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact). Ironically, a mere five years after the formation of the UN, the first major outbreak in the Cold War occurred: the Korean War. The effects of the Korean War would not only forever change the state of North and South Korea, but also have a significant effect on all the other nations involved in the Korean War.
Failure of the Détente Between the Superpowers The French word ‘détente’, which the Oxford English Dictionary describes as “the easing of strained relations, especially in a political situation” (www.oed.com), first appeared in this context when a German newspaper used it to describe the visit of a British monarch at the beginning of the 20th century (Froman, 1991). In this essay, I will attempt to explain the cold war détente between the superpowers of the USA and the USSR in the 1970’s, concentrating first on its positive developments between 1971 and 1973 and then on the events that lead to its ultimate failure, symbolised by the soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. The first real steps of relaxation of tensions were taken with the Moscow summit and the signing of the SALT 1 (Strategic Arms Limitations Talks) agreement in May 1972. The SALT agreement was a staring point for attempts to control nuclear arms, to restrict the impact and spread of nuclear weapons and to secure a balance due to ‘Mutual Assured Destruction’ (the notion that a nuclear attack from one side would lead to a retaliation from the other and therefore both sides would be greatly damaged) between the two superpowers and were to be followed up by further arms limitations talks within the next five years (Kent and Young, 2004). Also, agreements were reached on lowering the risk of accidental confrontation and on cooperation in science, health and environmental issues.
Nuclear issue in the North Korea has been a problem widely discussed around the world in recent years, while the whole progress from the start of the nuclear crisis (The withdrawal of the North Korea from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2003) to the cooperation (Six Party Talks) and its failure is quite dramatic and worth exploring (Fang, 2009). This paper attempted to use two perspectives including neorealism and neoliberalism to look at the issue, and examine their explanatory power. Accordingly, this paper recognized the importance of the two perspectives in explaining the issue. On one hand, neorealism showed the restraints and balancing behaviors of the states during the process of negotiation, implying the failure of the talks. On the other hand, neoliberalism contributed to clarification of the complexity constituted by different actors and problems in the issue, while demonstrating the rationality of states, as well as the birth of the institution forming international norms. Therefore, the author believed the two perspectives are not contradictory, but complementary.
The League of Nations was an Intergovernmental Organisation which persisted from 1919 up until 1946 where it was formally replaced with the United Nations towards the end of the Second World War. Many consider the League as one of the International Systems greatest failures due to it being widely regarded as an ‘ineffective instrument to tackle aggressors’ (Catterall, 1999, p. 52) and its inherent failure to prevent international conflict. However,
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, a NAM member state, in December 1979 occurred at the beginning of Cuba’s tenure of chair position. As the NAM was built upon values to “fight against oppression, racism, Zionism, and fascism,” it also sought to ensure “independence of all countries and peoples” which was not shown to be a priority for Cuba while it was holding chair of the movement because it did not act upon the invasion of a member country. By not condemning the invasion, many member states felt the movement’s principles were compromised as Cuba exerted pro-Soviet views on the movement, showing how it was re-orienting it based on its own values.
With the shock of two destructive world wars and then the creation of the United Nations, whose aim is to preserve peace, it is unconceivable for these two nations to fight directly in order to promote their own ideology. But the US and the USSR end up to be in competition in numerous ways, particularly in technological and industrial fields. In the same time they start to spread their influence over their former allies. This phenomenon have led to the creation of a bipolar world, divided in two powerful blocs surrounded by buffer zones, and to the beginning of what we call the Cold War because of the absence of direct conflicts between the two nations.
The time period between 1945 and 1991 is considered to be the era of the Cold War. The Cold War, known as the conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union, each known during this time as the “super powers”. This conflict consisted of the differing attitudes on the ideological, political, and military interests of these two states and their allies, exte nded around the globe. A common political debate covers the issue of who, if anyone won the Cold War. Many believe the United States won the Cold War since (it) had resulted in the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union. While others are to believe the United States had not won it as much as the Soviet Union had lost it since they feel Reagan did not end the Cold War, but that he prolonged it (Baylis & Smith, 2001.) This has lead me to believe that there is no winner, only losers of the cold war. The cold war for the Soviet Union was to ensure security, block out capitalism, gain power, and improve their economy. While, on the other hand the United States just wanted to stop the spread of communism, which they felt, would spread rapidly throughout the world if they did not put an end to it soon. Both the United States and the Soviet Union wanted to avoid WWIII in the process of trying to achieve their goals.
“The Cold War” is a broad term for the international order between 1945 and 1989. From proxy wars to space programs, and propaganda to independence movements, nationalism is the common denominator that truly catalyzed the major confrontations of the time period. Nationalism is defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy as, “(1) the attitude that the members of a nation have when they care about their national identity, and (2) the actions that the members of a nation take when seeking to achieve (or sustain) self-determination”. Nationalism shaped international political maneuvers throughout the cold war because it created solidarity, was blended
The international system is an anarchical system which means that, unlike the states, there is no over ruling, governing body that enforces laws and regulations that all states must abide by. The International System in today’s society has become highly influential from a number of significant factors. Some of these factors that will be discussed are Power held by the state, major Wars that have been fought out in recent history and international organisations such as the U.N, NATO and the W.T.O. Each of these factors, have a great influence over the international system and as a result, the states abilities to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development”.
The negotiations on the nuclear threat and the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula have recently shaped the agenda of the North Korean system of international relations, thus affecting the patterns of foreign policy of the DPRK. This issue has gained such a priority to lead to the establishment of the 6PT experiment, thus proving to stand at the core of the debate on the stability and safety debate in the Northeast Asia region. The theory of realism provides reasons why North Korea has positioned the nuclear weapon debate at the centre of its policy. One of the fundamental assumptions of Realism is in fact that each state, embedded in an international order characterized by a condition of antagonism, attempts to pursue its national interest. Besides that, the overriding national interest is defined in terms of national security and survival.
The New Cold War. Great Britain: Bloomsbury Publishing. Weber, Smith, Allan, Collins, Morgan and Entshami. 2002. Foreign Policy in a Transformed World. United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited.