International Relation and Organization - BAPol Science VTH Sem English - 21072017

INTERNATIONAL RELATION
AND
ORGANIZATION
BA [ Political Science ]
Fifth Semester
EDCN 803C
[ENGLISH EDITION]
Directorate of Distance Education

TRIPURA UNIVERSITY
Reviewer
Dr Biswaranjan Mohanty
Assistance Professor, Department of Political Science, SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi
Authors:
Miss Lianboi Vaiphei, Dr. Rajneesh Kumar Gupta and Pranav Kumar, (Units: 1.0-1.2, 1.4, 4.3, 4.4-4.4.1) © Reserved, 2017
Dr Sudhir Kumar Suthar, Nidhi Shukla & Shailza Singh, (Units: 1.3, 1.5-1.9, 3.3) © Reserved, 2017
Dr M.D. Tarique Anwer, (Units: 2.0-2.2, 2.4, 3.0-3.2, 3.5-3.9) © Reserved, 2017
Prakash Chandra, (Unit: 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.3-2.11) © Reserved, 2017
Dr S.S. Jaswal, (Unit: 3.4) © Dr S.S. Jaswal, 2017
Dr Namita Sahay, (Unit: 4.4.3-4.9) © Dr Namita Sahay, 2017
Vikas Publishing House, (Units: 2.3, 2.5, 2.6.2, 3.2.1-3.2.4, 4.0-4.2, 4.4.2) © Reserved, 2017
Books are developed, printed and published on behalf of Directorate of Distance Education,
Tripura University by Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication which is material, protected by this copyright notice
may not be reproduced or transmitted or utilized or stored in any form of by any means now known
or hereinafter invented, electronic, digital or mechanical, including photocopying, scanning, recording
or by any information storage or retrieval system, without prior written permission from the DDE,
Tripura University & Publisher.
Information contained in this book has been published by VIKAS® Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. and has
been obtained by its Authors from sources believed to be reliable and are correct to the best of their
knowledge. However, the Publisher and its Authors shall in no event be liable for any errors, omissions
or damages arising out of use of this information and specifically disclaim any implied warranties or
merchantability or fitness for any particular use.
Vikas® is the registered trademark of Vikas® Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.

VIKAS® PUBLISHING HOUSE PVT. LTD.
E-28, Sector-8, Noida - 201301 (UP)
Phone: 0120-4078900 • Fax: 0120-4078999
Regd. Office: 7361, Ravindra Mansion, Ram Nagar, New Delhi – 110 055
• Website: www.vikaspublishing.com • Email: [email protected]
SYLLABI-BOOK MAPPING TABLE
International Relation and Organization
Syllabi Mapping in Book
Unit-I Introduction to International Relations Unit 1: Introduction to

1. Nature and Scope of International Relations International Relations
2. Actors of International Society – The State and
the Non-State Actors – Their Role in International
Politics-Crisis in Territorial States
3. Concept of National Power-Elements of National
Power
Unit-II Foreign Policies of Various Countries Unit 2: Foreign Policies of

1. Definition of Foreign Policy – (Various Factors in Various Countries
Shaping the Foreign Policy) Determinants of
Foreign Policy: (a) Legislature (b) Public Opinion
(c) Civil Services
2. National Interest – Role of National Interest in
the Formulation of Foreign Policy of a Country
3. Instruments and Techniques of State Interaction
(a) Propaganda (b) Diplomacy
4. Foreign Policy: India, UK, USA and China
Unit-III Neocolonialism Unit 3: Neocolonialism

1. Post-Cold War Politics, Neocolonialism
2. Emergene of the Third World-Problems of the
Third World Countries
3. Non-Aligned Movement, Universal Declaration
of Human Rights
Unit-IV International Organizations Unit 4: International

1. The League Covenant and the United Nations Organizations
Charter Compared
2. Purposes and Principles of the UNO, UN Charter,
Principal Organs of the UNO
3. International Organizations – SAARC, OPEC,
WTO, IMF
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
UNIT 1 INTRODUCTION TO INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 3-35

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Unit Objectives
1.2 Nature and Scope of International Relations
1.3 Actors of International Society—The State and the Non-State Actors—their
Role in International Politics—Crisis in Territorial States
1.3.1 Emergence of Non-State Actors in International Relations
1.4 Concept of National Power—Elements of National Power
1.5 Summary
1.6 Key Terms
1.7 Answers to ‘Check Your Progress’
1.8 Questions and Exercises
1.9 Further Reading
UNIT 2 FOREIGN POLICIES OF VARIOUS COUNTRIES 37-156

2.0 Introduction
2.1 Unit Objectives
2.2 Definition of Foreign Policy—Various Factors in Shaping the Foreign Policy
2.3 Determinants of Foreign Policy: Legislature, Public Opinion and Civil Services
2.4 National Interest-Role of National Interest in the Formulation of Foreign
Policy of a Country
2.5 Instruments and Techniques of State Interaction: Propaganda and Diplomacy
2.5.1 Propaganda
2.6 Foreign Policy: India, UK, USA and China
2.6.1 India’s Foreign Policy
2.6.2 United Kingdom’s Foreign Policy
2.6.3 USA’s Foreign Policy
2.6.4 China’s Foreign Policy
2.7 Summary
2.8 Key Terms
2.11 Further Reading
UNIT 3 NEOCOLONIALISM 157-203

3.0 Introduction
3.1 Unit Objectives
3.2 Post-Cold War Politics
3.2.1 Neocolonialism
3.2.2 Emergence of the Third-World Problems of the Third World Countries
3.2.3 New International Economic Order
3.2.4 International Economic Imbalance and Structural Adjustment
3.3 Non-Alignment Movement
3.4 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
3.5 Summary
3.6 Key Terms
3.9 Further Reading
UNIT 4 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS 205-257

4.0 Introduction
4.1 Unit Objectives
4.2 The League Covenant and the United Nations Charter Compared
4.2.1 The League Covenant
4.2.2 The United Nations Organization
4.3 Purposes and Principles of the UNO, UN Charter, Principal Organs
of the UNO
4.4 International Organizations
4.4.1 SAARC
4.4.2 OPEC
4.4.3 WTO
4.4.4 IMF
4.5 Summary
4.6 Key Terms
4.9 Further Reading
Introduction
INTRODUCTION
International relations, as the name suggests, is the study of relationships between
NOTES
various nations. The interaction of nations, institutions, cultures and ethnicities is
relevant to everyone because everybody is affected by the decisions made by
governments and learning about these issues helps in the better understanding of
the world around. Since the 1970s, the study of international relations has been
marked by a renewed debate about the relationship between structures and
institutions in international systems.
International financial institutions have different specific objectives and
different areas of specialization and expertise. The enhanced partnership for
sustainable growth and poverty reduction underscores the different core mandates
of the IMF and the World Bank. Similarly, there are various international
organizations which have been set up to promote not only good regional relation
but to also provide a common platform for a global relationship.
But the world is dynamic and the power relation between nations change all
the time. This book is an effort to understand the manner in which international
relations are forged and maintained.
This book is written in a self-instructional format and is divided into four
units. Each unit begins with an Introduction to the topic followed by an outline of
the Unit objectives. The content is then presented in a simple and easy-to-understand
manner, and is interspersed with Check Your Progress questions to test the reader’s
understanding of the topic. A list of Questions and Exercises is also provided at
the end of each unit, and includes short-answer as well as long-answer questions.
The Summary and Key Terms section are useful tools for students and are meant
for effective recapitulation of the text.
Self-Instructional Material 1
Introduction to
UNIT 1 INTRODUCTION TO International Relations
INTERNATIONAL
NOTES
RELATIONS
Structure
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Unit Objectives
1.2 Nature and Scope of International Relations
1.3 Actors of International Society—The State and the Non-State Actors—
their Role in International Politics—Crisis in Territorial States
1.4 Concept of National Power—Elements of National Power
1.5 Summary
1.6 Key Terms
1.9 Further Reading
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In an increasingly globalized world, the study of international relations becomes a

significant field of study. This field of study is an amalgamation of issues, initiatives,
cooperation based on varied subjects like history, law, science, environment, trade
and economics etc. International relations then as a subject, reflects the study of
relations between nations. But before the nuances of the relations between economies
are determined, it is important to also study the concept of nation states and the
elements which make one country more powerful than another.
In this unit, you will study about the nature and scope of international relations;
actors of international society including both state and non-state actors and their
roles in the international politics, and the concept and elements of national power.
1.1 UNIT OBJECTIVES
After going through this unit, you will be able to:

• Discuss the nature and scope of international relations
• Describe the role of state and non-state actors of international society in
international politics
• Assess the emergence of non-state actors in international relations
• Analyse the concept and elements of national power
Introduction to
International Relations 1.2 NATURE AND SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS
NOTES Even though international relations (as a subject of study) has fascinated many
scholars for several centuries, it has evolved as a distinct discipline only in the 17th
century. The discipline came into being in the West, under the Latin term intergentes
(meaning international). It was coined by Richard Zouche and was used to describe
the branch of law that studied the laws of various nations and it later came to form,
what is now known as, international law. The present form of this discipline can be
traced to Jeremy Bentham who also used the term ‘international’ in the latter part of
the 18th century, in order to describe the study of that kind of law that governs the
relations among different nations.
The next two centuries (19th and 20th) also witnessed tremendous growth in
trade and commerce along with diplomatic relations. A strain in the relations between
nations was also witnessed, leading to the outbreak of the two major world wars.
Now, the study of international relations has become wider and more dynamic as it
reflects the change in the global politics.
As an academic discipline, international relations was started by the University
of Wales. In 1919, the study of diplomatic history was introduced with the first two
thinkers being the eminent historians, Professor Alfred Zimmeren and C.K. Webster,
who were then followed by Reynolds and E.H Carr.
Nature of international relations
The nature of international relations is dynamic, especially in these times of
globalization. The study extends beyond the interactions of states and their relations
to that of different governments. It encapsulates the different factors which influence,
shape and determine the relations among different nations and their governments.
The study of international relations is not limited to the factors that form the
international political system. The dynamic nature of international politics has
undergone both theoretical as well as topical transformations. The revolutions in the
means of travel and communication have not only changed the nature of international
relations, but has made the subject an overall and a holistic perspective of the world
that we live in.
International relations encompasses many profound political and moral problems
that people across the globe face. This includes issues such as peace and war,
imperialism and nationalism, wealth of some societies and the poverty of others,
nuclear weapons and the possibility of extinction; the environment and global warming;
human rights across the world; international organizations such as the United Nations;
regional organizations such as the European Union; religion and their political impact;
trade and the development of multinational corporations and various other concerns.
Scope of international relations
The field of study in international relations is the international society. Its objects of
study are the evolution and structure of international society, the actions on the
4 Self-Instructional Material
international scene, the patterns of their behaviour and the driving forces behind Introduction to
International Relations
their actions and finally the problems of international planning. The complexities of
the international system require the management of international organizations such
as United Nations to monitor from ordinary to complex bilateral negotiations. The
presence of these institutions along with the state defines the international system NOTES
and contributes to the meaning and scope of International Relations.
The study of international relations includes issues that are global as well as
regional, such as the environmental problems which are global for the former and
the antagonism between Israel and the Arab world, for the latter. In other words,
international relations are concerned with social interactions of states that affect
human relationships. The central focus of international relations being the study of
social interactions in the context where there is no higher authority to intrude or
mediate and it’s outside any single government authority. That is why, the international
relations assumes the international system to be anarchy, although it is not necessarily
chaotic.
A common view of international relations is to see it from the perspectives of
the interactions among the states as an entity such as India, US, Belgium, UK etc.
This state centric view is normally associated with an emphasis on military security
as the major goal of states. However, this view does not provide a comprehensive
perspective of the international relations, post 1918, after the First World War. As
many states have expressed their economic concern along with their security issues.
The establishment of international organizations from the League of Nations
to the United Nations (UN) has led to the presence of non-state actors in the
international system. The non-state actors have also wielded a considerable influence
in the interactions of states as they have also increase in number. Besides UN, there
are other institutions, such as World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF),
World Health Organization (WHO), and International Labour Organization (ILO)
which are significant in their respective areas. Even more important is the growth of
the multinational corporations (MNCs) that are located in a number of countries and
are loosely tied to a single one.
On the theoretical front, different approaches have been adopted to understand
and explain the different phenomena under which international relations is maintained.
It has also led to number of theories to evolve and explain the conduct of international
relations. There have been two dominant theoretical constructs plausible explanations
which are competing in providing explanations to the issues, factors as well as in the
conduct of international relations—idealism and realism. The two theories agree on
the anarchic nature of the international system, where the former seeks to build
alliance and organization to equip the states in reforming the system, the latter sees
that as a cause for conflict among the different states which leads to war as the last
resort of settling international disputes.
Although, these two theories have remained central in the understanding of
international relations, there have been new perspectives on the subject as new
theories have seek to challenge them. Different ideologies has sought to offer an
alternative and challenged the dominant perspective of idealism as well as realism,
Introduction to on the subject of international relations, such as Marxism, feminism and
constructivism.
The conventional domain of international relations, which has been perceived
to be confined to the issues which has a predominant political overtones such as
NOTES diplomacy, war to trade relations, alliances and cultural exchanges, international
organizations etc., has extended to topical theme, such as international terrorism,
environmental problems such as climate change and environmental degradation,
reforms in the multilateral organizations, international migrations and refugees, etc.
Though, they were not the core study of international relations but it has merged
with and expanded the concept of human security and its threats such as environmental
security. The need and urgency of understanding the phenomena, which has pervaded
across the globe, has led to the significance of the study within the discipline of
international relations as a subject of study.
The level of analysis of international relations, which has been traditionally
seen from a state-centric perspective, has evolved to include the non-state actors
such as international and transnational corporations.
Importance of international relations
Everyone in the world is a member of one political community or independent state
out of the two hundred independent states in the international system, which profoundly
affects the way people live and forms the crux of the study of international relations
and also the reason why the study of international relations is so important. A state
here refers to a sovereign, independent state which has a clearly demarcated and
bordered territory with a permanent population, under the jurisdiction of the supreme
government that is constitutionally independent of all foreign governments. Although,
legally speaking every state is a sovereign and independent state but in reality they
are adjoined with each other and are not isolated from each other. They form a state
system which is the core subject of international relations studies. Moreover, states
are embedded in international markets which affect the policies of their governments
and the wealth, as well as the welfare of their citizens, which make relations among
the states all the more imminent.
In the international system, the complete isolation of the state is not an option
as if people are isolated and cut off from the international system either by their own
government or by other countries, people suffer as a result. This has been exemplified
in the case of Burma, Libya, North Korea, Iraq and Iran. Like many other social
systems, the state system can have certain advantages as well as disadvantages for
the state involved and their people. International Relation is the study of the nature
and consequences of these international relations.
In order to understand the significance of international relations, it is important
to know the essence of what a state provides for their citizens. There are at least
five basic social values that states are usually expected to uphold: security, freedom,
order, justice and welfare. These are the social values which are so fundamental to
the human well being that they must be protected or ensured in some way by any of
the social institutions such as family, clan, ethnic or religious organizations. In the
modern era, the state plays the leading instrument of ensuring these basic values.
The fundamental values or the goals that a state seeks to establish is national Introduction to
security. Security is also one of the fundamental values of international relations. In
other words, the state should ensure the security by protecting their citizens from
both internal as well as external threat. A state which claims to possess security to
protect its citizens can also threaten the citizens of other states and this forms a NOTES
paradox of the state system, which is usually referred to as the ‘security dilemma’.
At the same time, unarmed states are extremely rare in the history of the state
system. Many states enter into alliances with other states to increase their national
security, so that no other power succeeds in achieving the hegemonic position of
overall domination which is based either on intimidation, coercion or outright use of
force. The need to study the states and the international system is also due to the
fact that the solutions also lead to problems, as in any other human organizations.
This has been the fundamental assumption in the approach to the study of world
politics which is typical of the realist theories.
The second basic value that states are expected to uphold is freedom—the
personal freedom as well as the national freedom through independence. That is
also the reason why the citizens put up with the burdens that the state put on the
citizens such as taxes or military service, so that the state can have the condition of
protecting the national freedom or independence. The people cannot be free unless
the country is free, is the rationale which has led to the political process and mark
the political history through out the world be it the freedom struggle against colonialism
in Asia and African countries or in Europe when Nazi Germany occupied and invaded
other territories of the people of Polish, Czech, etc. In other words, war threatens
and destroys peace. A progressive change for peace is the approach that is typical
of the liberal theories that have been adopted in the study of world politics.
The third value that states are expected to uphold are order and justice. There
is also the common interest of states in establishing and maintaining international
order. This is because states can coexist and interact on a basis of stability, certainty
and predictability. It is towards meeting this end that the states need to uphold
international law and keep their treaty commitments as well as observe the rules,
conventions and customs of the international legal order. States therefore need to
follow the accepted practices of diplomacy and support international organizations.
It is only when international law, diplomatic relations and international organizations
exist and operate successfully that international order can be maintained.
The fourth value which has gained importance is justice. The need to ensure
justice for their citizens has gained legitimacy through the codification of justice in
the concept of human rights. Today, every state is expected to uphold human rights.
There is an elaborate international legal framework of human rights—civil, political,
social and economic—which has been developed after the second world war that
has made its adherence an important goal and value of the states in the international
system today. In fact, the importance that order and justice has gained as a goal and
value has been reflected in the approach of the International Society theories as a
study of the world politics.
Introduction to The final value that states are usually expected to uphold is for the population’s
socio-economic wealth and welfare. The people expect that the state should adopt
appropriate policies that encourage high employment, low inflation, steady investment,
uninterrupted flow of trade and commerce. Irrespective of upholding the sovereignty
NOTES of the state, national economies are rarely isolated from each other and are expected
to respond to the international economic environment, so that it can enhance or at
least defend and maintain the national standard of living. That is why states seek to
frame and implement economic policies which can maintain the stability of the
international economy upon which they are increasingly dependent. In other words,
they need to frame their economic policies which can deal adequately with the
international markets through the instruments of foreign investment and foreign
exchange, so that the international economic relations along with the international
trade through international transportation and communications does not affect
national welfare and wealth. In other words, economic interdependence, that is a
high degree of mutual economic dependence among countries, is a characteristic of
the contemporary state system.
There are two different perspectives of the international system, being
characterized by economic interdependence. The first perspective is optimistic as
they view the outcome of ensuring freedom and wealth through the expansion of the
global marketplace and thereby increase participation, specialization, efficiency and
productivity. The other view is pessimistic of economic interdependence as it promotes
inequality the rich and powerful countries have the technical as well as financial
advantage of dominating over the poor and weak countries since they lack those
advantages. This the approach which is typical of International Political Economy
approach as a theory of international relation used in studying the world politics.
Since it operates on the assumption that international relations as being fundamentally
a socio economic world and not just a political and military world.
In the age of globalization, with transport and communications rapidly
developing, the world has been characterized with new regional and global
interconnectedness that has transformed the study of international relations.
The drastic change has led to opportunities which have had far reaching
repercussions and influence, in both the international as well as domestic scenarios,
which has necessitated the need for creating it. It has presented new opportunities
which are equally challenging to the study of international relations and made it all
the more important to study in the days to come.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

1. What are the objects of study in international relations?
2. What are the five basic social values that states are usually expected to
uphold?
3. How is justice ensured by the international community?
Introduction to
1.3 ACTORS OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY— International Relations
THE STATE AND THE NON-STATE ACTORS—

THEIR ROLE IN INTERNATIONAL
POLITICS—CRISIS IN TERRITORIAL STATES NOTES
The significance of the states in the field of international politics has some logical
justification. The real catalysts in the international political system are the independent
nation-states. Normally, these states recognize one another and enhance their
relationships through diplomatic channels. Even without recognition and during war,
relationships exist. It has been customary to define the state as a sovereign political
entity. That is to say, the state must have supreme political power within its own
boundaries, being independent of others, and also being capable of marching some
resources for public purposes. It normally must have a measure of unity with a
government controlling its territory and people. Sovereignty, however, has shades of
meaning. Political realities often produce superior–inferior relationships between
one power and another, an example being India and Nepal.
Political cohesion, sovereignty and independence
Today, there are broad variations in the degrees of political cohesion, sovereignty,
and independence that the states enjoy. What is essential is that the state, whatever
its size, possesses sufficient independent means of decision making to qualify as a
sovereign state. It must have enough people, territory, and resources to sustain
statehood and must be prepared to accept commitments and obligations. There is a
greater political unity, for instance, in United States or Netherlands, than there is in
Congo or Sudan. There is greater freedom from external influence in the Soviet
Union or France than there is in Mongolia or Cuba. There is little comparison between
the magnitude of strength possessed by Britain or China on the one hand and of
Upper Volta or Male (the Maldives) on the other.
There is an old saying in the state system that ‘Geneva is the equal of Russia.’
This is technically true. In other words, the smallest independent entity is regarded
as being the political and legal equal of the largest. In the United Nations Assembly,
the vote of Togo counts the same as that of the United States or Russia, irrespective
of differences in the national income, development, power, population, and other
factors. The Great Powers can be, and sometimes are, overwhelmingly outvoted at
the United Nations. States vary in all attributes, including the number of people, size
of territory, character of the political system, resources, ideology, and judgment. On
the one hand, we can identify them within certain broad categories. There are the
great powers, which can also be called superpowers, having large nuclear arsenals,
delivery systems, and vast strength; and the lesser great powers, lacking overwhelming
strength. In the first category, one would put the United States and Russia. In the
second would come China, Britain, France, Germany, and Japan. Then there are the
middle powers, which trail the Great Powers in some important characteristics,
such as population, national income, or the size of their armed establishments. This
Introduction to category belongs to Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, India, Italy, Pakistan, Poland,
Sweden and others. Most of the states of Europe too fall in this middle grouping.
Over and beyond these categories of states are a number of political entities
with a qualified status. These include protectorates like Monaco, Liechtenstein, and
NOTES San Marino, as well as principalities that are enclosed within larger states and usually
have their foreign affairs conducted for them by the protector. The international
political system then, comprises the states, and political entities just described, and
the interrelationships and interactions among them. Concepts related to national
interest are centered on core values of the society, which include territorial integrity,
and its self-preservation.
Till the first half of the 20th century, the state was the dominant actor over others. In
the countries which were being governed by a socialist or military regime, the state
was only a political actor. However, the state was also the most crucial economic
actor as it had the responsibility of running the industries, governing the economy
and also catering to other distributive functions.
The overpowering role of the state in international relations was widely
recognized in the theories of international politics as well. The core assumption of
the realist theory was that states are the central actors in international politics.
States try to maximize their national interest which is defined in terms of maximizing
the power. In the structural realist theory, Kenneth Waltz placed the states in the
central position of his analysis of international relations. According to Waltz, it is only
the states which go to war against other states. Besides, only the states decide the
foreign policies. Similarly neo-liberal institutionalism, in which cooperation and
institutions were given a primary role over conflict and war, also agrees that only the
states are the representative units in various international organizations. The
constructivists too give a prominent role to the state in international politics. Alexander
Wendt argues that the system of anarchy—meaning no central authority over the
states in international relations—is also being defined and determined by it. According
to him ‘anarchy is what states make of it.’
From the theoretical standpoint, according to David A. Lake there are three
reasons why scholars still consider state-centred theories as a useful tool of analysis.
Firstly, the concept of national interest can be explained in a more coherent manner
only if interpreted as in the state’s interest. He argues,
‘... analysts can safely abstract from the pushing and hauling of domestic politics
and assume that the state is a unitary entity with a collective preference or
identity interacting with other similarly unitary entities.’ (2008:43). Secondly,
states are the only authoritative actors in domestic politics as they can enforce
their decisions on the citizens even against their wishes. And finally, in the
evolutionary system-level analysis of international relations, states are naturally
considered as the most significant units since states are the most crucial systems
of the international system. Though the system-level analysts study the factors
which affect the state behaviour most, they tend to explain the state as central
units of analysis.’
(Lake in Smit and Snidal, 2008: Chapter two).
Introduction to
Exhibit 1.1 International Relations
Hierarchy in International Relations
David A. Lake is Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the University of
California, San Diego. He has published widely in international relations theory
NOTES
and international political economy. Lake’s most recent book is Hierarchy in
International Relations (2009). In this book, Lake challenges the traditional
view that international relations is a realm of anarchy in which countries lack any
superior authority and interact within a Hobbesian state of nature. He
demonstrates that states exercise authority over one another in international
hierarchies that vary historically but are still pervasive today.
However, with the changing nature of politics at the domestic as well as at

the global level, it was realized gradually that the state alone cannot perform so
many functions. An ‘overburdened state’ cannot perform its functions efficiently.
Besides, the resources of the state were also not adequate enough to fulfill the
various demands of its citizens. A welfare state was dependent on larger bureaucratic
paraphernalia for its functioning. Ironically, it also made the state functioning more
complicated as well as economically burdensome. Consequently, the major challenge
before the world was how to develop a system in which the state should perform its
functions efficiently without compromising on its essential ‘minimalist functions.’
For this purpose, the non-state actors eventually, especially the market forces, were
given considerable space in economic matters including economic decision-making.
The market was recognized as a major reason behind technological innovation,
economic growth and prosperity in the western countries. With the decline of socialism,
the market-centred economic model became popular worldwide. Different countries
which had either socialist or mixed economies gradually switched over to the Western
type capitalist mode of production.
In due course, the nature of states is not as homogenous as it used to be
during the era of monarchy. The state has become a complex phenomenon. Scholars
like Joel Migdal argue that the states are no more static entities. Rather, they are
always in the process of ‘becoming.’ This process has become more complex due
to the growing complexities of a capitalist global economy, a democratic polity and
interdependence amongst the states. States have a larger responsibility of managing
many actors which have been demanding their share in the state affairs. The growing
role of non-state actors in international politics is also a reflection of this complex
phenomenon. Some of the non-state actors which are becoming very prominent in
international relations, apart from states, are discussed below:
Transnational Companies as Significant Actors in International Relations
With the faster pace of economic activities across the world, the economic actors
have emerged as very strong political players as well. It is not possible for any
government to completely sideline the role of such actors. The most important
amongst such actors are the Transnational Economic Corporations or TNCs. In the
last fifty years, there has been an upsurge in the number of transnational actors.
These companies have a very strong network across the world. Technological
empowerment has further helped in strengthening their activities. In fact, the yearly
Introduction to turnover of many companies is much bigger than the budget of many states in the
world. Certainly, this provides them a very strong position in determining economic
policies of such smaller states.
Few decades ago, such TNCs were being based in the developed countries.
NOTES However, in the past few years things have changed. In fact many emerging
companies are not from the developed world but either from developing economies
or transitional economies like China, Russia, India, Venezuela, etc. (See Table 1.1).
In 2004, there were 100 TNCs with the highest levels of assets outside their home
country, 53 of those were from Western Europe, 25 from US, nine from Japan and
three from Canada (Willetts 2008:334).
Table 1.1 Top 10 Non Financial Transnational Corporations from
Developing or Transitional Economies in 2008 (Ranked by Foreign Assets)
Millions of Dollars and Number of Employees
Ranking by: Assets Sales Employment
c b
Foreign TNI b Corporation Home Industry Foreign Total Foreign Total Foreign Total TNI
assets economy (Per cent)
1 1 Hutchison Whampoa Hong Diversified 70 762 87 745 25 006 30 236 182 148 220 000 82.0
Limited Kong,
China
2 10 CITIC Group China Diversified 43 750 238 725 5 427 22 230 18 305 90 650 21.0
3 2 Cemex S.A. Mexico Non-metalic 40 258 45 084 17 982 21 830 41 586 56 791 81.6
mineral
products
4 3 Samsung Electronics Korea, Electrical & 28 765 83 738 88 892 110 321 77 236 161 700 54.2
Co., Ltd. Republic electronic
of equipment
5 8 Petronas - Petroliam Malaysia Petroleum 28 447 106 416 32 477 77 094 7 847 39 236 29.6
Nasional Bhd expl./ref./dis
tr.
6 7 Hyundai Motor Korea, Motor 28 359 82 072 33 874 72 523 22 066 78 270 36.5
Company Republic vehicles
of
7 4 China Ocean China Transport 28 066 36 253 18 041 27 431 4 581 69 648 49.9
Shipping (Group) and storage
Company
8 5 Lukoil Russian Petroleum 21 515 71 461 87 637 107 680 23 000 152 500 42.2
Federation and natural
gas
9 6 Vale S.A Brazil Mining & 19 635 79 931 30 939 37 426 4 725 62 490 38.3
quarrying
10 9 Petróleos De Venezuela Petroleum 19 244 131 832 52 494 126 364 5 140 61 909 21.5
Venezuela Bolivarian expl./ref./dis
Republic tr.
of
Source: UNCTAD/Erasmus University database

a. Data on total assets and employees, from Bloomberg, currency (USD) millions, period 2009.
Data on affiliates is based on the Dun and Bradstreets ‘Who owns Whom’ database.
b. GSI, the ‘Geographical Spread Index’, is calculated as the square root of the Internationalization
Index multiplied by the number of host countries
c. II, the ‘Internationalization Index’, is calculated as the number of foreign affiliates divided the
number of all affiliates (Note: Affiliates counted in this table refer to only majority-owned
affiliates).
Peter Willetts, scholar of international politics and the author of International
Politics: Power and Purpose in Global Affairs, further explains how these
economic actors have snatched state sovereignty. The five forms in which the growing
role of TNCs can be seen are:
(i) uncontrollable financial flows Introduction to
(ii) triangulation of trade
(iii) regulatory arbitrage
(iv) extraterritoriality NOTES
(v) forcing states to accept global regulation (Willetts 2008: 335)
In the contemporary economically globalized world, every country is trying to invite
more such corporations in order to increase foreign investment. A major reason
behind this is the stronghold of these companies on heavy technology. Such
technological development has been confined either to Western Europe or to America.
Consequently, the companies of these countries are in a position of natural advantage.
However, now many developing countries have also started focusing on the
development of heavy technology. The rise of China and India as nuclear powers,
space powers and IT powers is an example.
While countries seek higher investment from such companies, in return such
companies influence the political system of these countries. Besides, with the growing
role of democracy and acceptance of elections based on multi-party systems, these
companies have also emerged as bigger sponsors of political groups and parties
during the elections. Such activities have also provided them a greater space in the
policy formulations.
Exhibit 1.2
Top Indian Transnational Companies
— Business Standard, May 10, 2012
Both private and government-owned Indian companies are becoming increasingly
transnational, according to a survey by the Indian School of Business (ISB),
Hyderabad, and Fundacao Dom Cabrall (Business School), Brazil. According to
the Transnationality Ranking of Indian companies, the top five companies in the
list have a Transnationality Index (TNI) greater than 50 per cent. Tata Steel
topped the list by TNI.
The TNI combines the following three measures to determine the overall degree
of internationalization of companies.
(i) percentage of international assets to total assets
(ii) percentage of international revenues to total revenues
(iii) percentage of overseas employees to total employees
The survey has divided the ranking of companies by TNI into two categories.
While Tata Steel stood first among companies which have an international asset
base greater than $500 million, Core Education & Technologies topped the list
among companies with an international asset base between $150-500 million.
A list of top 20 companies has been created on the basis of the value of the
foreign assets and on the basis of the value of overseas revenues. Tata Steel
topped the list among companies on basis of value of foreign assets and Reliance
Industries topped the list in overseas revenue category. Oil and Natural Gas,
which ranks fifth (on the basis of value of foreign assets) is the only public
sector firm to feature in the list.
Introduction to A large number of companies in the TNI rankings, such as Tata Steel, Hindalco,
International Relations and Bharti Airtel, have followed the strategy of inorganic growth through
aggressive overseas acquisitions. FDI has been primarily driven by the
manufacturing sector—petroleum products, pharmaceuticals and automobiles.
NOTES Indian transnational companies have shown a tendency for direct acquisition
rather than minority acquisitions and joint ventures. It said the largest acquisition
over the period from 2006-11 has been Tata Steel taking over the Anglo-Dutch
steel major, Corus for $14.7 billion, closely followed by Bharti Airtel’s acquisition
of Zain Telecom for $10.7 billion.
Source: Adapted from a report in Business Standard available at http://
www.business-standard.com/india/news/isb-announces-top-indian-
transnational-companies/473931/(accessed on 11.08.12)
International Organizations as Political Actors

The emergence of the United Nations was the beginning of a new era in international
politics. Unlike the League of Nations, the UN was a more representative body of
super powers. As a result, it has successfully survived as an international organization.
It has played a more active role in the non-political matters. Its sister organizations
like the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Food and Agricultural
Organization (FAO), World Health Organization (WHO), etc., have played a
significant role in the developing and least developed countries of the world. These
organizations have also been actively involved in humanitarian activities in different
countries, especially the poor ones. The FAO has been working to ensure food
availability in the drought affected regions like Africa or Asia. In countries where
state machinery has not been able to ensure timely supply of food and other relief
materials, FAO has played a very crucial role. Similarly, UNDP’s democratic
governance programme has promoted many countries to work towards a more
transparent, participatory public policy making and implementation. The newly
emerging democratic polities are getting many benefits from UNDP’s programmes,
which are specially designed for training the parliamentarians. This has helped in
developing better institutions of democratic functioning in the counties which did not
have any history of democracy.
Apart from the UN agencies many other international financial organizations
like the Organization for European Cooperation and Development (OECD), Asian
Development Bank (ADB), World Bank, etc. have played a substantial role in
developing and strengthening emerging economies. ADB has been playing a very
crucial role in infrastructure development in countries like India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka,
Central Asian republics and so on. Similarly, the World Bank has been involved in
many welfare programmes in different countries around the world unlike ADB which
has its reach only in a particular region.
While providing assistance to different countries, these organizations do
influence the political processes of the host country. For example, the UNDP
governance programme and World Bank’s good governance programme has played
an effective role in transforming many polities from authoritarian to more democratic
way of functioning. Similarly, they have also been assisting in making economic
policies targeted towards market friendly and open economies.
Exhibit 1.3 Introduction to
ADB Assistance for Indian Roads
Across India, many communities have no direct link to nearby towns or villages
or, at best, use unmade roads often destroyed during rains. In many parts, roads
are unusable for almost three months a year. This has hindered development in
NOTES
the Indian countryside. The poverty rates in the five states covered by the
project are among the highest in India.
A four-part $800 million investment programme from the Asian Development
Bank (ADB) will help build 9,000 kilometers of rural roads in five Indian states,
connecting 4,200 far-flung communities year-round to crucial markets and
services.
Building the final connection from the main roads to smaller towns and villages
will help farmers transport their goods to markets; rural folk will be able to seek
jobs; children will be able to access schools and hospitals.
ADB’s investment programme is part of a larger $1.2 billion programme to connect
villages in the states of Assam, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and
West Bengal with all-weather roads by the end of 2017. The remainder of the
programme will be financed by the Indian government.
The Indian government has been working since 2000 to link the country’s rural
communities through its Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana nationwide rural
road investment programme. The programme has already built nearly 109,000
kilometers of rural roads in the five states, connecting nearly 40,000 communities
to bigger transport networks. ADB has already provided a total of $1.15 billion
through two separate projects in 2003 and 2005 to help finance those roads.
Source: Adapted from http://www.adb.org/news/800-million-program-link-
4200-indian-villages-crucial-services-and-markets?ref=countries/india/
news—accessed on 11.08.12
Non-legitimate Groups as Strong Political Actors

Many substate violent actors have also emerged across the world especially in the
countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The dominant agenda of such groups is
either separatism from one country and merging into another or spreading a particular
religious doctrine. The age of clash of political ideologies seems to be over. These
groups are not like any other political group or movement. Such groups not only
have strong financial network across the world but also have access to modern
warfare technology. Pakistan has been claimed to be home to many such religious
groups. Despite all efforts by the United States, not much has been achieved. Such
groups are also functional in many other countries like Afghanistan, India, Iraq and
Russia. Their growing strength has greatly affected the ability of these states to rule
within their territory.
There are other types of non-legitimate groups which too are operating, like
the criminal gangs that are involved in organized crime. Such groups can be seen
active in states like Russia and Latin America. Typically, these groups are involved
in robberies, murders, illegal drug trafficking, weapons trade and illegal immigration
activities as well. Some of them are considered to be stronger than the government
Introduction to of the state in which they function. Today, the world has realized the threat such
groups pose to the state authority. Therefore, collective efforts are being made at
the international level in order to diminish such groups.
Such efforts have been accelerated after the 7/11 attacks in 2001, on the
NOTES World Trade Center. There are efforts at the bilateral as well as multilateral levels
for this purpose. However, such efforts are not working effectively due to the growing
role of such groups in the politics of various countries. In democratic polities, such
groups are being used for forcing people to cast votes in favour of a particular
leader. In many countries, authoritarian regimes are being supported by these groups
and vice versa. Thus, this growing nexus between crime and politics tend to affect
the political stability of many countries.
In the early 20th century, terrorism was not considered such a big threat to
the nation states. According to James D. Kiras, author of Special Operations and
Strategy, three factors led to the rise of international terrorism in 1968. The first
was the expansion of commercial air travel; the second was widespread televised
news coverage; and finally, the broad encompassing political interests of extremists
that intersected around a common cause. Consequently, terrorism evolved from a
local to a transnational threat.
Air travel gave terrorists unprecedented mobility. For example, the Japanese
Red Army trained in one country and attacked in another, such as the 1972 Lod
Airport Massacre in Israel. Air travel appealed to terrorists as the airport security
measures were not adequate and resulted in plane hijacking cases. The success of
such tactics spurred other terrorist groups, as well as criminals and political refugees.
Kiras further argues that this led to an increase in the number of hijackings from five
in 1966 to ninety four in 1969. Besides, by sharing techniques and technical
experience, these groups demanded the release of imprisoned ‘fellow revolutionaries’
in different countries, giving an impression of a coordinated global terrorist network
(Kiras 2009: 374).
Non-governmental Organizations as Political Actors
Non-governmental organizations have also affected global policy making in a very
significant way. These organizations have been quite active in the fields of human
rights protection, environmental safeguards, poverty reduction, etc. The non-
governmental organizations have also been involved in fighting for the restoration of
democracy in many authoritarian regime governed countries. A few decades ago,
such organizations were functioning at local levels in a limited capacity. However,
with the emergence of information technology, such groups have become truly global
in nature. Today, they have branches all over the world along with a large number of
personnel working for them. Besides, various international organizations, especially
the UN agencies and other financial agencies, have been seeking their assistance in
drafting their policies or implementing their welfare schemes in various countries.
This has provided great leverage to these organizations in global policy making.
In the contemporary definition of democracy along with a multi-party system,
a free civil society is also strongly favoured. Such groups are the core of civil society,
functioning unlike the local groups, such organizations have strong financial backing
along with a highly trained workforce. In the emerging democracies of the world, such Introduction to
groups have a larger say than many political actors.
As a result of the growing number of non-state actors at the global level,
politics is no more a state dominated activity. Rather, like increasing democracies at
the domestic level in various countries, there has been an upsurge of democratic NOTES
forces at the global level as well. The emergence of such actors has fundamentally
changed the character of international politics in the last two decades. There are
more demands for democratization of various international agencies like the UN,
along with demands for more transparency in global affairs. This is showing positive
outcomes as well. The world is no more being dominated by the West European
countries or by the US. A multipolar world seems to be emerging in the near future.
However, not everything is positive. There are serious criticisms of such a
global order. There are apprehensions about the emerging actors as they are still
being dominated by American or European money and agenda. The next section
deals with such criticisms in more detail.
Changing Nature of Political Communities
A community is a group based on human solidarity and a distinctive pattern of
cooperation. In the post-Cold War era, many types of political communities have
emerged, ranging from local and neighbourhood communities to international non-
governmental communities. Each of these communities depends on a powerful sense
of emotional identification with the group and on the willingness to make some
personal sacrifices for a more general or larger good.
Politics is an integral part of all such communities, as members do not have
similar view points about the nature, future and course of action. In a modern society,
there are sharp divisions between those who think that governments should redistribute
wealth, and those who believe that the market and not the state should take care of
such needs. The loyalty and trust with which these members are bound together,
determines the limits of such cooperation. The members are more comfortable in
sharing power with each other than sharing it with outsiders. In fact, there is always
a distinction between the insiders and outsiders. Those who have a similar history or
other similarities are recognized as insiders, whereas others are seen as outsiders.
However, most of the people may belong to multiple political communities at
the same time. They may be a member of a professional group as well as of a
transnational group. Usually, authoritarian regimes demand loyalty from the members
for only one political community, e.g., Nazi Germany or Stalin’s Russia are two very
popular examples of such loyalty demanding political communities.
The liberal regimes, on the other, hand recognize that their citizens value
many different loyalties, some directed towards local communities, others connected
with the membership of international associations such as Green Peace.
The nature of these political communities has undergone serious transformation
since the end of the Cold War. Although, there have been demands for allegiance to
international law or community, most of the states demand loyalty from their citizens
only when their national survival is at stake. There are various examples of political
Introduction to communities emerging in the post-Cold War era. Nationalism is the strongest sense
of political communities even till date. The nation as a political community emerged
historically. The first city states of Mesopotamia and ancient Greece, the early empires
of Assyria, Persia and Rome, and the Ottoman and Chinese Empires were political
NOTES communities, but they were radically different from the nation-states. Ancient Greek
city states for example, cherished their independence but, compared with modern
democracies, they had a highly exclusionary conception of community. Rights of
political participation were restricted to adult male citizens in the polis. Women,
resident aliens, and slaves were not full members of the community because they
were denied citizenship. Even the European states in the seventeenth century were
not the nation-states in the modern sense, but were territorial states.
Territorial states are the ones who had the monopoly of using physical power
against its citizens within a defined territory. On similar lines, Michael Mann argues
that modern states have acquired high levels of ‘intensive power’—power that can
be projected deep into society. In addition, the pre-modern states have poorly defined
frontiers with a limited ability to control frontier populations. Viable modern states
have clearly demarcated borders and the ability to project power across and often
beyond national territories. Commenting on this second difference, Mann argues
that modern territorial states have acquired a high level of ‘extensive power’—
power that can be projected across spaces. The vast colonial empire encompassed
the Americas, Asia-Pacific, and Africa to name a few examples.
However, the evolution of the nation as a political community has not stopped
there. It continues even afterwards. The territorial states which established the first
overseas empires gradually turned into nation-states. As Norbert Elias has argued,
the modern state’s monopoly control of the instrument of violence led to the pacification
in the society. In this context, closer emotional ties between societies gradually
developed. There were two reasons at large: first, the rise of capitalism; and secondly,
the endemic warfare. Benedict Anderson has argued that print capitalism made
national consciousness possible. Books, pamphlets, and the more recent mass media
disseminated national symbols along with shared narratives about the past and a
sense of common destiny. Ernest Gellner argued that industrialization was the primary
reason for the rise of national languages and cultures. The sheer numbers of
commercial exchanges which typify modern industrial societies simply could not
occur unless strangers could communicate in the same language. The crucial point
is that the human race is not divided naturally into nations. States played a crucial
role in creating national identities not least by building education systems that promoted
shared values.
Secondly, the modern nation state merged out of the wars. They were largely
instruments for war. Warfare was crucial for the transition from territorial states to
national states. Warring states promoted national solidarity to ensure that citizens
would stay loyal in times of military conflict.
Emergence of International Regimes
A noteworthy aspect of globalization is the establishment of worldwide regimes and
rule-governed activity as a part of the international system. It was only during the
20th century that nations became a global phenomenon with all states obeying the Introduction to
same international rules and regulations.
The regime theory, in international relations, is broadly located within two
broad schools of thought: realism and liberalism. Realists are often skeptical of or
uninterested in international law, and yet they have developed an important position NOTES
on regimes. At the same time, regime theorists in the liberal camp, identified as
liberal institutionalists, have accepted key assumptions made by neo-realists and
these, along with their social science credentials. However, the difference between
the two schools exists. Liberal institutionalists focus on the way that regimes allow
states to overcome the obstacles to collaboration imposed by the anarchic structure
of the international system. Realists, by contrast are interested in the way that states
use their power capabilities in situations requiring coordination to influence the nature
of regimes and the way the costs and benefits derived from regime formation are
divided up.
Critical Assessment
There have been widespread demands for democratizing the existing global order.
People have been protesting on the streets and showing their outrage at the meeting
venues of various financial or other international organizations especially at the World
Trade Organizations meetings. Besides, there has been opposition to the growing
influence of western culture and lifestyle. Growing terrorist activities in Afghanistan
and Pakistan are also regarded as an outcome of such activities. Serious oppositions
have been raised against the role being played by various international agencies in
the post-Soviet countries and in case of the Iran-US confrontation, the role of the
International Atomic Agency has been questioned.
The pertinent question that arises here is—why is there so much opposition
to something which has been bringing so many positive changes to the world? What
is so problematic about the phenomenon called globalization? Hirst and Thompson
(1996) provide an extensive critique of the wave of globalization. Given below are
the criticisms of the emerging international order and also of the phenomenon of
globalization:
(i) The world was more interconnected and economically vibrant before the
First World War. There is nothing unique with the present wave. In fact, the
present wave is nothing, but a new reformed form of the capitalist world
order. The only change is that it has been projected as a real transformation
of the world in a more modified manner than the colonial era. The propaganda
of new globalization in order to defend the western agenda, capitalism and
imperialism is stronger. This propaganda is being done by the market forces,
which want to benefit from the unexplored market of developing countries.
These forces are also involved in the exploitation of natural resources in
these countries. In other words, the positive factors of globalization are being
highlighted a lot in order to neutralize any opposition to the growing economic
influence of western companies. The Iraq war, opposition in Central Asian
countries, problems in Cuba, Venezuela are few examples of such an influence.
Introduction to (ii) The technological developments are confined to the developed world or to
some of the developing countries. In reality, a larger part of the world is still
untouched by these developments. The internet and telecommunications have
enhanced business activities in Europe and America. The African nations or
NOTES a larger population in the South Asian countries are still suffering from the
problems of poverty, hunger and malnutrition. Besides, such technological
innovations are being carried out in the western countries only. Companies
like Microsoft are based in countries like the US and their gains are being
invested more in the United States than in any other part of the world.
(iii) The present wave of globalization in international politics is also labelled as
another form of western imperialism. In this wave, only western culture,
institutions and ideas are becoming prominent over other cultures in the world.
There are violent reactions against the growing influence of western culture.
Such oppositions are more frequent in the Asian especially in Muslim countries
like Iran, Pakistan, Iraq and so on.
(iv) A major criticism of the idea of global governance is that it has failed to
ensure the accountability of various non-state actors. In many countries, these
actors have been involved in bringing regime changes in various countries. In
the case of post-Soviet countries like the East European countries and Central
Asian countries, various civil society groups have been alleged of bringing
political instability in the form of ‘colour revolutions.’
(v) As a result of the growing economic activities, the economic crimes have
gone up exponentially. Not only individuals and smaller companies, but larger
multinational companies are also involved in spreading economic crimes and
corruption. The bigger companies are found paying bribes to bureaucrats and
politicians in order to get clearances for their proposals, especially in countries
undergoing economic transitions. Such companies are not only spoiling the
political culture but also harming the environment while illegally exploiting
resources of such countries.
(vi) Growing religious extremism is also considered as a form of opposition against
the growing economic, political and cultural influence of the west. In fact,
such opposition is coming more from ordinary citizens than from the states.
Since citizens groups are incapable of chasing state forces in direct
confrontation, they are involved more in small scale war or in guerrilla warfare
activities.
(vii) Globalization has brought more inequality in the economic fields. The gap
between the rich and poor within the countries as well as between the rich
countries and poor countries has increased in the past two decades.
Globalization has helped those who are already rich, but the poor continue to
live on the margins.
However, despite all these criticisms, there are defenders of globalization.
They argue that those who criticize globalization do not see the benefits which
globalization has brought to the less developed world. Besides, their focus is more
on the economic disadvantages of globalization. But, there is no claim by globalists
that globalization will produce even effects or will bring total equality. Rather it’s a Introduction to
process to bring better policies and their outcomes for the whole world.
Inter-Governmental Organizations (IGOs)—Meaning, Features and Role
An Inter-Governmental Organization, sometimes called as an International NOTES
Governmental Organization (and both abbreviated as IGO), is an organization
comprising primarily of sovereign states (called as member states), or of other inter-
governmental organizations. Inter-governmental organizations are usually called
international organizations, although that term may also comprise international non-
governmental organizations such as international non-profit organizations (NGOs)
or multinational corporations.
Inter-governmental organizations are also an important aspect of public
international law. IGOs are established by treaties which act as a charter creating
the group. Treaties are formed when lawful representatives (governments) of several
member states go through a ratification process, providing the IGO with an international
legal personality. Inter-governmental organizations, in a legal sense, should be
distinguished from simple groupings or coalitions of states like the G8 or the Quartet.
Such groups or associations have not been founded by a constituent document and
exist only as task groups.
Inter-governmental organizations can also be distinguished from treaties. Many
treaties (like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) or the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) (GATT) do not establish an organization and instead
rely purely on the parties for their administration becoming legally recognized as an
adhoc commission. Other treaties have established an administrative apparatus which
was not deemed to be granted an international legal personality.
Inter-governmental organizations can be differentiated on the basis of function,
membership and membership criteria. They have various goals and scopes, usually
outlined in the treaty or charter. Some IGOs have evolved to fulfill a requirement for
a neutral forum for debates or negotiations to resolve critical disputes. Others
developed to carry out mutual interests in a unified form.
Generally, the common objectives are to preserve peace through conflict
resolution and better international relations, promote international cooperation on
matters like environmental protection, human rights, social development (education,
health care, etc.), humanitarian aid and economic development. Some of them are
more general in scope (the United Nations), while others might have subject-specific
targets (Interpol or the International Organization for Standardization and other
standards organizations).
Some common categories are as follows:
• Worldwide or global organizations: These are generally open to nations
worldwide as long as certain criteria are fulfilled. This category comprises
the United Nations (UN) and its specialized agencies, the Universal Postal
Union, Interpol, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Customs
Organization (WCO) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Introduction to • Regional organizations: Such organizations are open to members from
specific region(s) or continent(s). This category comprises the Council of
Europe (CoE), European Union (EU), NATO, OSCE, African Union (AU),
Organization of American States (OAS), Association of Southeast Asian
NOTES Nations (ASEAN), Arab League and Union of South American Nations.
• Cultural, linguistic, ethnic, religious or historical organizations: This
category is open to members on the basis of some cultural, linguistic,
ethnic, religious or historical link. For example, the Commonwealth of
Nations, La Francophonie, Community of Portuguese Language Countries,
Latin Union or Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
• Economic organizations: These types of organizations are based on
economic organization. Some are dedicated to free trade, the reduction of
trade barriers (the World Trade Organization) and International Monetary
Fund. Others are focused on international development. International
cartels such as the Organization of Petroleum-Exporting Countries
(OPEC) also exist. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) was started as an economy-focused organization.
• Educational organizations: These are based on tertiary-level study.
Academy of European Law offers training in European law to lawyers,
judges, barristers, solicitors, in-house counsels and academics. EUCLID
(Euclid University) chartered as a university and umbrella organization
dedicated to sustainable development in signatory countries and United
Nations University tries to resolve pressing global problems which are the
concern of the United Nations, its people and member states.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

4. What are the five forms in which the growing role of TNCs can be seen?
5. What does the meaning of state as a sovereign political entity imply?
6. Name some of the international financial organizations, apart from the
UN, who are working towards the development of emerging economies.
7. What is the dominant agenda of non-legitimate groups as political actors?
8. Mention the two broad schools of thought on which the regime theory of
international relations is based.
9. How are inter-governmental organizations established?
10. List the common categories of inter-governmental organizations.
1.4 CONCEPT OF NATIONAL POWER—

ELEMENTS OF NATIONAL POWER
Like sovereignty and nationalism, national power is a vital and inseparable feature
of the state system. Power of some kind is the means by which states implement
their policies, domestic as well as foreign. When we speak of power, we do not Introduction to
mean man’s power over nature, or over means, or over himself; we actually mean
man’s control over the minds and actions of other men. When we speak of political
power, we refer to the mutual relations of control among the holders of public authority
and people at large. Political power and physical force are two different things. NOTES
When violence or physical force becomes the practical actuality, it amounts to a
negation of power. Physical power can be an instrument of power but not power in
any sense. Political power is a psychological relation between those who exercise it
and those over whom it is exercised. It gives the former a control over certain
actions of the latter through the influence which the former exerts over the latter’s
mind (Morgenthau, 1948). The concept of national power, power based classification
of states, elements of national power and critical appraisal of the idea of national
power are discussed as follows:
National Power– Conceptual View
The concept of power is quite complex and it is difficult to give a universally accepted
definition. It shall, therefore, be desirable to discuss some definitions of power to
reach an acceptable conclusion. According to Morgenthau, power in a political context
means ‘the power of man over the minds and action of other men’. Georg
Schwarzenberger in his book Power Politics defines power as the ‘capacity to
impose one’s will on others by reliance on effective sanctions in case of non-
compliance’. Max Weber defines it as ‘the probability that one actor within a social
relationship will be in a position to carry out his own despite resistance, regardless of
the basis on which this probability rests’. Guild and Palmer hold that power is ‘the
ability to affect or to control the decisions, behavior, policies, values and fortunes of
others. Thus, in the broad sense, power can be defined as the capacity of persons or
group to get things done effectively. Adopting this notion we can define national
power as a ‘capacity of a nation to get things done effectively in international system’.
National power plays the same role in international politics as money plays in market
economy. It should be also noted that it is neither good nor evil in itself-‘it is socially
and morally neutral’.
Power-based Classification of States
There are about 200 sovereign states in present world order. All of them do not
posses similar capacity in terms of power. Based on power, those states have been
classified by scholars in number of ways. Traditionally, states have been divided into
‘great powers’ and ‘super powers’. Super powers are those nations who can influence
international politics and its various actors without compromising their own interests.
During cold war period USA and USSR were two established super powers in
world politics. Great powers also possess the capacity to influence international
politics, but to a lesser extent. Their area of influence is often limited to a particular
region. So, France, United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, China, and probably India
could be included into this category. However, this classification is not satisfactory
as most of the state don’t find any space. Keohane categorizes states into four
categories viz.- Great powers- countries which can alone influence international
politics to a great extent; Secondary powers- those states which can influence
Introduction to international politics to a certain extent; Middle powers those states which can not
influence international politics individually and therefore work in collaboration with
other countries to play meaningful role and; Small powers- those states which can
neither influence international politics individually nor collaborate with other states
NOTES to play meaningful role. Orgenski in his famous work World Politics has divided
states into four categories: (i) The powerful and satisfied-Those states who control
international system and are satisfied with this role such as USA; (ii) The powerful
and dissatisfied- States included in this category are also powerful but are not satisfied
with present world order and want drastic change in it such as China, India, Brazil
and South Africa etc.; (iii) Weak and satisfied states-States which are middle power
but seems to satisfy with present world order like Canada, Argentina, Australia etc.
and; (iv) The weak and dissatisfied states included in this category are not satisfied
with present world order, but they don’t have power or capacity to change it. Most
of the countries in third world fall into this category.
Elements of National Power
What are the factors which contribute to the foundation of power? It is a general
belief that wealth, resources, manpower, technology, and sophisticated weapons are
the real foundation of national power. But, it is not the mere possession of these
which makes a nation powerful. As William Ebenstein notes that, in the field of
international relations, the central problem of the strength of a nation is essentially a
problem of qualitative judgment and measurement, as national power is more than
the some total of population, raw materials and quantitative factors, the alliance
potential of a nation, its civic devotion, the flexibility of its institutions, the technical
know-how its capacity to endure privations, these are but a few qualitative elements
that determine the total strength of a nation’. Thus, national power consists of several
factors and an analysis of all of them is neither possible nor desirable in this context.
There are seven important elements of national power such as geography, natural
resources and raw materials, population, technology, ideologies, morale and national
character, and leadership. These factors can be divided into the two major categories
which are tangible elements and intangible elements.
(i) Tangible elements
(a) Geography
Among the various components of the national interests, geography is
considered to be the most stable element. The importance of geography as
an element of national power has long been characterized. Napoleon once
said that ‘the foreign policy of a country is determined by its geography’. This
may be an exaggeration, but there can be no question that geographical factors
have had a decisive effect on national development and those provide basic
infrastructure for national power. Here, the geographic factors that are referred
to are size, climate, and topography. These are discussed as follows:
• Size: In a spoken language, it is easy to describe that more land area of
a state is itself an element of power. However, apart from land area,
effective power depends upon a variety of other factors such as location,
fertility, rainfall, the temper of its people, the nature of its technology, Introduction to
and the quality of its leadership. Thus, despite of its huge size, Sudan is
not considered a big player in international relations, but Japan with its
small territorial size is recognized as great power. Similarly, during Russo-
Japanese war of 1904-5, Japan successfully defeated Russia. Though, NOTES
Russian land area is many times bigger than Japan, her immensity was
a handicap, for it impeded the concentration of armies and supplies in
distant Serbia.
• Climate: Climate is one of the determinants of culture and economy. It
has direct effect on health and energy of people. The temperate regions
are often considered the best human habitation. It is not coincidence
that almost all of the great civilizations of the world have developed in
temperate zones. Similarly, uncertain rainfall and periodic droughts also
limit the power of a nation. It makes the country increasingly dependent
on foreign market for food and obstructs the development of national
power and adoption of an independent foreign policy.
• Topography: Topography of the land is also a major determinant of
national power as it facilitate or limit movement of human, goods and
ideas. Thus, good rivers may afford transportation throughout a state;
and, on the other hand, as international boundary lines they may invite
commercial problems with another state. Topography has given good
ports and river waterways to Europe but almost none to Africa. Due to
lack of access to seacoast landlocked countries such as Lesotho, Nepal,
Bhutan, Chad, and Laos etc. heavily dependent on their neighbouring
countries for international trade. Himalaya has served as a natural
boundary for India since centuries, but has also acted as a barrier to
trade route.
(b) Geopolitics
Geopolitics is the study of the relationship among politics and geography,
demography, and economics, especially with respect to the foreign policy of a
nation. Scholars of this school give great importance to geographical factors
in the study of international relations. Some of the prominent scholars of
geopolitics include- Sir Halford Mackinder, Karl Haushofer,
Alfred Thayer Mahan, and Nicholas John Spykman etc. Mackinder provided
heartland theory which says, ‘who rules Eastern Europe commands Heartland,
who rules Heartland rules the world islands and who rules the world islands
ruled the world’. Spykman, a leading American geopolitician, criticized
Mackinder on the ground that he had exaggerated the potentialities of the
Heartland and underestimated those of the Inner Crescent, which he renamed
the Rimland and defined as the ‘intermediate region…between the heartland
and the marginal seas…a vast buffer zone of conflict between sea power
and land power. According to him ‘who controls the Rimland rules Eurasia;
who rules Eurasia control the destinies of the world’. On the other hand,
Mahan emphasized on sea power.
Introduction to (c) Natural resources and raw materials
The natural resources and the raw materials available in a country also greatly
contribute to the national power. Before entering into the actual theme, we
must distinguish between natural resources and raw materials. Natural
NOTES resources may be defined as gift of nature of established utility; they will
include, for example, most minerals, flora and fauna, rainfall, fertility of soil
and so on. On the other hand, the raw materials are the result of human
labour which includes vegetable products, animal products, exploration of
minerals etc. It should be also clear that merely possession of natural resources
and raw materials do not make nation powerful, instead, they have to be
usefully utilized with the help of capital, technical know-how and skilled labour.
For example, there are several countries in Africa with huge mineral deposits
like diamond, gold hydrocarbons etc., but those are unable to explore them
without the help of developed world. Therefore, this wealth is useless for
them as far as national power is concerned.
Among natural resources, sufficient availability of food stuff is the foremost
requirement of national power as no nation of the world can be prosperous
with empty stomach of her citizen. Reliance on import of food grain could be
a main constraints in the perusal of independent foreign policy. It is a well
known fact that the Allied powers succeeded in bringing down Germany
during First World War, because she failed to procure food grains from other
countries. In India also the government could not pursue any vigorous foreign
policy so long the country was dependent for her food supplies on other
countries. But once India attained self-sufficiency in food supplies following
the Green Revolution, it showed greater independence of action.
Again, with the availability of one or two products in abundance but lack of
other resources, no nation can become powerful in the actual sense. There
are several countries relying on the export of one or two products. Oil is the
chief export of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela etc.; tin of Malaysia
and Bolivia, Coffee of Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Ethiopia
etc.; Tea of Sri Lanka and Kenya etc. It is a fact that no nation of the world
is self-sufficient in all kinds of resources, not even USA. But a nation aspiring
to become powerful in world politics must secure optimum supply of required
resources, if those are not available in the country’s own land.
(d) Population
You might have come across arguments such as it is not the natural resources,
technology, nor anything else but the people who constitute the chief and
decisive factor in a nation’s power. However, it is a point of debate as to
whether large population only contribute in national power. According to
Morgenthau, ‘since size of population is one of the factors upon which national
power rests and since the power of one nation is always relative to the power
of others, the relative size of the population of countries competing for power
and especially the relative rate of their growth desire careful attention.’
Mussolini once said ‘Let us be frank with ourselves. What are 40 million
Italians compared with 95 million Germans and 200 million slaves? Given that Introduction to
there are sufficient resources available in the country. The large population
can help in increasing the agricultural as well as industrial production. It is
helpful in raising large armies and acquiring effective hold over conquered
territories. NOTES
Definitely, population contributes in the strength of any nation. But increasing
population becomes a weakness, if the state is unable to utilize them effectively,
cannot support them at tolerable standards of living, and cannot cater to
constructive outlets for their talents and energies. In the present day, it is
seen that the ever fast increasing population in most of the Asian and African
states is becoming a weakness for them instead of strength. On the other
hand, though most of the European countries have acquired ‘stagnation’ state
in population growth, they are facing shortage of ‘work force’ due to the
rising old age population.
(e) Technology
From the time that the first man sharpened a stick or wielded a rock to crack
a calm shell or a skull, technology has played a part in the lives of people.
Technology is often defined as applied science. Technological changes reflect
the actual adoption of new methods and products; it is the triumph of the new
over the old in the market and the budget. In modern period, technology in at
least four spheres—industrial, communication, transportation and military, has
greatly influenced the power of the state. The industrial technology adds to
the power of the country by enabling it to increase its production and attaining
economic prosperity. Britain dominated in the world politics for centuries
because of her industrial advancement. In the later half of 20th century, Japan
and Germany occupied important position in the world politics because of
tremendous development in industrial technology. The communication
technology is giving a boost to the flow of ideas and emotions. Today, no parts
of the world are away from the reach of internet and mobile phones. However,
countries with poor advancement in communication technology rely on
countries with well established communication technology. With highly evolved
satellite system, India and China apart from the developed world have emerged
as leading service provider to those nations. The transport technology has
resulted in fast and convenient way of movement of people and goods. In
today’s world, no nations isolate her with age old transport technologies. The
military technology has played an even more important role in increasing the
power of a state. During the cold war period, USA and USSR were regarded
as the leaders of capitalist and socialist blocks because of their military might
and continuous innovation on that. Now, military strength of China, Israel,
South Africa and India etc., has also got attention due to their technological
advancement. In short, technological development in various spheres is an
important ingredient of national power.
Introduction to (ii) Intangible elements
(a) Ideologies
‘An ideology is a cluster of ideas, about life, society, or government, which
NOTES originates in most cases as consciously advocated or dogmatically asserted
social, political, religious slogans or battle cries and which through continuous
usages and preachment gradually becomes the characteristic beliefs or dogmas
of a particular group, party or nationality’. Interpreted in such a broad and
generic sense, the term ‘ideology’ can be applied to a great variety of moving
ideas of our time, including many of the ‘isms’ nationalism, anti-imperialism,
Totalitarianism, Communism, Fascism, Nazism, Marxism, Socialism,
Liberalism, collectivism and so on through a long list. Democracy, also, is in
many respects an ideology and the same is true for the major religions, notably
the proselytizing ones such as Islam and Christianity. Ideologies may be
classified in a variety of ways. Hans Morgenthau discusses certain ‘typical
ideologies of foreign policies’ under three headings: (1) ideologies of the status
quo, such as peace and international law; (2) ideologies of imperialism; and
(3) those ideologies which appear to be somewhat ambiguous such as the
principle of national self determination.
In modern period, ideologies have been a major instrument in crystallizing
policies and determining foreign policy of a nation. After Bolshevik revolution
in Russia, ideological factors received too much attention in international
relations. Ideological differences were at the core of the cold war, which
lasted decades between capitalist and communist blocks. ‘End of ideology
debate’ started through the writings of Daniel Bell in early 1960s, received
world wide attention and reached at its height with the demise of USSR led
communist block in the late 1980s. It is true that ideological factors, in traditional
sense, have lost their appeal. However, the resurgence of ideology in other
forms such as rising fundamentalism, terrorism, regionalism and so on can be
seen in many parts of the world.
(b) Morale and national character
Palmer and Perkins define Moral as ‘a thing of spirit made up of loyalty,
courage, faith, impulse to the preservation of personality and dignity’. According
to Morgenthau, ‘National moral is the degree of determination with which a
nation supports the home and foreign policies of its government in times of
peace or war. It permeates all activities of a nation, its agricultural and industrial
production as well as its military establishment and diplomatic services’. Thus,
it refers to the sum total of the individual qualities of men in a nation in the
form of their willingness to put the nation’s welfare above their own regional
welfare. It amounts to willingness to sacrifice. Morales seem to be related to
what we call ‘national character’, but the relationship is not clear. Studies
have been made by the sociologists and anthropologists with regard to national
character. On the basis of these studies we tend to think of, Germans in
terms of thoroughness, discipline and efficiency, of Americans and Canadians
in terms of resourcefulness and inventiveness and Russian in terms of
relentless persistence and of English in terms of dogged commonsense. In Introduction to
Russia and Germany, there is strong tradition of obedience to the authority of
government and the fear of foreigners. Hence, Germans and Russian could
easily switch over to war and tolerate dictatorial regimes of Hitler and Stalin
(Palmer and Perkins, 1969). Whether, such characterizations are correct or NOTES
not are a matter of debate but certainly those play vital role in morale.
Morale and national character are great determinant of national power.
Quantitative elements discussed as tangible elements of national power alone
do not contribute to the national strength. Quality of the population has great
bearing on national power. National character and national morale ‘stand out
both for their elusiveness from the point of view of national progress and for
their permanent and often decisive influence upon the weight a nation is able
to put into the scales of international politics.’ It was due to morale and the
national character of the small European nations that for long they could
dominate the large Asian and African nations. Similarly, spirit of Vietnamese
people forced USA to withdraw herself in early 1970s. However, morale and
national character are not a static phenomenon but those are dynamic, the
national character keeps on changing from time to time. The people are willing
to subordinate their personal interests to the nation’s welfare during war period
only, even though this sacrifice is of equal significance during peace times as
well. If a country is ruined by internal divisions, jealousies and dissensions, it
either will not be able to demonstrate any morale or else if there is any morale,
it will not be effective.
(c) Leadership
Among various elements of national power, leadership is probably the most
important element, as all other elements of national power relies on quality
and wisdom of leadership. Highlighting the important role of leadership Palmer
and Perkins writes, in fact some one can argue that without leadership people
can not even constitute a state; without it there can be no well-developed
integrated technology and without it morale is totally useless, if indeed it can
exist at all” (Palmer and Perkins, 1969). Leadership plays an important role
in all kind of political systems. Be it democracy or totalitarianism important
and crucial decisions are taken by the political leaders. They decide the nature
of relations with other states and declare war and conclude peace or treaties
of friendship. Though, supreme test of a successful leadership and national
strength is its effectiveness in waging war, in the period of peace a good
leadership helps to attain national power in a number of ways. An efficient
leadership can serve the interests of a state by protecting its people abroad;
by constant vigilance in the search of new avenues of trade and commerce;
by the accumulation of a wide range of information on the geography,
resources, techniques, culture, military establishment, diplomatic interests, and
people of a foreign nation; apart from bringing peace and prosperity in the
motherland.
History is full of such examples to show that the leaders succeeded in rousing
their people, as one man to give a concerted fight and brought laurels to their
Introduction to country. During the First World War, President Woodro Wilson of USA won
the support of American people by giving projection that USA had joined the
war to make the world safe for democracy. Likewise, during Second World
War Roosevelt won the support of his people by highlighting the Japanese
NOTES attack on Pearl Harbour. Emphasizing the important role of leadership Palmer
and Perkins says, ‘without leadership people can not even constitute a state;
without it there can be no well-developed integrated technology and without
it morale is totally useless, if indeed it can exist at all’.
National Power– A Critical Appraisal
Any discussion on national power cannot and should not be concluded without a
critical appraisal of the idea itself. While assessing national power, it should be very
clear that it is a very difficult task. National power consists of a number of tangible
and intangible elements and so far there are no well defined scientific tools, quantitative
or qualitative, to measure it. It is a relative judgment such as one state could be more
powerful than others in some respect but no state in the world is absolute powerful.
Further, it is a dynamic phenomenon. A state’s power and position may change
fundamentally over a period of time. Much of human history is the story of the ‘rise
and fall’ of nations and other political entities. This can be related to some events
which have occurred in the last century. Prior to World War I, Europe was the
centre of world politics and until attainment of Indian independence, Britain had a
pride of ‘sun never sets in the Empire’. After World War II, USA and USSR emerged
as the two most powerful nations in the world, but suddenly dramatic changes
occurred in the late 1980s and USSR was disintegrated. And now, we are hearing
about BRICS, countries as future economies of the world, thanks to Jim O’Neill and
other scholars of Goldman Sachs. However, many a times, miscalculation of national
power becomes suicidal for a state and a danger to world peace. There are various
instances of war and conflicts in the past generated by overestimation of one’s own
power and underestimation of other’s powers. Moreover, aspirations to acquire
power also generate a never ending ‘arms race’ among various states of the world
and posses a major challenge to world peace.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

11. What is the difference between great powers and super powers?
12. Enlist the tangible elements of national power.
13. How does Hans Morgenthau classifies ideologies of foreign policies?
14. Mention the ways in which leadership helps to attain national power in the
period of peace.
Introduction to
1.5 SUMMARY International Relations
• The nature of international relations is dynamic especially in these times of

globalization. The study extends beyond the interactions of states and their NOTES
relations to that of different governments. It encapsulates the different factors
which influence, shape and determine the relations among different nations
and their governments.
• The field of study in international relations is the international society. Its
objects of study are the evolution and structure of international society, the
actions on the international scene, the patterns of their behaviour and the
driving forces behind their actions and finally the problems of international
planning.
• International relations are concerned with social interactions of states that
affect human relationships. The central focus of international relations being
the study of social interactions in the context where there is no higher authority
to intrude or mediate and it’s outside any single government authority.
• There have been two dominant theoretical constructs plausible explanations
which are competing in providing explanations to the issues, factors as well
as in the conduct of international relations—idealism and realism.
• In order to understand the significance of international relations, it is important
to know the essence of what a state provides for their citizens. There are at
least five basic social values that states are usually expected to uphold: security,
freedom, order, justice and welfare.
• There are two different perspectives of the international system being
characterized by economic interdependence. The first perspective is optimistic
as they view the outcome of ensuring freedom and wealth through the
expansion of the global marketplace and thereby increase participation,
specialization, efficiency and productivity. The other view is pessimistic of
economic interdependence as it promotes inequality.
• The significance of the States in the field of international politics has some
logical justification. The real catalysts in the international political system are
the independent nation-states. Normally, these states recognize one another
and enhance their relationships through diplomatic channels. Even without
recognition and during war, relationships exist.
• The core assumption of the realist theory was that states are the central
actors in international politics. However, with the changing nature of politics
the major challenge before the world was how to develop a system in which
the state should perform its functions efficiently without compromising on its
essential ‘minimalist functions.’ For this purpose, the non-state actors
eventually, especially the market forces, were given considerable space in
economic matters including economic decision-making.
• Some examples of non-state actors in international society are transnational
companies, international organizations, non-legitimate groups,
Introduction to non-governmental organizations, political communities, international regimes
and inter-governmental organizations.
• Criticism of globalization include the absence of anything new, concentration
of technological developments in the developed world, western imperialism,
NOTES economic crimes, religious extremism and economic inequalities.
• In the broad sense, power can be defined as the capacity of persons or group
to get things done effectively. Adopting this notion, we can ‘define national
power as a capacity of a nation to get things done effectively in international
system’. National power plays the same role in international politics as money
plays in market economy. It should be also noted that it is neither good nor
evil in itself- ‘it is socially and morally neutral’.
• Based on power sovereign states have been classified by scholars in number
of ways. Traditionally, states have been divided into ‘great powers’ and ‘super
powers’. Super powers are those nations who can influence international
politics and its various actors without compromising their own interests. Great
powers also possess the capacity to influence international politics, but to a
lesser extent. Their area of influence is often limited to a particular region.
• Elements of national power includes tangible as well as intangible elements.
Tangible elements include geography; geopolitics; natural resources and raw
materials; population; and technology. Intangible elements include ideologies;
morale and national character; and leadership.
• While assessing national power, it should be very clear that it is a very difficult
task. National power consists of a number of tangible and intangible elements
and so far, there are no well-defined scientific tools, quantitative or qualitative,
to measure it. It is a relative judgment such as one state could be more
powerful than others in some respect but no state in the world is absolute
powerful.
1.6 KEY TERMS
• State: It refers to a sovereign, independent state which has a clearly

demarcated and bordered territory with a permanent population, under the
jurisdiction of the supreme government that is constitutionally independent of
all foreign governments.
• Security Dilemma: It refers to a paradox of the state system, where the
state which claims to possess security to protect its citizens, also threaten the
citizens of other states.
• Community: It is a group based on human solidarity and a distinctive pattern
of cooperation.
• Inter-governmental Organization: It refers to an organization comprising
primarily of sovereign states (called as member states), or of other inter-
governmental organizations.
• Power: It is defined as the capacity of persons or group to get things done Introduction to
effectively.
• Super Powers: It refers to those nations who can influence international
politics and its various actors without compromising their own interests.
NOTES
• Geopolitics: It is the study of the relationship among politics and geography,
demography, and economics, especially with respect to the foreign policy of a
nation.
• Ideology: It is a cluster of ideas, about life, society, or government, which
originates in most cases as consciously advocated or dogmatically asserted
social, political, religious slogans or battle cries.
• National Moral: It is the degree of determination with which a nation supports
the home and foreign policies of its government in times of peace or war.
1.7 ANSWERS TO ‘CHECK YOUR PROGRESS’
1. The objects of study in international relations are the evolution and structure
of international society, the actions on the international scene, the patterns of
their behaviour and the driving forces behind their actions and finally the
problems of international planning.
2. The five basic social values that states are usually expected to uphold are
security, freedom, order, justice and welfare.
3. Justice is ensured by the international community through the codification of
justice in the concept of human rights and the international legal framework
of human rights.
4. The five forms in which the growing role of TNCs can be seen are:
(i) Uncontrollable financial flows
(ii) Triangulation of trade
(iii) Regulatory arbitrage
(iv) Extraterritoriality
(v) Forcing states to accept global regulation
5. The meaning of state as a sovereign political entity implies that the state has
supreme political power within its own boundaries, being independent of others,
and also is capable of marching some resources for public purposes.
6. Apart from the UN agencies many other international financial organizations
have played a substantial role in developing and strengthening emerging
economies, like the Organization for European Cooperation and Development
(OECD), Asian Development Bank (ADB), World Bank, etc.
7. The dominant agenda of non-legitimate groups such as political actors is either
separatism from one country and merging into another or spreading a particular
religious doctrine.
Introduction to 8. Realism and liberalism are the two broad schools of thought on which the
regime theory of international relations is based.
9. Inter-governmental organizations are established by treaties which act as a
charter creating the group and treaties are formed when lawful representatives
NOTES of several member states go through a ratification process, providing the IGO
with an international legal personality.
10. Some common categories of inter-governmental organizations include: global
organizations; regional organizations; cultural, linguistic, ethnic, religious or
historical organizations, economic organizations and educational organizations.
11. The difference between great powers and super powers is that the former
influences international politics to a lesser extent than the latter. Also, the
area of influence of great powers is limited to a particular region.
12. Geography, geopolitics, natural resources and raw materials, population and
technology are the tangible elements of national power.
13. Hans Morgenthau classifies ideologies of foreign policies as ideologies of the
status quo, ideologies of imperialism, and those ideologies which appear to be
somewhat ambiguous.
14. In the period of peace, the ways in which leadership helps to attain national
power are through protecting its people abroad, constant vigilance in search
of new avenues, accumulation of a wide range of information on diverse
fields across the world and by bringing peace and prosperity in the motherland.
1.8 QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES
Short-Answer Questions
1. What is the nature of the subject of international relations?
2. What is the importance of NGOs as political actors?
3. Discuss the power based classification of economies.
4. Write a short note on the intangible elements of power.
Long-Answer Questions
1. Discuss the scope of international relations.
2. Evaluate the criticisms of the emerging state order.
3. Assess the tangible elements of power.
4. Explain the social values that the state is expected to uphold.
Introduction to
1.9 FURTHER READING International Relations
Appadorai, A. 2005. Dilemma in Foreign Policy in the Modern World. New

York: Asia Pub. House. NOTES
Jordan, Kiras, Lonsdale. 2008. Understanding Modern Warfare. Cambridge
University Press.
Hirst, Paul Q, Thompson. 1996. Globalization in Question: The International
Economy and the Possibilities of Governance. Polity Press.
Malhotra, V.K. 2004. International Relations. New Delhi: Anmol Publications.
Cohn, Theodore H. 2008. Global Political Economy. US: Longman.
Foreign Policies of
UNIT 2 FOREIGN POLICIES OF Various Countries
VARIOUS COUNTRIES
NOTES
Structure
2.0 Introduction
2.1 Unit Objectives
2.2 Definition of Foreign Policy—Various Factors in Shaping the Foreign Policy
2.3 Determinants of Foreign Policy: Legislature, Public Opinion and Civil Services
2.4 National Interest-Role of National Interest in the Formulation of Foreign
Policy of a Country
2.5 Instruments and Techniques of State Interaction: Propaganda and Diplomacy
2.5.1 Propaganda
2.6 Foreign Policy: India, UK, USA and China
2.6.2 United Kingdom’s Foreign Policy
2.7 Summary
2.8 Key Terms
2.11 Further Reading
2.0 INTRODUCTION
It is very difficult, rather next to impossible for any nation on our planet to survive in
isolation. All the nations have different resources, climate, financial conditions,
population and various other factors which makes them maintain good relations with
other nations. These good relations are not just necessary for the material benefits
but also to avoid any situation of conflict or war which could lead to heavy losses
both in material and human terms. Foreign policy is the combination of national
interests and strategic terms on which the countries maintain relationships with other
countries. There are various factors which affect the foreign policy of nation and
there are different techniques through which the nations choose to conduct themselves
with other nations. In this unit, you will learn about the definition of foreign policy,
the determinants of foreign policy, various factors in shaping the foreign policy, the
role of national interest in the formulation of foreign policy, the instruments and
techniques of state interaction along with the foreign policy of countries like India,
UK, USA and China.
Foreign Policies of
Various Countries 2.1 UNIT OBJECTIVES

NOTES • Describe what is foreign policy as well as the various factors in shaping
foreign policy
• Explain the determinants of foreign policy
• Assess the role of national interest in the formulation of foreign policy of a
country
• Analyse the instruments and techniques of state interaction
• Discuss the foreign policy of India, UK, USA and China
2.2 DEFINITION OF FOREIGN POLICY—VARIOUS

FACTORS IN SHAPING THE FOREIGN POLICY
The foreign policy of a country, often referred to as the foreign relations policy,
comprises self-interest strategies adopted by the state to protect its national interests
and achieve its goals in the international scenario. These approaches are strategically
used to interact with other countries. The world is getting increasingly interconnected
or ‘globalized’. We are not merely a handful of individual states any more. We rely
on each other for economic as well as military support.
Due to increasing level of globalization and transnational activities, the states
may also have to interact with non-state actors in order to maximize benefits of
multilateral international cooperation. Since the national interest is most important,
foreign policies are designed by the governments of various countries using high-
level decision making processes.
How the rest of the world views one state is of great significance. Harsh
foreign policies are often coupled with military action or economic embargoes. Dealing
with the complications of other countries may lead to countries becoming isolationists.
However, foreign policy cannot be prevented from becoming isolationist either.
Foreign policy is often described as one of the driving forces of the international
relations operations. It is impossible for a state to live in complete isolation. An
individual and a state have many similarities. A state, just like an individual, always
tries to promote its interests. The interest of any state is referred to as ‘national
interest’. A foreign policy is made to achieve the objectives of national interest.
The essence of India’s foreign policy can be traced back to the freedom
movement. The freedom fighters, while fighting for independence, were also involved
in other important causes. The fundamentals that emerged at that time are still
relevant today. India’s foreign policy primarily focusses on having cordial relations,
equality of all the states, emphasis on the principles of non-alignment and conducting
international relations with equality.
Foreign policy is, therefore, nothing but a policy that governs international
relations of a country. Foreign policy of a country requires understanding the behaviour
of other states. A foreign policy involves various objectives and goals that are to be Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
achieved through foreign policy.
Meaning and Objectives
Originally, it was believed that the foreign policy of a country grew out of national NOTES
interest only and no other matters of interest were involved in dealing with other
countries. The meaning of foreign policy today has attracted many debates among
scholars. In easy and general terms, it is the relation among countries concerning all
issues of international relevance like disarmament, peace, climate change,
decolonization, and justice. In specific terms, foreign policy is the policy of a country
in pursuit of its national interests in global affairs, for example, the country’s refusal
or acceptance of international agreements like the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
and Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) or seeking a permanent seat in the
United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Through its foreign policy, a state tries to
control the behaviour of other states. In this process, a state and its statesmen are
generally guided by national interest.
It must be remembered that in the era of globalization, it has become very
difficult to isolate national interest of one country from its geo-political or geo-strategic
location and international environment. Therefore, the foreign policy of a country is
more than the sum total of its foreign polices, in which it also includes its commitment,
its interests and objectives in the current form and the principles of right conduct
that it professes. Thus, the foreign policy of India is determined not only by domestic
factors but also by international factors. Some of these factors are dynamic, which
go on changing in the course of time; while some other basic factors make a long-
term impact or influence on foreign policy. Thus, continuity and change among these
factors is a common phenomenon in determining the foreign policy of a country. It is
really interesting to know how the foreign policy of a country emerges over time to
undertake its present complex form. It is an ongoing process where various factors
interact with one another in different ways and in different situations.
In modern times, it can be said that no state can avoid involvement in
international relations. This involvement can definitely be improved and systematized
if it is based on certain defined lines. This provides a rational urge for the formulation
of foreign policies. Again, the term foreign policy suggests a greater degree of
rational procedure and a step-by-step planning process towards a known and defined
goal. It is a rational response to the existing and fairly perceived external conditions.
Though there are national and international limitations to any such well-knit planning,
yet an effort is constantly made and will continue to be made for it.
Foreign policy is an important key to the rational explanation of international
behaviours. It is impossible to understand inter-state relations without understanding
foreign policies of states. The study of foreign policies, therefore, is one of the most
important aspects of the study of international politics.
Foreign policy deals with a country’s external environment. It represents the
substance of foreign relations of a state. A foreign policy is to be analysed from
actual behaviour patterns of the states rather than exclusively from declared objectives
Foreign Policies of or policy plans. Its object is to influence events or situations that are beyond the
Various Countries
state boundary. The behaviour of each state affects the behaviour of others. Every
state, with its national interests, tries to take maximum advantage of the actions of
other states. Thus, the primary purpose of foreign policy is to seek adjustments in
NOTES the behaviour of other states in favour of oneself.
The meaning of ‘foreign policy’ is to decide on certain goals and make efforts
to regulate the behaviour of others to achieve these goals. These goals can be
achieved with the help of power. Thus, national interest and power are the most
important components of a foreign policy. All states have some kind of relations with
one another; they have to behave with one another in a particular manner. The
framing of the foreign policy is, therefore, an essential activity of modern states.
In the words of Mahendra Kumar, author of Theoretical Aspects of
International Politics, the meaning of foreign policy is incomplete and imperfect. A
change in the behaviour of other states or countries may not always be desirable. At
times, it may be advisable to ensure continuation of the same behaviour of others. At
another time, it may become essential to make certain adjustments in one’s own
behaviour. According to Kumar, ‘The aim of foreign policy should be to regulate and
not merely to change the behaviour of other states. Regulation means adjusting the
behaviour of other states to suit one’s own interest as best as possible.’
During the cold war period, the super powers, the United States and the
former Soviet Union, tried to change the behaviour of other states to get maximum
number of bloc followers, and India sought to regulate the behaviour of maximum
number of countries to build a strong Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). The US
policy of containment of communism was to change the course of events in its
favour. The United States had also unsuccessfully tried to persuade India to sign the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
According to George Modelski, Foreign policy is defined as ‘the system of
activities evolved by communities for changing the behaviour of other states and for
adjusting their own activities to the international environment’.
Joseph Frankels definition of national interest is as follows: National interest
is the key concept in foreign policy. In essence, it amounts to the sum total of all the
national values—national in both meanings of the word—both pertaining to the nation
and to the state… National interest can describe the aspirations of the state; it can
be used also operationally, in application to the actual policies and programmes
pursued; it can be used polemically in political argument, to explain, rationalize or
criticize. The recurrent controversies on foreign policy often stem from these
ambiguities and not only from the different ideal about the substance of the national
interest.
Again Modelski says that the most important task of foreign policy must be to
‘throw light on the ways in which states attempt to change, and succeed in changing,
the behaviour of other states.’ According to Hugh Gibson, foreign policy is defined
as ‘a well rounded, comprehensive plan, based on knowledge and experience, for
conducting the business of government with the rest of the world. It is aimed at
promoting and protecting the interests of the nation.’
According to Northedge, ‘foreign policy is an interaction between forces Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
originating outside the country’s border and those working within them’. Hartman
defines the foreign policy as ‘a systematic statement of deliberately selected national
interest’. Thus, every definition gives the emphasis on behaviour of states to regulate
their own actions and, if possible, change or regulate the behaviour of other states, NOTES
with the view of serving their national interests.
In the words of Rodee, foreign policy involves the formulation and
implementation of a group of principles which shape the behavioural pattern of a
state while negotiating with other states to protect or further its vital interests. The
idea of Crab Jr. explains that foreign policy-makers identify the national goals to be
achieved and the means to achieve them. The interaction between the objectives
and the means is foreign policy. Couloumbis and Wolfes expressed similar opinion
that, ‘… Foreign policies are syntheses of the ends (national interests) and means
(power and capabilities) of nations-states.’ To understand this definition, it will be
necessary to examine the meaning of national interest and power, which as mentioned,
are important ingredients of foreign policy. Therefore, foreign policy means deciding
on certain goals and making efforts to regulate behaviour of others to achieve those
goals. The goals are sought to be achieved with the help of power.
Foreign policy, as we have seen, is concerned both with change and status
quo. There is another dimension too. As stated by Feliks Gross, even a decision not
to have any relations with a state is also considered foreign policy. Each individual
state has to decide the degree of its involvement in its relations with another country
that would protect its interests. In 1949, India took a decision not to have any relations
with the racist regime of South Africa, which was a definite foreign policy. Similarly,
after Bolshevik Revolution, the American decision of not recognizing the Soviet
Union till 1934, was clearly the US policy towards USSR. The foreign policy may
either be positive or negative. It is positive when it aims at regulating the behaviour
of other states by changing it, and negative when it seeks such a regulation by not
changing that behaviour. Thus, we have to conclude that, every state adopts certain
principles to guide its relations with other states. These principles are based on the
interaction between national interests and means (power) to achieve them. As
Bandopadhayaya opines, ‘The formulation of foreign policy is essentially an exercise
in the choice of ends and means on the part of a nation-state in an international
setting.’
In formulating the foreign policy, the role of policy-makers is indeed most
important. It is mostly dependent on the perceptions and ideology of the foreign
minister who guides the officials and who identifies the aims of foreign policy and
determines the principles to be followed. Today, an important role is being played by
the people and media. The flow of action from the community towards the policy-
makers is known as the ‘input’ and the decisions of the policy-makers are known as
the ‘output’, as stated by Modelski. Kumar defines the foreign policy as ‘a thought-
out course of action for achieving objectives in foreign relation as dictated by the
ideology of national interest’. He further includes foreign policy as the following:
• The policy-makers
• Interests and objectives
Foreign Policies of • Principles of foreign policy
Various Countries
• Means of foreign policy
The foreign policy of a country is dependent on various factors for its
development like objectives, goals and orientation.
NOTES
Objectives
The five main objectives of a foreign policy of any country are as follows:
(i) The first objective of a foreign policy is to protect the territorial integrity of
the country and the interests of its citizens from both within and outside the
country. For this purpose, generally the states prefer to follow the policy of
status quo. If a state pursues a policy which seeks to upset the status quo, it
is branded as revisionist and the suspicion is aroused by other members of the
international community. For the maintenance of its prestige, it has to protect
the interests of its citizens both inside and outside the state.
(ii) The second objective of a foreign policy is maintenance of links with other
members of the international community and adoption of policy of a conflict
or cooperation towards them with a view to promoting its own interests. It is
well known that India has diplomatic relations with the Jewish state, Israel,
but its relations with the Arab countries do not get strained, primarily because
of close trade relations with the Arab countries.
(iii) The third objective of a foreign policy of a country seeks to promote and
further its national interests. The primary interest of each state is self-
preservation, security and well-being of its citizens. Different interests often
clash and the states have to protect their interests, bearing in mind this regard.
(iv) The fourth objective of the foreign policy aims at promoting the economic
interests of the country. The status of a state in the international arena is
largely determined by its economic status. The states try to pursue a foreign
policy, which can contribute to their economic prosperity and enable it to play
a more effective role in international politics. Most of the treaties and
agreements of the states, which other members of international community
have concluded, are essentially designed to protect and promote the economic
interest of these countries. This is an important factor which is evident from
the fact that India adopted the policy of non-alignment chiefly because it had
to concentrate on her economic development. Further, India hoped to get
every possible help and assistance to accelerate the process of economic
development from both the superpowers. Similarly, the USA and China, despite
their ideological differences were obliged to join hands differences due to
economic considerations.
(v) The last and fifth objective of foreign policy aims at enhancing the influence
of the state either by expanding its area of influence or reducing the other
states to the position of dependency. Post World War II, the policy of the
United States and former Soviet Union has been largely motivated by these
considerations.
Goals Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
The objectives of foreign policy can be summed up in one term, that is, national
interest. However, national interest is open to a variety of meanings. In the words of
Paul Seabury, ‘national interest is what foreign policy-makers say it is.’ Security, NOTES
national development and world order are the essential components of national interest
of any state. In other words, it embraces such matters as security against aggression,
development of higher standard of living and maintenance of conditions of national
and international stability. Notwithstanding, to avoid any ambiguity and confusion,
Holsti has substituted the concept of objectives, which is essentially ‘an image of a
future state of affairs and future set of conditions that governments through individual
policy-makers aspire to bring about by wielding influence abroad and by changing or
sustaining the behaviour of other states.’
However, objectives can be derived from national interest only. Objectives
are of a more specific nature than interests. Hence, objectives are conditioned by
the advantages of accommodating the interest of other states. An objective, therefore,
comes into existence when a particular type of national interest becomes important
for a state to seek. George Modelski considers both interests as well as objectives
under the category of aim or purpose.
The acts of any state on certain norms or principles represent more or less
clearly formulated patterns of behaviour which guide national action or policies. The
ideology of foreign policy was together constituted by these principles. Every action
and policy involves the application of means. A foreign policy is, therefore, a thought
out course of action for achieving objectives in foreign relation as dictated by the
ideology of national interest. The objectives of foreign policy can be classified into
many pairs of contrasting objectives or goals. Arnold Wolfers has defined, for instance,
the difference between ‘possession goals’ and ‘milieu goals’. In the context of the
former, it means those goals which a foreign policy seeks to achieve in order to
preserve its possessions, like a stretch of territory or membership of some world
organizations. In the context of the latter, it understands those goals which nations
pursue in order to shape favourable conditions beyond their national boundaries.
Achievements of peace, promotion of international law and growth of international
organization can be considered as ‘milieu goals’. In practice, milieu goals may only
be the means for the pursuit of possession goals.
Hence, some objectives may be direct national goals, such as preservation of
national independence and security; and some are indirect goals which are of primary
benefit to the people. Therefore, another contrasting set of goals may be ideological
or revolutionary goals and traditional goals.
The objectives of foreign policy further can be classified into the following three
categories:
(i) Core values and interests: The core values and interests are the types of
goals for which more people are willing to make ultimate sacrifices. The
existence of a state is related to them. They are:
Foreign Policies of (a) Self preservation, defence of strategically vital areas, ethnic, religious
Various Countries
or linguistic unity and protection of cultural and political institutions and
beliefs and values;
(b) Economic development and prosperity can lead to the adoption of a
NOTES course of policy that ignores the core values and interest and yet survive.
(ii) Middle range objectives: Middle range objectives include:
(a) Trade, foreign aid, access to communication facilities, sources of supply
and foreign markets are necessary for increasing social welfare.
(b) Increase of state prestige by expansion of military capacity, distribution
of foreign aid and diplomatic ceremonies—including such exhibitions
and status symbols as development of nuclear weapons, outer space
exploration, many forms of imperialism or self-extension, such as creating
colonies, satellite and sphere of influence. Ideological self-extension is
also prevalent in many forms to promote socio-economic political values
of a state abroad.
(iii) Universal long range objectives: Universal long range objectives are those
plans, dreams, visions and grand designs concerning the ultimate political or
ideological organization of the international system. These objectives aim at
restructuring the international system. Hitler’s concept of Thousand Year
Reich, the European New Order, Japan’s dream of Greater East Asia, the
Soviet Union’s idea of World Soviet Federation, the American dream of making
the world safe for democracy, and De Gaulle’s image of Federation of
Fatherlands, are some of the illustrations of long- range objectives.
It, however, should be noted here that the first and second categories of objectives
require immediate pursuit, but the third category goals are meant for long-term
pursuit.
Foreign policy orientation
The general polices, strategies and obligations of a state are termed as orientation.
Generally, the foreign policy can be observed to have three types of orientation:
(i) Isolation and non-involvement, adopted by the USA until World War II under
the influence of the Monroe Doctrine
(ii) Non-alignment, adopted by most of the Third World countries, particularly
India
(iii) Forming coalitions or alliances, adopted by the states having common economic
problems and common enemies, e.g., NATO, CENTO, WTO, OAS, OAU,
EU, ASEAN, and SAARC
Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS
1. State the primary focus of India's foreign policy.
2. Name the two most important components of a foreign policy. NOTES
3. What is the difference between 'possession goals' and 'milieu goals'?
4. How does the cultural and historical tradition affect foreign policy?
2.3 DETERMINANTS OF FOREIGN POLICY:

LEGISLATURE, PUBLIC OPINION AND CIVIL
SERVICES
Formulating a foreign policy is a dynamic process. Normally, a change of government

does not mean a change in the fundamentals of foreign policy of a state, although a
revolutionary change in the political set-up may result in drastic changes in a state.
The foreign policy normally remains unchanged because the foreign policy of
a state is determined by a number of factors, many of which remain static or
unchanged. Some factors may be changed, but their influence or impact in shaping
the foreign policy of a country is usually secondary. The foreign policy of a country
is ‘compounded out of many factors and forces’. All of them interact as well as
determine the foreign policy. Some of them are permanent, some are temporary,
some are obvious, others obscure. In devising its foreign policy, a nation must consider
certain basic facts of existence. This frame of reference includes:
• Geo-strategic (geographic strategic) situations
• Population potential
• Economic endowments
• Ideological environment
According to Norman Judson Padelford and George Arthur Lincoln, authors of The
Dynamics of International Politics, ‘Fundamentally, foreign policy has its roots in
the unique historical background, political institutions, traditions, economic needs,
power factors, aspirations, peculiar geographical circumstances and basic set of
values held by a nation’. According to J. Bandopadhyay, author of The Making of
India’s Foreign Policy, the basic determinants of foreign policy include geography,
economic development, political traditions, domestic milieu, international milieu, military
strength and national character. The foreign policy of a country is influenced by so
many elements that it is not possible to enumerate all of them here. However, some
of them are discussed below.
Historical factor
History determines the boundaries of states and also a legacy which furnishes the
guidelines for the foreign policy at the present time. It determines the prevailing
tradition and the self-image of a society, and therefore, the specific national style.
Foreign Policies of The British habit of confusing; the French concern with security, honour and glory;
Various Countries
the German ruthlessness; the Russian obsession with secrecy; and the American
habit to interpret international issues as moral issues have, definite and specific
historical roots. Such a national style, in every case has expressed itself in the
NOTES formulation and pursuit of foreign policy.
The cultural and historical traditions of a country also deeply influence the
foreign policy. A country generally possessing a unified common culture and historical
experience can pursue an effective foreign policy because of the support of all
sections of society who share the same values and memories. On the other hand, a
country which is culturally and historically fragmented cannot pursue an equally
effective foreign policy. Commenting on France in particular, Duroselle, a French
historian, has remarked, ‘France… is much more a “product of history” than a
“geographic entity”’. History has determined the French quest for natural frontier
as well as security against Germany. National history has been one of the most
important factors in the development of the Chinese foreign policy. It has been the
case in every state.
Therefore, British imperialism in India and our struggle for freedom against
colonialism and imperialism has had direct impact on the foreign policy of India. It
was the outcome of our history that led India to give its complete support to freedom
struggles in Afro-Asian countries and fight against racial discrimination.
Population factor
Population plays an important part in determining the foreign policy. The foreign
policy of a country regarding political, economic and military phases is also conditioned
by the size, character and distribution of its population. However, the size of a
country’s population alone is not an index of its economic and military greatness.
The degree of social integration, adequacy of political control and extent of
industrialization, characterize the power of a country. Nevertheless, the dynamics of
population constitutes an important consideration. Naturally, countries having high
birth rates like China and India can count upon a reservoir of manpower. England
and France have suffered a setback because the population has been declining in
these countries (is relevant both in quantitative and qualitative terms).
There is a normal expectation that the greater the population, the greater will
be its power. Population determines the standard of living, values, and the way of
life and even expectations of a nation. Even great powers like the United States and
Russia have shown respect to this factor.
Apart from the quantity, the quality of population as revealed in its educational
level, skilled labour, technical know-how, health and strong national character is a
factor of foreign policy. Ultimately, the quality of population determines the quality
of political system, public administration and even leadership.
Quality of government
One of the major influences on the foreign policy of a state is the quality of government
and leadership. Government converts a potential power into actual power. Its
popularity efficiently organizes the public administration. Even the quality of civil
servants is, in the long run, a determinant of foreign policy. Every single state’s Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
foreign policy is an integral part of its peculiar system of government.
Economic development
The basis for many principles of a foreign policy is also provided by the economic NOTES
condition of a particular state. No state in the world is economically self-sufficient.
Even the United States is greatly dependent on world trade for economic prosperity.
Most of the problems regarding the economy arise from this mutual interdependence
of the economics of states. An agrarian state, primarily like Argentina, must sell its
wheat, wool and beef to an industrial state like England and buy industrial products
such as tractors, cloth and automobiles in return from such a state. This
interdependence leads to international economic activity which is expressed in terms
of tariffs, import quotas, trade agreements and other financial arrangements. The
practice of economic specialization of production and free trade in goods is not
followed by states. They rather follow the practice of ‘economic self-sufficiency’
which leads to maladjustment in international economic relationship. Economic tension
in the world which sometimes takes the form of political and military action is created
by this maladjustment. By nature, all the states are not equally endowed with such
critical raw materials as iron, coal, oil, rubber, uranium and other products essential
to warfare. Such types of differences are further heightened by unequal capacity to
utilize the available resources. Therefore, states construct their foreign policies in
such a way so that the supply of war materials may not run short and their trade
may have a favourable balance. International economic activity also needs facilities
and protection of foreign investments. Both Britain and the United States are more
interested in the Middle East because they have investments in the soil of this region.
A state’s capacity to solve such economic problems is reflected in its foreign policy.
Most of the states have added to their power and prestige by acquiring control over
economic resources. Again, an industrial country is expected to have a higher gross
national product and can devote greater funds for external purposes, namely, economic
aid programme, military ventures and extensive diplomatic commitments. On the
other hand, industrially backward countries are not able to actively involve themselves
in external affairs. The lack of scientists, engineers and other specialists in the
country prevents them from taking advantage of the technological break through
abroad.
Natural resources
This is another important element for the foreign policy of a state. National resources,
including food, minerals, metal and water resources, constitute a vital element of
national power and consequently of foreign policy. Abundance of these resources
certainly enhances the importance of a country. For example, the international
importance of the west Asian countries has been underlined due to the presence of
petroleum. These countries account for 80 per cent of West Europe’s oil supplies.
Food and energy are equally essential. If they are not locally available, they have to
be secured through international cooperation. Availability of strategic and important
raw materials will always enhance a country’s effectiveness in foreign affairs. Their
absence will correspondingly weaken a country’s international stature.
Foreign Policies of Industrial development
Various Countries
Industrial development plays a vital role in determining a state’s foreign policy. It has
already provided the criterion of the classification of states as advanced and under-
developed or developing. Most of the industrial powers like the United States, Russia,
NOTES
Britain and Japan have enjoyed a power status. To use foreign aid as a new instrument
of foreign policy has also been granted to such powers. However, the developing
and industrially weak countries are fated to a relatively ineffective role in international
affairs. This weakness definitely sets certain limits on their policy choices, which
leaves little scope for active initiative and leadership.
Ideological factor
The foreign policy of a nation is mostly influenced by its ideology, which subscribes
to certain fundamental beliefs relating to the distribution of power in society. The
foreign policy of a nation is conceived in the minds of politicians or political leaders.
Policy is expressed in terms of the beliefs and behaviour of these political leaders,
although they are conditioned by custom and tradition.
There is considerable reflection as to whether ideology by itself constitutes
one of nation’s vital interests. At times, a leader makes use of ideology only to justify
his policy or behaviour in familiar terms which is acceptable to his countrymen. Yet,
occasionally, at other times, a nation is at war not for national defence, but only to
force others to accept its ideology. However, ideology alone is not a policy goal for
reflecting the realistic view on this matter. The fact is evident that nations professing
opposite ideologies live in peace with each other for a number of years. Yet, the
contradictory evidence is also available. If we do not take into consideration ‘world
revolution’ as one of its objectives, the foreign policy of the former Soviet Union
cannot be fully explained. The expansion of Communism was a bonafide goal. Russian
empowerment since 1945 aimed to achieve the establishment of Communism as
much as its political domination. However, the importance of ideology in the
constituents of foreign policy should not be aggravated. They are only used simply
to conceal the real facts of a situation or real motives of ambitious rulers.
Military strength
The military strength or capacity of a country has a direct impact on its foreign
policy. Only those states or nations with a strong military have adopted aggressive
postures. Possession of large and powerful armed forces equipped with modern
sophisticated weapons of warfare is essential for making an effective and aggressive
foreign policy. It is the final element of the power status of a state and consequently,
of its ability to play an effective role in world affairs. A state with a weak military
machine will normally be at a disadvantage, even at peaceful negotiations. Ordinarily,
a military superior state or nation would try to pursue a bold policy to maximize its
gains and a weak state or nation would try to minimize its disadvantages.
Geo-strategic factor
The geo-strategic is an important factor in the formation of a foreign policy. Geo-
strategy, a subfield of geo-politics, is a type of foreign policy guided principally by
geographical factors as they constrict or affect political and military planning. As Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
with all types of strategies, geo-strategy is concerned with matching the means to
an end. In this case, matching a country’s resources, whether they are limited or
extensive with its geopolitical objectives, this can be local, regional or global. Strategy
is intertwined with geography, as geography is with nationhood, or as Gray and NOTES
Solan state it, ‘geography is the mother of strategy’. It is generally said that ‘pacts
may be broken, treaties unilaterally denounced, and geography holds its victim fast’.
A nation can escape anything but the constraints of geography. In a geographical
situation, the characteristics of size, topography, shape and climate are important. A
large size is required to support a huge population— a climate which is uniform and
conducive to physical vigour, preferably either temperate or tropical highland. It
should have a topography that offers boundaries with natural defence barriers such
as mountains, forests, swamps, rivers, deserts and oceans. It should have a shape
which is compact rather than elongated or disjoined like Pakistan till 1971, and thus
easy to defend, provide part of the necessary power potential allowing a state to
accuse an independent foreign policy. Before the arrival of modern military and
machines, topography and terrain were considered as a great asset in maintaining
national security. American Isolationism was made possible due to its location between
the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The great African deserts similarly, protected Egypt
for centuries and the Alps served as the protector barrier between France and Italy,
and the Himalayan mountain range protected India.
However, one can say that the geo-strategic factors of foreign policy in relation
to the traditional viewpoint were developed much before the demonstration of the
importance of air power extended by the invention of nuclear weapons. In the context
of new technological developments, this view seems to suffer from much amplification
and rhetoricism. We no longer believe in statements phrased in deterministic language
such as, ‘the geographical position of a nation is the principal factor conditioning its
foreign policy’ or, ‘England was destined by geography to command the seas’ or,
‘sea routes have beckoned the Japanese abroad’. This effect of geography on the
political phenomenon has become the victim of the law of diminishing utility in view
of technological revolution and scientific progress.
We cannot deny that many of the above mentioned geographical
characteristics and the resulting political implications will still remain owing to the
advent of air power, which has revolutionized these. In the present time, instead of
land or sea surface distance, air distance and weather conditions have assumed
great military importance. Within twenty-four hours, any distance can be covered.
In fourty-five hours, heavy bombers can encircle the globe. Atom, hydrogen and
cobalt bombs have revolutionized the old concepts of national security. No country
today on earth can escape from an attack. There is no defence against nuclear
missiles.
Public opinion
Public opinion has become an important factor in shaping the foreign policy. A foreign
policy is not formed in the secrecy of an office any more. It is formulated in the open
and public opinion can often force a change in the foreign policy and in its
Foreign Policies of implementation. It was the strength of the public opinion in American politics, which
Various Countries
forced their government to order the withdrawal of American forces from south
Vietnam. Again, it was the public opinion against the British in the Suez crisis that
forced the Eden government to resign in 1957. It was due to the fear of annoying a
NOTES minority community that compelled Indian foreign policy-makers not to establish
diplomatic ties with Israel for four decades.
The character of foreign policy has been influenced by the considerations of
shape, mass and geographic configurations. In olden times, landlocked states heavily
depended upon infantry and those having extended coastlines depended upon naval
forces. The solid land masses of China as well as Russia have more than once
served to check the advancing invading armies. The importance of a particular
nation’s position in the world depends upon the possession of rich resources such as
food and minerals, upon the degree of industrialization, and upon the location on or
near the major ocean trade routes and world commercial centres.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

5. List the basic facts that must be considered while devising a foreign
policy.
6. State the elements which characterize the power of a country.
7. Which factor aided the American Isolationism?
2.4 NATIONAL INTEREST-ROLE OF NATIONAL

INTEREST IN THE FORMULATION OF
FOREIGN POLICY OF A COUNTRY
National power is the strength of the state to do what it likes internally and externally.
National power is the power or the capacity of a state with the domestic and foreign
policy as effectively as possible to realize its national objectives. Hartman says that
national power is the strength or capacity that a sovereign national state can use to
achieve its national interests. For H.J. Morgenthau, national power is ‘the power of
man over the minds and actions of other man’. To Schwarzendberger, national power
is ‘the capacity to impose one’s will on others by reliance on effective sanctions in
case of non-compliance’.
The most stable factor upon which the power of a nation depends is geography.
Geography implies factors like land, topography, size, location, boundaries, and climate
and so on. These factors have a phenomenal bearing on the power of the nations
and their foreign politics. The area of a nation can accommodate a large population
and many natural resources. Location is a major determinant of whether a country
is sea power or land power. Climate too has an influence on the vigour of the people.
Neither too cold nor too hot but temperate climate can determine the power of a
nation. The question of topography-terrain, mountain, seas, rivers, lakes, and forests
can assume great importance. Boundaries have exercised a great influence over Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
the gate of a number of nations.
Economy may be said to be the second important element constituting the
power of a nation. It includes factors like natural resources, agricultural production,
industrial production, system of transport and communication. It is richly endowed NOTES
with natural resources and is capable of achieving the status of great power. In
modern times, as wars have become large-scale and expensive, the element of
economy has assumed great importance.
Today, a nation can succeed in the pursuit of its different stakes or goals
through application of different instruments like diplomacy, balance of power, collective
security and war along with sound economy; the sounder the economy, the stronger
becomes the position of a nation. In today’s world, strategic factors like rubber, coal,
petrol, electricity, uranium, steel, manganese may be said to be the motive powers or
energies for production. In both world wars petrol proved to be a strategic product;
hence, the strength of a nation depends on its ability to command the strategic
product.
Population is undoubtedly a very important element of national power. Whether
a state is big or small, it has to depend upon its population. A state with large population
is capable of achieving a great power status in the world. More populous state
means more men to work, more women to bear children, and more people for
production. A state with the largest number of men and women is most capable,
since other elements are not equal.
As Voltaire said, ‘God is always on the side of the biggest battalions. Generally,
populous nations have been powerful nations too. We find that the nations which
had larger manpower had better bargaining position and could exercise greater
influence over the balance of power and fare better in war.
However, the quantity of population alone is not enough to contribute to national
power. Quality is also important. In modern times with the rapidly advancing
technology and fast improving means of transport and communication, quality of
population is becoming more and more important. Today, what contributes to national
power is well-fed, healthy, educated and trained population belonging to be suitable
age group. Since warfare has become highly mechanized and sophisticated, there is
a great need of well trained and technically capable men. Training, skill, character
and morale count today more than mere numbers. Ill-fed and ill-trained populations
are bound to be a liability to nations and handicap it in its struggle for power in
international politics. Ideally, what is required for maximization of national power is
the sufficient size of sufficiently qualitative population. Thus, in this sense, population
constitutes a very important element or constituent or factor of national power.
Morale is another important element of national power. Morale may be defined
as the physical and mental powers of individuals to perform a particular act. It is the
spirit of men made up of faith, courage and loyalty and will to fight to preserve the
individual and nations distinctions. Morale may be of a civilian population or it may
be of soldiers. For success in war, the morale of both is necessary. Morale appeals
to the people to sacrifice their utmost to the cause of the nation. It is born of a loyalty
Foreign Policies of to a cause and a determination to fight for it. People’s morale may be boosted to
Various Countries
fight and die for a cause. Allied soldiers were asked to fight ‘to preserve democracy
in the world’. The communists appealed to the workers ‘to fight to retain the equality
of all in socialism’. Nazi’s would ask to fight to retain ‘the superiority of the Aryan
NOTES race’. Thus, morale gives more devotion to a cause, which can be boosted by various
methods of propaganda. ‘Join the navy and see the world’, ‘drive slowly and save
life’, and ‘fight to preserve democracy’ are some of the slogans designed to boost
publish morale.
Next to geography economy, population, morale, technology may be said to a
key constituent of national power. In a wider sense, technology can be defined as a
system of techniques and skills and the ability to apply them to the given resources
to turn better and more useful products so as to increase the power of the given
nation. In short, technology may be said to be a nation’s capacity to turn the available
resources to greater and greater advantages. Hence, in actual practice, technology
implies more research institutes, more laboratories, more workshops, more patents,
and better and more products. The benefits of technology can be of different types,
depending upon the fields in which it is employed. Technology can be applied in the
economic and industrial field which means better machines and better products. It
can be applied to the problems of transport and communication which means better
roads, trains, ships, planes and so on. It can be applied to the problem of war which
means better guns, tanks, warships, fighter planes, bombs and so on. Qualitatively,
the benefits of technology may again be of different types. Application of technology
may mean better products, cheaper products, and more abundant products.
As regards the role of technology, we find that, throughout history, it has
played a vital role and fundamentally changed the course of events. At every stage,
we find that nation which makes inventions wins a start and superiority over others.
In the expansion of national power, technology has been found to be of immense
use. It was on account of the railway and telegraph technology that Britain could
establish an effective rule over the Indian subcontinent. The use of the atom bomb
by the US effectively made the country into a superpower post the Second World
War. Now missiles can be used as long-range delivery vehicles for transporting
bombs and equipment across continents or vast distances. The rocket race to the
moon, Mars and the other planets is becoming ever more interesting and analyzing.
In our world, nations possessing the technological superiority, bombs, missiles, rockets
and similar things possess great influence and prestige.
The possession the technological superiority has fundamentally changed the
balance of power in today’s international politics. Thus, technology constitutes a
very vital element of national power because technology enables a nation to have
stronger economy, stronger industrial base, stronger system of transport and
communication, stronger army, greater capacity to win war, influence or dominate
other nations and so on.
It has always constituted a very vital element in the power of a nation. It has
assumed particularly great importance in the twentieth century. Ideology is a body
of ideas and beliefs concerning certain values and usually suggesting a certain political
and economic order in order to accomplish these values. Ideologies can be of different Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
types — social, political, economic religious, racial and so on. Hans Morgenthau,
one of the major figure in the study of international politics of the 20th century, has
mentioned three main types of ideologies:
• Ideologies of status quo NOTES
• Ideology of imperialism
• Ambiguous ideologies (e.g. self-determination)
Other important ideologies of the twentieth century are liberalism, Nazism,
Facism, communism, socialism, nationalism, and internationalism. Experience reveals
that in the past, ideologies had provided a tremendous philosophical, psychological,
and moral power for the policies and programmes of men. They are the guiding
force for policy goals and activities of nations. Often nation have utilized ideologies
as a source of moral justification.
As an element of national power, these can boost people’s morale. Thus,
when we speak of the ideology of communism, generally we refer to its ideals or
ideas or slogans like ‘workers of the world unite’. Such a slogan is used to bring
about revolutions in the world for the establishment of communism. It would be
seem that ‘an ideology is to a nation what an ambition or career goal is to a man’. In
the absence of an ideology, many, if not all, policies and activities of a nation would
be inexplicable.
Leadership can be said to be the most important element constituting the
power of a nation. Leadership may be defined as an instrumentally provided by a
leader or a group of leaders by which all other elements of national power geography,
economy, population, technology, ideology and morale can be mobilised and used
most purposefully and effectively for the achievement of the goals of a nation in a
given context. Leadership can be of different types-military, political, diplomatic,
social, and economic and so on. Military leadership can make a difference between
victory and defeat for a nation. Diplomatic leadership can make a difference between
securing strong nations as friends or turning them into enemies. The social and
political leadership brought about a revolutionary change in the social and political
life of the country. Economic leadership brought about an ‘economic miracle’ and
industrial power in the world. The range of activities today’s leaders have to handle
in times of war is simply staggering. They have to tackle the problems of food
supply, raw materials, industrial production, transport and communication, national
morale and so on and so forth. Undoubtedly, greatness or incompetence, wisdom or
irrationality, effectiveness or impotence in leadership considerably affects the power
that the country has.
Leaders such as Napoleon, Hitler, Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin, Mao, Gandhi,
Kennedy, Khrushchev and Nixon have made a deep impact on world history. An
able leadership serves as a source of great inspiration to the people. Thus, in modern
times the tasks and responsibilities of leadership have increased tremendously, and
along with them have increased the importance of leadership as an element of
national power.
Foreign Policies of Military strength is relevant both in war and peace. No one can win a war
Various Countries
without a strong military base. Military strength involves two main elements —
armed forces and weapons. The size of armed forces is of great importance. The
quality of the army and arm-ammunition is also very crucial along with their quantity.
NOTES The quality of forces depends on the nature of training, physical endurance and the
morale of the troops. Military, leadership also plays a great role in the actual military
operations during a war. Morale of forces i.e. their willingness to sacrifice for nation,
is no less a factor in contributing to military strength. The military alliances and
bases also contribute important aspect of the military element. Lastly, military
component of national power is dependent upon the financial resources of nation as
well as its technological, industrial and economic development.
Relevance of National Interest in International Relations
National interest is the most crucial concept in international relations. It is the key
concept in foreign policy as it provides the material on the basis of which foreign
policy is made. While formulating foreign policy, all statesmen are guided by their
respective national interests. It is the purpose of foreign policy to conduct foreign
relations in a way so as achieve national interest to the maximum extent. It is not
easy to determine exactly what a nation’s national interest is. This concept is highly
vague and difficult to define. Not withstanding its vagueness, the concept of national
interest is central to any attempt at describing explaining, predicting, prescribing and
understanding international behaviour. From time immemorial, leaders of states justify
their actions in the name of the national interest.
Author Joseph Frankel divides the various attempts to define national interest
into two broad categories —objective and subjective approaches. The first category
embraces those approaches which view national interest as a concept which can be
defined or examined with the help of some objectively definable criteria. The second
category contains those definitions which seek to interpret national interest as a
‘constantly changing pluralistic set of objective references’. The task of defining
national interest becomes more cumbersome as the domestic and international
activities of a state overlap. It is appropriate if national interest is seen as a synthesis
of the objective and subjective approaches. In most of the nation-states, the iron jaw
of oligarchy is prevalent, implying that governmental decision is made only by a few
men and women. These decisions are often taken in such a way as to promote
national interest.
According to the definition provided by Frankel, national interest ‘amounts to
the sum total of all the national values’. Charles Lerche and Abdul Said have defined
it as ‘the general, long-term and continuing purpose which the state, the nation and
the government all see themselves as serving’. Van Dyke defines it as that which
states seek to protect or achieve in relation to each other. It includes desires on the
part of sovereign state and these desires differ greatly from state to state and from
time to time.
Lerche and Said’s definition sounds more logical than Dyke’s. The former’s
definition describes national interest in terms of a permanent guide to the action of a
state, while the latter’s definition regards national interest as the action itself. What Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
a state seeks to protect or achieve and what it desires to have in relation to other
states are, generally speaking, the aims of foreign policy. These aims have two
components-goals and objectives. A goal is a set in terms of the maximum time span
that can be anticipated analytically, whereas an objective is only immediate or short- NOTES
range in terms of time. Thus, national interest determines the nature of the long-
term as well as short-term efforts in foreign policy. It is nothing else but the application
of a generalized value synthesis to the overall international situation in which a state
has to make and pursue its foreign policy.
The residual meaning implied in the concept of national interest is survival. In
Morgenthau’s opinion, the minimum requirement of nation states is to protect their
physical, political and cultural identity against encroachments by other nationstates.
Preservation of physical identity, preservation of political identity and preservation
of cultural identity are the main concern of a nation-state. National interest also
adds an element of consistency in a nation’s foreign policy. Several factors of variables
both internal as well as external play their role in the formulation of national interest.
These determinants are the qualities, personality and ideals of decision makers, the
customs and cultural styles of different societies, ideologies of the states, the types
of challenges and pressures that each country faces from neighbouring countries.
States deliberately follow certain policies in pursuit of their national interests.
A state may pursue economic policies to enhance its domestic welfare without
harming another state. But a state may also pursue economic policies clearly aiming
at harming another state. Whenever economic policies are designed to achieve
national interests-whether or not they intended to harm other state-they are economic
instruments of national policy.
Economic methods are regularly employed to fulfill national interests both in
peace and war. In peace times all countries have objectives which must be
accomplished. Whenever possible, such as raising the standard of living, encouraging
foreign sales, expanding employment, conserving natural resources, advancing
technology and improving health and hygiene. Economy means may also be utilized
by a state during war.
These have long been used as instruments for the promotion of national policy.
From sixteenth century till the middle of twentieth century European nations used
imperialism and colonialism as a tool to further their national interests. It will be
wrong to presume that imperialism and colonialism are dead. As a matter of fact
their entry through the back door in the form of Neo-Colonialism has made appearance
in many parts of the world. The reality is that, as Eagleton observed, ‘War is a
method of achieving purposes’. Many people hate war and strongly suggest that
war never pays. On the contrary many believe that war often pays-and moreover,
that it has paid not only for bad men with wrong intention but often for good men
with good purposes. For that matter it persists as an instrument for the promotion of
national interest. However, this instrument is mostly used as a last resort when all
other methods prove ineffective.
Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS
8. What are the different instruments through which a nation can succeed in
NOTES the pursuit of its different stakes or goals?
9. What does the application of technology imply in reference to the
products?
10. State the three main types of ideologies as per Morgenthau.
2.5 INSTRUMENTS AND TECHNIQUES OF STATE

INTERACTION: PROPAGANDA AND
DIPLOMACY
In this section, we will discuss two prominent instruments of state interaction:
propaganda and diplomacy.
2.5.1 Propaganda
Among the varied techniques that are used by the state to interact with its citizen
and as a part of foreign policy is the instrument of propaganda. Simply defined,
propaganda can be explained as the communication instrument that involves the
psychological manipulation, command and domination through which the authority
of a State exercises control over its citizen and other states.
There have been various different ways in which propaganda has been used
by various governments for meeting their own interest along with swaying the opinions
of other foreign states. Let us look at some of the examples from history:
• Nazi Germany: Perhaps, one of the biggest and most famous example of
the use of propaganda for governance has been of the Nazi Germany.
The government vociferously propagated an anti-semantic propaganda
by holding Jews as partners of Allies who will betray them in war. It was
also propagated that the Jews who were dominating the German economy
were responsible for the troubles of the non-Jew Germans. This
propaganda was carried out by the Nazi party who did not face any
significant opposition or hard resistance from other parties or its own
populace. Thereby, it can be said that the propaganda was being used to
control the public, which effectively led to not only decimation of the
Jewish population of Germany but also other neighbouring states.
Another instance of propaganda during Hitler’s time was his manipulation
of the public in Sudetenland. Picking on the poor economic condition of
the Germans in Sudetenland, Hitler somehow convinced the German
populace that the Sudeten Germans were suffering due to their
discrimination by the Czech government, which was not the absolute truth.
Hidden behind this agenda was Hitler’s plan of invading the Sudetenland
and expanding his territory.
His anti-Jewish and similar propaganda naturally affected other powerful Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
countries like Britain and France who were working hard to prevent war.
• Another instance of propaganda can be seen in the events of the second
phase of the Cold War. This was between 1949 and 1953. It was at this
time, that USA was involved in building a strong military and economic NOTES
partnership against the Soviet Union. To carry this forth, USA signed
varied treaties with countries like Australia, New Zealand, Japan. USAs
efforts are representative of the anti-Communist propaganda. To undertake
the propaganda, USA spent huge amount of money to be used in subversive
activities in the Communist countries. But this failed with the Soviet Union’s
use of the atom bomb.
• An example of propaganda is visible in the dealing of the Kashmir issue
between India and Pakistan. India claims the territory based on the rightful
accession and Pakistan calls this illegal occupation. Both the countries
have appeared several times before the International Court and other
international forums to further their own interests. They have used several
instances of ceasefire violations are examples of propaganda of affecting
the residents of the Kashmir valley.
• In China, Mao started his propaganda under the name of Great Proletarian
Cultural Revolution. Under this, he encouraged violent form of revolution
to oppose the capitalist and revisionist force in the land. He had very
smartly convinced the people to believe that notorious bourgeois elements
are plotting a reinstatement of capitalism in the country by penetrating the
posts in government services and in the society. He carried out his
propaganda by touring various parts of the country, spreading the message
among youths in school, factories etc. and through the formation of Red
Guards.
• Similar unrest among the poor classes was observed amidst the Bolsheviks
who inorder to support their propaganda against unequal distribution of
wealth and injustices suffered organized themselves into Red Guards and
led an armed uprising.
• In the 1930s, the authorities in the Soviet Union initiated their propaganda
against any form of organized religion in the country. The strong propaganda
of completely banning all religions were evident from the state support
and propagation of atheism. This involved shutting down of all places of
worship be it of any faith Christianity, Judaism, Islam etc. This was very
different from anti-religious principle under Lenin which singularly opposed
Russian orthodoxy on account of it being a representative of Tsarist
government.
The word diplomacy has been derived from the Greek verb diplono, meaning
to fold. It refers to the folded metal plates used by the Romans as formal documents.
Although the term diplomacy is not easy to define, it is generally considered
an art and practice of conducting negotiations among state representatives. It is,
hence, mostly referred to as an instrument of foreign policy implemented to achieve
specific goals of countries and organisations. It is a peaceful means of achieving
Foreign Policies of goals through established diplomatic routes. Harold Nicolson defines diplomacy as
Various Countries
‘an ordered conduct of relations between one group of human beings and another
group alien to themselves’. He also elaborates this definition by calling it ‘the need
to be informed of the ambitious, weaknesses and resources of those with whom one
NOTES hopes to deal’.
States adopt diplomacy as a national strategy either to improve relations or
maintain status quo in a hierarchical system. This system has the form of a pyramid.
The closer a state is to the top, the better its chances of achieving its goals. The
diplomatic course of each country would depend upon its geographical locations,
political trend and socio- economic needs. Consequently, diplomacy is likely to reap
better results in a democratic state than an autocratic country. The concept of
diplomacy changed with time under the influence of socio-political movements, new
economic ideas (such as liberalism and globalisation) and international relations.
Diplomacy in the nineteenth century was governed by imperialistic ambitions of
states and devoted essentially to ‘high politics’, while in the twentieth century it was
more diverse and progressively less Eurocentric. Diplomacy in the 21st century is
more proactive, multidirectional, and innovative than ever before. We will now study
about the changing form of diplomacy —old and new diplomacy.
Old and New Diplomacy
The terms old diplomacy and new diplomacy have been in common use for twenty-
five years or more. The system of alliance set up by France, England and Russia to
ward off the German danger in the decade before 1914 is dubbed as old diplomacy.
The system of so-called international security which took shape in the League’s
Covenant of June 1919, and afterward regulated or was supposed to regulate the
relations of the fifty-odd states of the world, is labelled as new diplomacy. All the
implications of the word alliance connote old diplomacy. In the same way, new
diplomacy connotes the twin ideas of replacing the bilateral alliances of the past
with a universal or semi-universal association of states pledged to compliance with
a set of general principles embodied in international law, and the abandonment of
power politics—that is, the use of force to settle conflicts between nations.
Diplomacy has been regarded as an art by an array of writers in the past.
The old diplomacy has declined. The function and structure has been changed from
old to new one. Every developed and developing nation is a laboratory in itself,
where the effectiveness and the application of diplomacy can be tested and the
results verified. Thus, a systematized study of diplomacy becomes necessary. A
study of the history of diplomacy reveals that whenever destruction and devastation
result from war, responsible statesmen in power attempt to innovate means which
are capable of preventing wars once and for all. A desire for peace is as inherent in
man as perhaps is desire for war. War is a part of human nature as history has
repeatedly proved. So is peace a part of human nature. Nevertheless, the desire for
peace always overpowers the desire for war. While war is an inevitable human
instinct, peace is a natural prerequisite for self-preservation.
The League of Nations and the United Nations Organization are bodies that
have come into existence after humanity tasted the bitter fruits of the World Wars.
The macabre killings that wars of such magnitude had caused, posed serious threat Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
to the survival of mankind. The failure of the League of Nations to hold countries
together, to condemn war and to preserve peace was due to obvious reasons.
There are two popular claims about diplomacy in the modern history of
international relations. According to the first, World War I constituted a decisive NOTES
turning point in the modern era, marking the emergence of a new diplomacy, distinct
in both essence and style from that which had existed previously. The second
maintains that diplomacy is in a state of continuous decline. This study proposes that
the distinction between old and new diplomacy is simplistic and inaccurate, and that
the argument regarding the decline of diplomacy is not a valid one, Raymond Aron’s
observation that ‘diplomacy, in the traditional sense of the term, functions up to a
certain degree between allies, but hardly any longer among enemies, or even between
the blocs and the neutral nations’ is only partially correct, and reflects its time of
writing at the height of the Cold War.
New diplomacy has different compositions and mechanism and all these
mechanisms in their respective importance contribute to the way diplomacy functions.
It is believed that the new diplomacy can achieve its true meaning when all areas of
intelligence have been exploited ranging from closed door meetings, and secrecy in
diplomacy, and now it involves all the ways through which results can be achieved.
Another important mechanism from new diplomacy is how public diplomacy has
emerged in as an increasingly important strategy and how states realise the important
way to engage by using dialogue and soft power rather than hard power in new
diplomacy. Thirdly, celebrities are able to participate in diplomatic activities with the
notion of achieving good and fast results.
High level of technology in the twenty-first century plays significant role in
diplomacy. It does not only serve as an easy of way of communication but rather it
has improved the level of diplomatic negotiations. Old diplomacy was seen in the
olden days as for days either on chariots, other forms of transportation or envoys but
since the new methods of technological advancement have been introduced, there
has been an improvement in the way diplomats interact and negotiate using high
level and secured means of communications and also share information via e-mails.
Technology has enabled embassies to improve their way of sharing information
on their websites. Today it is easy acquire to information needed from an embassies’
websites in over five different languages without seeking for translator. This shows
how easy information has been made through technologic advancement. Diplomatic
officials do not need to have people with them as interpreters.
Non-state actors, such as celebrities, engage in diplomatic activities. They
not only highlight the importance and significance of mass participation but also it
enable other non-state actors to participate in diplomacy. Celebrities are sometimes
seen as inexperienced, but they work with other governments, diplomats and they
do not follow protocols as diplomat would do. They are able to respond to situations
quicker than some governments would because as far as people in destitute situations
are concerned it does not matter who provides them with food and shelter and they
have easy connection with the general public. Therefore, high level of technological
changes and involvement of non-state actors are the most important aspects and
significant area in new diplomacy.
Foreign Policies of During the old diplomacy, policy making was more attentive and careful in
Various Countries
relation to their mission abroad since they were seen are the representative of state
and also they were seen as firmly the insightful of governments. In the 1990s new
diplomacy began to be recognized broadly when the cold war was calm and the
NOTES expansion of communication among activists in the new are began to be rampant
and widespread of information has become easier. New diplomacy is being used to
address many issues such as human rights, humanitarian assistance and also as a
means of an alliance between two or more nations in achieving common goal.
Dimensions of Diplomacy
The features of diplomacy of any country will greatly depend upon the choice of its
diplomats—their abilities and their competence to discharge their functions. Sir David
Kelly, an eminent British ambassador, observed, ‘The essential qualities and feature
of a good diplomat are common sense, good manners, understanding of foreign
mentalities, and precision of expression.’
The training and selection of a diplomat is the domain of the foreign office
which comprise the minister for external affairs, foreign secretary, a hierarchy of
officials who are specialists in various branches of political and diplomatic history of
other countries, and members of the diplomatic service comprising the ambassadors,
ministers resident, ministers plenipotentiary, Chargés d’Affaires, and so on.
In England, there was no recognized diplomatic service till 1815 when the
Congress of Vienna came to recognize diplomacy as an honourable profession. It
was in the year 1856 that a preliminary examination in French was introduced by
Lord Clarendon in the process of selecting the best personnel for foreign service.
The Foreign Department of Britain employed an interesting system of selecting
personnel through a process of competitive examination and rigorous training in
foreign affairs.
In fact, in modern relations between states, a diplomat’s responsibility is
immense. He has to represent his sovereign with dignity and courage while conducting
negotiations to the best of his ability and tact so as to safeguard his national interests
without causing any damage to the interests of the receiving state. The process of
selecting diplomatic personnel passed through several phases under different foreign
ministers. For instance, Lord Lansdowne prescribed a qualifying examination in
French and German in addition to the general rule that a candidate for foreign services
must get through the Civil Service Examination.
The foreign office and the diplomatic service were two independent bodies
up to 1918. In 1918, they were fused into a single consolidated service called ‘foreign
service’. In 1941, Anthony Eden, the then foreign minister of Britain, through a
series of reforms abolished the outmoded methods and practices and created a new
cadre of foreign service, where ability and competence alone were considered the
major criteria in choosing the personnel.
Every diplomat has to discharge certain basic functions in the normal course
of his dealings with the head of the receiving state and his representatives. These
include: diplomatic representations, exchange of notes on matters of mutual interest,
political and parliamentary negotiations, protection of his materials, and above all, Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
preservation of the interests of his state in general. To put it more precisely, the
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, under Article 3 (incorporating the
recommendations of the International Law Commission on Diplomatic Intercourse
and Immunities) states the features of a diplomatic mission as follows: NOTES
(a) Representing the sending state in the receiving state
(b) Protecting in the receiving state the interests of the sending state and of
its nationals, within the limits permitted by international law
(c) Negotiating with the government of the receiving state
(d) Ascertaining by all lawful means, conditions and developments in the
receiving state, and reporting thereon to the government of the sending
state
(e) Promoting friendly relations between the sending state and the receiving
state, and developing their economic, cultural and scientific relations
A sub-clause is provided under Article 3, which states: ‘Nothing in the present
convention shall be construed as preventing the performance of consular functions
by a diplomatic mission, human nature, temperaments and instincts; being what they
are, it may be possible to lay down some general qualifications, for a diplomat but it
is not possible to innovate methods to bring about a radical change in the very
personality itself.’
However, as Harold Nicholson points out, the basis of a good negotiation is
moral influence, and that influence is founded on seven specific diplomatic features:
(i) truthfulness, (ii) precision, (iii) calmness, (iv) modesty, (v) good temper,
(vi) patience, and (viii) loyalty. Nicholson has further observed: He (a diplomat)
must be good linguist, and above all a master of Latin, which was still the lingua
franca of the time. He must realize that all foreigners are regarded with suspicion
and must, therefore, conceal his astuteness and appear as a pleasant man of the
world. He must be hospitable and employ an excellent cook. He must be a man of
taste and erudition and cultivate the society of writers, artists and scientists. He
must be a naturally patient man, willing to spin out negotiations and to emulate the
exquisite art of procrastination as perfected in the Vatican. He must be imperturbable,
able to receive bad news without manifesting displeasure or to hear himself maligned
and misquoted without the slightest twinge of irritation. His private life must be so
ascetic as to give his enemies no opportunity to spread scandal. He must be tolerant
of the ignorance and foolishness of his home government and know how to temper
the vehemence of the instructions he receives. Finally, he should remember that
overt diplomatic triumphs leave feelings of humiliation behind them and a desire for
revenge; no good negotiator should ever threaten, bully or chide’.
A.L. Kennedy listed the following features and qualities for an ideal diplomat:
(i) He is conciliatory and firm
(ii) He eludes difficulties which cannot immediately be overcome only in
order to obviate them in more favourable conditions
(iii) He is courteous and unhurried
Foreign Policies of (iv) He easily detects insincerity, not always discernible to those who are
Various Countries
themselves sincere
(v) He has a penetrating intellect and a subtle mind, combined with a keen
sense of honour
NOTES (vi) He has an intuitive sense of fitness and is adaptable
(vii) He is at home in any society, and is equally effective in the chanceries
of the old diplomacy or on the platforms of the new
It is generally agreed by most writers that certain amount of basic honesty
and a high degree of character have to be necessarily combined to make a good
envoy.
The concept of diplomacy has been changing so fast that successful diplomat
in the 19th century may prove a measurable failure in the 20th century. A successful
diplomat in the first half of the 20th century where the Afro-Asian states have not
developed a political consciousness, and the world was in the grip of colonial empires,
may prove an utter failure in modern times. The methods and techniques in conducting
diplomatic negotiations have undergone a radical change in recent times.
The complex function of a modern diplomat demands an earnestness in mind,
a dependable character, an amiable disposition, the extraordinary ability to deal with
situations, and last but not the least, the capacity to win the confidence of the head
of the receiving state. Every experienced diplomat should always realize that
prophecy and prediction in diplomatic dealings may lead to dangerous consequences.
He should always rely on factual situations, watch things with an observer’s eye,
and employ a greater degree of precision in his dispatches to his home government
as well as in his representations to the receiving state. Human instincts being what
they are, a diplomat should always concentrate his energies in winning the confidence
of the government and the affection of the people.
In fact, the goodwill that a diplomat gathers from the people of a state may
yield greater results in diplomatic relations than the official dexterity employed in
drafting the contents and form of the negotiations. It is a necessity that every diplomat
has to train himself to tackle situations with great presence of mind and intellectual
incisiveness. Ambassador Pietro Quaroni in an article on ‘Profession of Diplomacy’
stated: ‘I believe that the principal job of an ambassador is that of being the best
possibly informed on the internal and foreign situation of the country to which he is
accredited, and of succeeding in acquiring that grade of influence, which is possible
to reach, and putting the influence thus acquired at the service of the interests of his
country; it is necessary that he should go and search out good sources of information
and seek to create a position of influence in those circles which count.’
It is highly desirable that an ambassador should be well-versed in history
geography, military science, and in economics, among others. It will be of interest to
note that Empress Catherine of Russia wrote to Fredrick the Great of the Prussian
Empire that she will accept an ambassador who is handsome in personality, and of
agreeable complexion with acceptable disposition. Though said in a lighter vein, the
capacity to remain undisturbed either in mind or in disposition, both in talk and action
even after consumption of large quantities of alcohol, was deemed a qualification in Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
15th and 16th centuries in choosing an envoy in the European states.
It is essential to note that every embassy functions as a ‘mission’, specifically
designed for certain purposes. An envoy has to necessarily realize that he has to
extract work in team spirit from his personnel. He has to keep a watch on all the NOTES
members of the ‘mission’; and he has to function as a guiding spirit in coordinating
the work of the ‘mission’, and in doing so, he should always remember that the
interests of the state to be paramount in all activities, diplomatic or otherwise. His
responsibilities include coordinating the work of various officials like military, naval,
air, commercial, financial, cultural and labour advisors. This demands a great deal of
tact and skill. In other words, a diplomat has to be ambivalent if he desires to become
successful in his profession. In the practice of diplomacy, written words always play
a major role when compared to spoken words.
The instance when Napoleon insulted Metternich of Austria by showing
arrogance and throwing his hat down on the carpet, in the year 1813 at the Marcolini
Palace at Dresden, caused irreparable damage to both the countries. Nicolson cites
another instance where Sir Charles Wansmith tore off a treaty in the presence of
Sultan of Morocco, the then emperor. The observations of Jules Cambon, an eminent
ambassador from France, may be quoted here: ‘Patience is an indispensable quality
for the successful negotiator. The wind is bound to be contrary at times, and then
one has to tack to get into port.’
One confounding factor in diplomacy is the question of loyalty. In the monarchal
days, the loyalty of a diplomat always was fixed to the interest of his sovereign and
none else. During the 18th and 19th centuries, with the improvement of
communications and realization of the necessity of mutual dependence and intercourse
between states, the concept of loyalty in diplomacy was found to be necessarily
qualifying.
This again has got different connotations. For instance, where the head of the
state changes, the loyalty continues to the office because in modern complexity of
state relationship, the interests of the nation are counted as supreme. Such loyalty
includes the diplomat’s responsibility towards his nationals residing in the receiving
state. Further, he has to be loyal to the head of the receiving state. This loyalty
involves keeping promises, ethical responsibility and confidence. In conducting
negotiations with the receiving state, the diplomat has to forget personal antipathy
and animosities towards some officials, and his likes and dislikes. The diplomat
conducts himself as a person who will always be looked upon as persona grata in
conformity with the dignity of his sovereign and state. Last, but not the least, he
must be loyal to his staff. This loyalty to the office and staff, capacity to coordinate
work and gain the confidence of the staff, and watchful observations of their
movements are the factors which contribute, to a great extent, to the success of a
diplomat.
Foreign Policies of Above all, viewing the present inflammable tensions prevailing in the world
Various Countries
affairs, one would demand a diplomat’s loyalty much more towards the human race
in preference to his state’s interest. Socially, he must be cosmopolitan in outlook. A
diplomat should often entertain guests, establish goodwill for his country, acquaint
NOTES himself with the language of the state, and behave as a great friend of the receiving
state at all times. For a diplomat to imbibe all these qualities, it requires a broad
mental disposition, intensive training in methods and practices, and selective and
conscious approach in solving the problems posed from time to time. The responsibility
of a diplomat, especially when the receiving state is on hostile terms with his state, is
supreme and subtle. Similarly, the responsibilities of a diplomat from a democratic
state accredited to a totalitarian state are also delicate and complex because he has
to adjust himself to the methods and mode of government in such state.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

11. In what terms is the diplomacy of the 21st century defined?
12. List the seven important diplomatic features on which moral influence is
based.
2.6 FOREIGN POLICY: INDIA, UK, USA AND

CHINA
In this section, we will look at the foreign policies of four nations: India, UK, USA
and China.
India is undoubtedly an emerging world power. It is already acknowledged as a
regional superpower or a ‘mini’ superpower. Though a shackled giant at the moment,
India has all the necessary residues—historical, national, and human—to be a great
power. It has the seventh largest territory, home to sixteen per cent—the second
largest—population of the world. Besides, it has the third largest pool of manpower.
In addition, it has the fourth largest military force, the fifth largest air force and navy
with full-fledged blue—water capability, with two aircraft carriers. Moreover, India
is recognized as the pioneer of the non-aligned movement, the pillar of the
Commonwealth of Nations, the protagonist of the Third World. Besides, it is the
leading spokesman of the Afro-Asian bloc at the United Nations and the guide of
the Group of 77. Thus, with a population of more than one billion, an abundance of
natural resources, a large pool of scientific-technical, particularly infotech manpower,
the sixth largest economy (its GDP is calculated by IMF at $ 2 trillion) and
sophisticated nuclear deterrence and space programmes, India can legitimately aspire
for a superpower status in the next century.
Character of Indian’s foreign policy Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
The Indian foreign policy has some distinctive character of its own. Its uniqueness
lies in the fact that after achieving independence (1947), it chose to follow an
independent (non-aligned) foreign policy in a world surcharged with Cold War
NOTES
alignment. Apart from refreshing originality, it has shown a rare consistency and a
remarkable continuity.
Determinants of Indian Foreign Policy
Foreign policy is never original. It is always determined by a certain order of facts.
Further, it is never determined by any one factor or a set of factors, but is the result
of the interplay of a large number of factors that affect the formulation of policy in
different ways and different circumstances. Generally speaking, determinants of
foreign policy include geography, historical experience, political traditions, military
strength, national character, domestic milieu, international milieu, political institutions
and personalities of decision makers. According to V. P. Dutt, ‘The Indian foreign
policy is determined by conceptual and operational frameworks and the parameters
and the motivating forces, the perceptions about world developments, the pulls and
tides of history and geography, the interplay of strategy, economics and aspirations,
the cut and thrust of international situation, the subtle interaction between domestic,
regional and international balance of forces and the zigzag of relations with countries
and regions critical to India.’
Now let us examine these determinants one by one as to how they affect and
shape the Indian foreign policy.
Geography and strategic factors
Geography has conferred upon India one of the main determinants of its foreign and
defence policies, shaping its attitudes towards other countries. A country of continental
size, it covers an area of 3.28 million sq kms. It has something like 3,500 miles of
coastal frontier and 8,200 miles of land frontier. Few regions of the world have such
perfect boundaries as the Indian subcontinent. The Indian subcontinent separated
from the rest of Asia by formidable natural barriers in all directions constitutes a
distinct geographical region in cultural, economic and political terms. India is sheltered
by the Bay of Bengal, the Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea, in the east, south and
west and the grand Himalayas, in the north. Its land frontiers meet Pakistan,
Bangladesh, China, Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan and Burma.
India occupies an important geographical position in local, regional and global
sense. Its location and size give India a central position in Asian and world politics.
Nehru, the first Indian Prime Minister, had a keen appreciation of this and made
India’s weight, size and geographical location the main source of his policies. He
wrote: ‘We are in a strategic part of Asia set in the centre of the Indian Ocean with
intimate past and present connections with West Asia, South-East Asia and East
Asia.’ In short, India is situated on the cross-roads of Asia. It is a sort of Asian
bridge. All the major sea and air routes of the world pass through India.
Foreign Policies of India and the Indian Ocean are an indispensable link in the world trade and
Various Countries
commercial intercourse. As far back as 1903, Lord Curzon had predicted that India’s
geographical position shall push it into the forefront of international affairs. Not
surprisingly, India has been playing an important role in world issues and conflicts
NOTES since independence. It also explains why the superpowers have always attempted
to programme India into their respective global strategic environment.
India’s geographical location had made it inevitable that its political, commercial
and cultural relations should be based primarily on oceanic intercourse. In other
words, India’s political and economic relations as well as its security must depend
vitally on its command over the Indian Ocean. The logic of geography inevitably
makes India a sea-faring nation and the Indian Ocean vital to its existence.
Thus, ‘a state such as India by virtue of its size, sources and geographical
location, finds itself a great power in regional terms, whether it seeks or not that
label.’India’s current political pre-eminence over its neighbours is so substantial that
its position has been recognized by all major outside powers. Its continental size and
political resource make India an important independent factor in international relations
in its own right. They make India, like China, a potentially big power in material
terms. It is, therefore, natural for India to behave as a big power in international
affairs. As Nehru observed: ‘India is too big a country to be bound down to any
country, however big it may be; India is going to be and is bound to be a big country
that counts in world affairs.’ To quote Giri Lal Jain, ‘India, though not a global
power, has global aspirations.’
Historical and political traditions
A country’s foreign policy, as Nehru has said, ultimately emerges from its own
traditions, urges, objectives and, more particularly, from its recent past. No doubt,
the political tradition, particularly the recent one, of any country is an important
determinant of its foreign policy. As such, the Indian foreign policy is the product of
traditional values of its society and commitments of the national movement during
freedom struggle. According to Palmer and Perkins, ‘the roots of Indian foreign
policy are to be found in its civilization, the heritage of British policies, the
independence movement and the influence of Gandhian philosophy.’ The long, rich
and complicated historical experience has much to condition Indian outlook and
ethos. Indian tradition in its philosophical, ethical and social strands is derived from a
multiplicity of sources, including Buddhism, Jainism, Islam, Christianity and industrial
civilization of the West. Nehru in his Discovery of India writes: ‘We are very old
and trackless centuries whisper in our ears.’ J.B. Bandyopadhyaya sums up our
political traditions as follows: (1) Idealist view of politics and power with emphasis
on peace and non-violence, (2) Idealist approach to internationalism (Vasudhaiva
Kutumbkum); (3) Anti-imperialism and anti-racialism; (4) Asianism; (5) Rejection
of both Western capitalism and communism.
Thus, if India has always stood against political domination and aggrandisement,
it is because India has no tradition of colonial or imperial past. In other words, anti-
colonialism is rooted in our history. Similarly, the general preference for pacifism
and peaceful methods of settling international disputes can be traced partly to
Gandhian doctrine of non-violence technique. Likewise, the policy of non-alignment Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
corresponds to Indian tradition and philosophy. It is a reflection of our philosophical
outlook that ‘nothing is black or white but everything is a different shade of grey.’ In
a sense, it is a rationalization of traditional trait of Indian mind. It is middle of the
road policy and accords well with the culture of the land, for the middle path is the NOTES
hallmark of Indian tradition and culture. Our tolerance, non-violence, middle path
are all derived from the Indian philosophy, which was summed up in Gandhism. But
apart from Gandhism, the Indian foreign policy makers also show the influence of
recent ideologies like Marxism and Democratic Socialism on their thinking. This
partly explains India’s preference for the socialist bloc as against the West. Thus,
Indian foreign policy is a projection of the values and traditions which we have
cherished through the centuries and which formed the ethos of the Indian national
movement.
Economic determinant
‘Ultimately, foreign policy is the outcome of economic policy’, as Nehru said. India’s
abysmal poverty made rapid economic development after independence a categorical
imperative of domestic policy. In spite of being endowed with natural wealth, India
remained a backward country during the British rule. There was no industrial
establishment commensurate with its natural resources. Thus, India’s comparative
backwardness made foreign aid and external assistance indispensable. But the
politico-economic objective of foreign aid could be achieved only through a policy of
non-alignment, for only this policy could ensure the diversification of the sources of
aid without being subjected to pulls and pressures of either of the blocs. Nehru,
therefore, avoided putting all eggs in one basket and welcomed aid from all quarters—
Bhilai and Bokaro plant with the Soviet help, Rourkela plant with the help of West
Germany, Durgapur plant with the British help and Tarapur atomic plant with the US
money.
Given the economic compulsions and the constitutional and political set up,
the only rational stance for Indian diplomacy could be one of avoidance of war to
the best of its ability. Peace was therefore a minimum precondition for economic
development. As Nehru said: ‘We cannot afford war and its devastation; we want
to build our strength on peace and under the shelter of neutrality.’ Non-alignment,
therefore, was organically related to our economic interest because it enhanced the
chance of peace. In fact, the economic factor has always been at the background of
Indian foreign policy. If today, India is moving closer to the West away from the
Soviet Union/Russia, it is because there is little left in the Russian kitbag.
Military strength
The military strength of a nation is, in the ultimate analysis, a function of its economic
strength and therefore dependent rather than an independent variable. A foreign
policy aiming at the increase of military power must have a highly developed economy.
To begin with, India neither has such an ambition nor the capability in economic
terms. Therefore, it did not visualise a big power politico-military role in international
relations. Being a developing country it had to invest the bulk of its resources in
Foreign Policies of development rather than defence. That is why until Pokharan-II tests (1998) it never
Various Countries
tried to gatecrash the nuclear club, the 1974-Pokharan test notwithstanding. In terms
of per capita military expenditure, India’s position has been weaker than that of
even Pakistan, what to say of the US, the Soviet Union and China. India spends less
NOTES than three per cent of its GNP on defence yearly. Therefore, its overall military
capability is nowhere as compared to that of USA, Russia and China.
Yet, by and by India has become a regional superpower in terms of military
capability. Today, it has the fourth largest army and the fifth largest naval and air
force in the world. The Time magazine maintains that ‘India is fast emerging as a
global military power.’ It has cited: India’s surgical suppression of the pocket coup in
the Maldives (1988), occupation of no man’s land of Siachen glacier (1984), its eye
ball to eye ball confrontation with China (1987) and deployment of Indian soldiers in
Lanka (1987) as indicators of this trend. Further, India has become one of the world’s
largest importers of arms, has doubled its defence expenditure in the last decade.
Surely, it is the dominant military power in the subcontinent.
There is no denying the fact that India’s military strength has multiplied fast
since 1963, but taking all other factors into consideration, ‘the conclusion becomes
inevitable that political, economic and cultural diplomacy rather than military strength
must be the primary means for the preservation and promotion of India’s national
interest, including its national security.’
Domestic milieu
George F. Kennan has said: ‘Foreign policy like many other things, begins at home.’
A country’s foreign policy is an exercise in the extension of its national interest. In a
democracy, it is a reflection of the domestic scene of a nation. To borrow Mondale’s
observation, ‘Foreign policy must truly become extension of domestic policy by
other means.’ Both foreign policy and domestic policy are therefore inseparably
interlinked. Economic capability and political tradition, as already discussed, are
important elements of domestic milieu. Other elements pertaining to domestic milieu
are the role of the ruling elite, the problems of state building and the party structure,
etc.
There is no gain saying the fact that the Indian state system is not fully
integrated regionally, economically, politically, socially and culturally, and this lack of
integration affects Indian foreign policy. There are certain centrifugal and separatist
tendencies within the state system which create an image of internal weakness and
dwarf its status abroad, thus thwarting, to some extent, India’s role on the international
scene. To be sure, domestic political integration or stability is the precondition for an
effective foreign policy. Further, a foreign policy can be sustained only if it enjoys
domestic acceptance. To substantiate, it was the all round domestic support that
kept intact the policy of non-alignment since independence. Its enunciation by Nehru
was universally hailed, because it was in tune with the general consensus. It was
this consensus formula that could hold together the cross-sections of Indian public
opinion.
International milieu Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
Lately, one factor which has gained importance more than any other determinant is
what is called international milieu—external environment or international political
topography or geopolitical equation or global relationship of forces.
NOTES
The growth of international law and organization, the mutational impact of
technological advance on international relations and the political evolution of the
nation-states are some of the major factors that impart essentially dynamic character
to the international milieu within which a state has to formulate its external policy.
For all practical purposes, the policy makers must treat the international milieu as a
given datum. In fact, the external environment impinges on the foreign policy and
even on the domestic policy of a state more heavily than ever before.
Foreign policy makers cannot but take into account the major developments
on the international scene, such as the bipolarity of a large area of the world politics
as in 1950s and 1960s, gradually shading into a certain polycentric pattern, culminating
into detente by the middle of eighties and climaxed by the demise of one pole of the
bipolar system by the end of 1980s. In other words, they cannot be indifferent to
different phases, of global power equation like Cold War, Détente and post Cold
War uni-polarism or multi-polarism, etc. Further, they have also to take into account
the development and dismantling of destructive weapons, the appearance and
disappearance of colonialism or neo-colonialism, the growth of MNCs, the new
economic trends, areas, globalization, like free trade resurgence of Afro-Asia, NAM
and growing North-South chasm, reaction of related states—friendly or hostile, such
as the Soviet Union/Russia, China and Pakistan.
Review of Indian Foreign Policy
The India foreign policy has shown a refreshing originality, a remarkable consistency
and a rare continuity. Although there may be no particular sanctity about consistency
or stability in foreign policy, yet it is notable that stability has characterized the Indian
foreign policy much more than any other foreign policy. The general contours, the
principles and the directions have remained firmly steady. The validity of the
framework of Indian foreign policy has never been shaken. Unquestionably, the
Indian foreign policy has stood the test of time and helped India to play a dynamic
role in international affairs. The main credit, of course, goes to Nehru, whose vision,
foresight and realist idealism helped to shape it.
The foreign policy of India has been influenced by two basic factors: One, it
has emerged out of our historic commitment to certain principles and was moulded
over decades as a part and parcel of our freedom struggle and international
commitments. Two, India’s foreign policy has always been marked by a consensus
from all sections of its people as far as its basic approach to international affairs was
involved.The basic contours of Indian foreign policy may be summarised as follows:
It is the policy of peaceful and constructive co-existence, of non-alignment, of moral
support to liberation struggles and freedom movements, of collaboration with
developing countries in the battle for scientific and technological self-reliance, and
support to the assertion of equal rights of the newly independent nations of the
Foreign Policies of world. No doubt, this policy has given India a place of prestige in the comity of
Various Countries
nations and has won for its friendship from all quarters of the world.
Modifications in Indian foreign policy after Nehru
NOTES Being peace loving leader, Nehru did not pay enough attention to Indian defence
forces. The defence capabilities of the country got a boost only in the post-Nehru
era, following the war with Pakistan and China. Nevertheless, concern for good
neighbourly relations remained reflected from Panchsheel (1954) to the Lahore
Declaration (February 1999). While advocating the cause of nuclear disarmament
all along, India became a nuclear state during the Vajpayee’s regime. The Pokhran
tests gave India a new identity — a de facto nuclear weapon power. The result was
a sudden international isolation. But thankfully, the post-Pokhran II chill in relations
with the US and other major powers has been overcome by now, and India’s
interactions with all the Group-8 countries have increased substantially in the last
few years.
Achievements of Indian Foreign Policy
The achievements of Indian foreign policy are quite impressive, India has been at
the forefront of the anti-imperialist, anti-colonial and anti-apartheid struggles. It has
played a positive and constructive role in resolving the situation in various pockets of
tension, such as Korea, Indo-China, the Congo, the Lebanon, the Suez Crisis, Sinai
Somalia, Sierra Leone and elsewhere. Its role in about thirty peacekeeping operations
has been duly acknowledged and appreciated.
India’s place and position in world politics
The basic objective underlying India’s regional policy since independence has been
its undeclared claim to hegemony in South Asia. Now it has achieved that position
unquestionably. Its pre-eminence in South Asia is now acknowledged even by
Pakistan. Even though it disclaims any ambition to act as a leader in Asia, India is a
leading champion of Asia’s claim to a greater place in world affairs.
Besides, India is the most influential member of Non-aligned Movement.
Moreover, it is the main organizer and the leading member of the powerful Afro-
Asian bloc in the United Nations. In addition, it is the chief spokesman of the Third
World Forum. Notably, without being a great power, it has enjoyed a unique position
in world affairs, because both politically and ideologically, it has a greater room for
manoeuvre. But India has still a long way to go to become a global power, although
it has thought of emerging so since independence. To quote S. Gurumurthy, ‘The
idea that we should aim at becoming a superpower is no longer a dormant one, even
if it is not a dominant one.’
Drawbacks in Indian Foreign Policy
Though the positive side of the Indian foreign policy is quite prominent and impressive,
its negative side, too, is not less glaring. The Indian foreign policy is bereft of long
range thinking, of objective understanding analysis—the modern methodology of
foreign policy-making and decision making. There is no foreign policy think tank as
such or any architectural design of our foreign policy. Our foreign service is generalist
corps and focuses on day to day relationship; it has none of the reflexes so essential Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
for diplomatic activism in a world of rapid shifts and development. There are few
specialists, and most of the foreign service officers are diplomats, who have not
been given sufficient opportunities to develop expertise in specific areas. No wonder,
out foreign policy has been attacked for being reactive rather than an anticipative or NOTES
creative or constructive. In other words, it lacks continued creativity. But the evolution
of foreign policy does require continued creativity. As a matter of fact, our foreign
policy is at its best in reacting decisively rather than initiating boldly. Moreover,
‘Indian diplomacy has failed to meet regional and global challenges. It did not define
for India a place in the international system that could fuse the needs of security as
well as national development. The conception of policy and its diplomatic articulation
did not relate interests and goals to principles and behaviour, specially failing to
subordinate rhetoric consistently to a pragmatic calculation of costs and gains.’ Again,
more emphasis on multilateral diplomacy and comparative neglect of developing the
methodologies of bilateral management has been a historical error of the Indian
system. Besides, we have paid excessive attention to the West, and with all our lip
service to Asia, we neglected our reach to the continent, until P.V. Narsimha Rao
who initiated a novel ‘Look East Policy’.
Another charge against our foreign policy is that since the very beginning
India has adopted a hectoring posture. But, as Henry Kissinger has observed: ‘The
hectoring tone of moral superiority exhausts, if not the goodwill, at least the patience
of their interlocutors’. Certainly, our foreign policy has been full of pious but toothless
exhortations. Understandably, ‘our gratuitously moralistic tone has pushed both friends
and foes alike,’ as Prem Bhatia remarked.
India’s foreign policy administration also suffers from many weaknesses. In
the opinion of Shashi Tharoor, ‘In Indian foreign policy institutionalization has been
inadequate, personnel and processes subverted, rationality and efficiency only
occasionally realized and consensus contrived’. In other words, there is a lack of
rational, institutional basis; there is lack of strategic planning, making national security
our greatest casualty. The foreign office has no separate unit on military affairs.
Our National Security Council is a poor copy of its counterpart in the US. J. N. Dixit
in his Across Borders also points out that ‘the absence of a security component in
India’s foreign policy is a strain that runs through fifty years’.
To conclude, ultimately our standing in the comity of nations depends on our
political stability, our economic power, our technological autonomy and our peaceful
coexistence with our neighbours.
India’s Relations with Neighbouring Countries
Significance of Indian Ocean Region
Indian Ocean is strategically important for India. From India’s perspective, key
security considerations include the accessibility of the Indian Ocean to the fleets of
the world’s most powerful states; the large Islamic populations on the shores of the
ocean and in its hinterland; the oil wealth of the Persian Gulf; the proliferation of
conventional military power and nuclear weapons among the region’s states; the
Foreign Policies of importance of key straits for India’s maritime security; and the historical tendency
Various Countries
of continental Asian peoples or powers (the Indo-Aryans, the Mongols, Russia) to
spill periodically out of Inner Asia in the direction of the Indian Ocean. The position
of India in this environment has sometimes been compared to that of Italy in the
NOTES Mediterranean, only on an immense scale. To this list may be added the general
consideration that, in the words of India’s navy chief, Indians ‘live in uncertain times
and in a rough neighbourhood. A scan of the littoral shows that, with the exception of
a few countries, all others are afflicted with one or more of the ailments of poverty,
backwardness, fundamentalism, terrorism or internal insurgency. A number of
territorial and maritime disputes linger on .... Most of the conflicts since the end of
the Cold War have also taken place in or around the [Indian Ocean region].’
Confronted by this environment, India—like other states that are geographically
large and also ambitious—believes that its security will be best guaranteed by enlarging
its security perimeter and, specifically, achieving a position of influence in the larger
region that encompasses the Indian Ocean. As one prominent American scholar
recently noted, ‘Especially powerful states are strongly inclined to seek regional
hegemony.’
Unsurprisingly, New Delhi regards the Indian Ocean as its backyard and
deems it both natural and desirable that India function as, eventually, the leader and
the predominant influence in this region—the world’s only region and ocean named
after a single state. This is what the United States set out to do in North America
and the Western Hemisphere at an early stage in America’s ‘rise to power’:
‘American foreign policy throughout the nineteenth century had one overarching
goal: achieving hegemony in the Western Hemisphere.’ Similarly, in the expansive
view of many Indians, India’s security perimeter should extend from the Strait of
Malacca to the Strait of Hormuz and from the coast of Africa to the western shores
of Australia. For some Indians, the emphasis is on the northern Indian Ocean, but
for others the realm includes even the ‘Indian Ocean’ coast of Antarctica.
In this same vein, one—probably not atypical—Indian scholar judges that ‘a
rising India will aspire to become the regional hegemony of South Asia and the
Indian Ocean Region, and an extra regional power in the Middle East, Central Asia
and Southeast Asia. Ceteris paribus, a rising India will try to establish regional
hegemony just like all the other rising powers have since Napoleonic times, with the
long term goal of achieving great power status on an Asian and perhaps even global
scale.’
A second motive for India, and one obviously related to the foregoing, stems
from anxiety about the role, or potential role, of external powers in the Indian Ocean.
The late Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru summed up India’s concerns in this regard:
‘History has shown that whatever power controls the Indian Ocean has, in the first
instance, India’s sea borne trade at her mercy and, in the second, India’s very
independence itself.’This remains India’s view. The Indian Maritime Doctrine asserts,
‘All major powers of this century will seek a toehold in the Indian Ocean Region.
Thus, Japan, the EU, and China, and a reinvigorated Russia can be expected to
show presence in these waters either independently or through politico-security
arrangements.’ There is, moreover, ‘an increasing tendency of extra regional powers
of military intervention in [IO] littoral countries to contain what they see as a conflict Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
situation.’
India’s concern about external powers in the Indian Ocean mainly relates to
China and the United States. The Sino-Indian relationship has improved since India’s
war with China in 1962 and the Indian prime minister’s 1998 letter to the U.S. NOTES
president justifying India’s nuclear tests in terms of the Chinese ‘threat.’ Most recently,
the Chinese premier paid a state visit to India in April 2005, during which the two
sides agreed to, among various other steps, the establishment of a ‘Strategic and
Cooperative Partnership for Peace and Prosperity.’ Chinese and Indian naval units
also exercised together for the first time in November 2005.
However, and notwithstanding the probably episodic progress registered of
late, China and India likely will remain long-term rivals, vying for the same strategic
space in Asia. Beijing, according to former Indian external affairs minister Jaswant
Singh, is the ‘principal variable in the calculus of Indian foreign and defence policy.’
In the words of one Indian scholar, China’s ‘rise will increasingly challenge Asian
and global security. Just as India bore the brunt of the rise of international terrorism
because of its geographical location, it will be frontally affected by the growing
power of a next door ... empire practicing classical balance-of-power politics.’
Another observer has recently judged that ‘there is no sign of China giving up
its ‘contain India’ strategy which takes several forms: an unresolved territorial dispute;
arms sales to and military alliances with ‘India-wary countries’ (Pakistan, Bangladesh,
Burma and now Nepal); nuclear and missile proliferation in India’s neighbourhood
(Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia); and opposition to India’s membership in global
and regional organizations.’ Most recently, India’s defence minister said in September
2005 that the Sino-Indian ‘situation has not improved. Massive preparations and
deployments by China in the Tibetan and Sikkim border areas near Arunachal Pradesh
and the Aksai Chin ... has created an alarming situation.’
Narrowing its focus to the IO, India cannot help but be wary of the growing
capability of China’s navy and of Beijing’s growing maritime presence. In the Bay
of Bengal and Arabian Sea, especially, New Delhi is sensitive to a variety of Chinese
naval or maritime activities that observers have characterized collectively as a ‘string
of pearls’ strategy or a ‘preparation of the battlefield.’ For Beijing, this process has
entailed achieving the capability, and thereby the option, to deploy or station naval
power in this region in the future. A key focus in this connection is Burma (Myanmar),
where Chinese engineers and military personnel have long been engaged in airfield,
road, railroad, pipeline, and port construction aimed at better connecting China with
the Indian Ocean, both by sea and directly overland.
Some of this activity, moreover, spills over onto Burma’s offshore islands,
including St. Matthews, near the mouth of the Malacca Strait, and the Coco Islands
(Indian until their transfer to Burma in the 1950s), in the Bay of Bengal. On the
latter, China is suspected of maintaining a communications monitoring facility that
collects intelligence on Indian naval operations and missile testing. In addition to this
‘presence’ in Burma, China is pursuing a variety of infrastructure links with Southeast
Asia through the Greater Mekong Subregion programme and is building container
Foreign Policies of ports in Bangladesh at Chittagong, and in Sri Lanka at Hambantota—directly astride
Various Countries
the main east-west shipping route across the Indian Ocean. Elsewhere, and perhaps
most ominously for India, China is constructing a large new naval base for Pakistan
at Gwadar.
NOTES India also remains somewhat nervous about the large U.S. military presence
in the Indian Ocean to India’s west—in the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf.
India’s Maritime Doctrine observes that ‘the unfolding events consequent to the
war in Afghanistan has brought the threats emanating on our Western shores into
sharper focus. The growing US and western presence and deployment of naval
forces, the battle for oil dominance and its control in the littoral and hinterland ... are
factors that are likely to have a long-term impact on the overall security environment
in the [Indian Ocean region].’ In similar fashion, the 2004-2005 Annual Report of
India’s Defence Ministry states, ‘The Indian Navy maintained its personnel and
equipment in a high state of combat preparedness due to the continued presence of
multinational maritime forces in the Indian Ocean Region resulting in a fast pace of
activities in the area.’
On the other hand, the continuing development of ties with the United States
lately seems to have moderated Indian sensitivity to the U.S. presence in the Arabian
Sea. In September and October 2005, for example, the two sides conducted their
first naval manoeuvres—MALABAR 05—employing U.S. and Indian aircraft
carriers, and this occurred in the Arabian Sea. Many Indians, moreover, also recognize
that because of Washington’s desire to draw closer to India in response to overlapping
‘China’ and ‘terrorism’ concerns, the increased American role in the Indian Ocean
region lately has increased India’s ‘strategic space’ and political-military relevance.
Any decrease in the level of U.S. involvement in the region also would increase
pressure here from China. Wariness about China also is a factor in recent Indian
efforts to increase Japan’s profile in the IO. This was most recently made manifest
by the March 2005 Indo-Japanese agreement to develop jointly natural gas resources
in the strategically sensitive Andaman Sea. In any case, as one retired Indian diplomat
recently commented, ‘asking outside powers to stay away is a pipe dream.’
Of particular note, this last realization has led New Delhi to discard its traditional
rhetoric about the Indian Ocean as a ‘zone of peace.’ That language, along with
‘nonalignment’ and a diplomatic approach marked by preach-ness and a ‘moral’
dimension, were the policies of an India that was weak. That India now belongs to
history: ‘India has moved from its past emphasis on the power of the argument to a
new stress on the argument of power.’
A third factor animating Indian interest in the Indian Ocean region is anxiety
about the threat posed by Pakistan and, more broadly, Islam in a region that is home
to much of the world’s Muslim population. Formerly this may not have been an
important consideration. Today, however, Islamic civilization often finds itself at
odds with the West and with largely Hindu India, and this conflict frequently will
play out in the Indian Ocean region. India’s Maritime Doctrine, for example, observed
‘the growing assertion of fundamentalist militancy fuelled by jihadi fervour are factors
that are likely to have a long-term impact on the overall security environment in the
[Indian Ocean region].’ In a similar vein, India’s naval chief recently declared that
the ‘epicentre of world terrorism lies in our [India’s] immediate neighbourhood.’ Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
India, however, will approach these matters pragmatically, as illustrated by New
Delhi’s close ties with Iran.
A fourth motive for India in the Indian Ocean is energy. As the fourth-largest
economy (in purchasing-power-parity terms) in the world, and one almost 70 percent NOTES
dependent on foreign oil (the figure is expected to rise to 85 percent by 2020), India
has an oil stake in the region that is significant and growing. Some Indian security
analysts foresee energy security as India’s primary strategic concern in the next
twenty-five years and believe it must place itself on a virtual wartime footing to
address it. India must protect its offshore oil and gas fields, ongoing deep-sea oil
drilling projects in its vast exclusive economic zone, and an extensive infrastructure
of shore and offshore oil and gas wells, pumping stations and telemetry posts, ports
and pipeline grids, and refineries. Additionally, Indian public and private-sector oil
companies have invested several billion dollars in recent years in oil concessions in
foreign countries, many of them in the region, including Sudan, Yemen, Iran, Iraq,
and Burma. These investments are perceived to need military protection.
The foregoing considerations are the primary ones for India in the region.
However, there also are important commercial reasons for New Delhi to pursue a
robust Indian Ocean strategy. In the Indian view, ‘the maritime arc from the Gulf
through the Straits of Malacca to the Sea of Japan is the equivalent of the New Silk
Route, and ... total trade on this arc is U.S. $1,800 billion.’ In addition, large numbers
of overseas Indians live in the region—3.5 million in the Gulf and Arab countries;
they, and their remittances, constitute a factor in Indian security thinking.
In light of these interests, India is pursuing a variety of policies aimed at
improving its strategic situation and at ensuring that its fears in the theatre are not
realized. To these ends, New Delhi is forging a web of partnerships with certain
littoral states and major external powers, according to India’s foreign secretary, to
increase Indian influence in the region, acquire ‘more strategic space’ and ‘strategic
autonomy,’ and create a safety cushion for itself. One observer states: ‘To spread
its leverage, from Iran ... to Myanmar and Vietnam, India is mixing innovative
diplomatic cocktails that blend trade agreements, direct investment, military exercises,
aid funds, energy cooperation and infrastructure-building.’ In addition, India is
developing more capable naval and air forces, and it is utilizing these forces
increasingly to shape India’s strategic environment.
Relationship with the US
India’s pursuit of closer ties with its neighbours in the region and with key external
actors in the region is not haphazard. Rather, and as one would expect, India is
systematically targeting states that will bring India specific and tangible security and
economic benefits.
The relationship with the United States is intended to enhance and magnify
India’s own power, and it constitutes perhaps the most important measure that is
intended, inter alia, to promote the realization of India’s agenda in the Indian Ocean.
The United States, of course, is the key external actor in the IO and has a more
significant military presence there—in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, Pakistan,
Foreign Policies of east and northeast Africa, Singapore, and Diego Garcia—than it did even a few
Various Countries
years ago. Thus, America’s raw power in the region has made it imperative that
New Delhi, if it is to achieve its own regional goals, court the United States—at
least for some time. The U.S. connection, of course, also promotes Indian goals
NOTES unrelated to the Indian Ocean.
This developing relationship has been abetted by common concerns about
international terrorism, religious extremism, and the rise of China. It also is a
fundamental departure from the past pattern of Indian foreign policy. Since President
William Clinton’s visit to India in 2000 (the first visit by a president in decades) and,
more recently, the realization by the George W. Bush administration of the importance
of a rising India, as well as the 11 September 2001 terrorist attack on the United
States, the two nations have embarked on a broad programme of cooperation in a
variety of fields, especially security. This cooperation has included Indian naval
protection of U.S. shipping in the Malacca Strait in 2002, a close partnership in
responding to the 2004 tsunami, combined military exercises, U.S. warship visits to
India, a dialogue on missile defence, American approval of India’s acquisition of
Israeli-built Phalcon airborne warning and control systems, and an offer to sell India
a variety of military hardware, including fighter aircraft and P-3 maritime patrol
planes.
Indo-US ties recently have advanced with particular speed. In March 2005,
notably, an American government spokesperson stated that Washington’s ‘goal is to
help India become a major world power in the 21st century. We understand fully the
implications, including military implications, of that statement.’ This declaration was
followed, in June 2005, by a bilateral accord, a ten-year ‘New Framework for the
U.S.-India Defence Relationship’ that strongly implies increasing levels of cooperation
in defence trade, including co production of military equipment, cooperation on missile
defence, the lifting of U.S. export controls on many sensitive military technologies,
and joint monitoring and protection of critical sea lanes.
George Bush hosted a summit with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in July
2005, promising to strive for full civil nuclear cooperation with India. In effect, the
president recognized India as a de facto, if not de jure, nuclear-weapon state and
placed New Delhi on the same platform as other nuclear-weapon states. India,
reciprocating, agreed to assume the same responsibilities and practices as any other
country with advanced nuclear technology. These include separating military and
civilian nuclear reactors and placing all civilian nuclear facilities under International
Atomic Energy Agency safeguards; implementing the Additional Protocol (which
supplements the foregoing safeguards) with respect to civilian nuclear facilities;
continuing India’s unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing; working with the United
States for the implementation of a multilateral Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty; placing
sensitive goods and technologies under export controls; and adhering to the Missile
Technology Control Regime and to Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines. The American
and Indian delegations also agreed to further measures to combat terrorism and
deepen bilateral economic relations through greater trade, investment, and technology
collaboration. The United States and India also signed a Science and Technology
Framework Agreement and agreed to build closer ties in space exploration, satellite Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
navigation, and other areas in the commercial space arena.
Notwithstanding this dramatic advance in relations, which—assuming eventual
congressional approval of implementing legislation—establishes a very close United
States-India strategic relationship, some bilateral problems will persist. One is NOTES
Pakistan.
The U.S. administration’s policy now is to expand relations with both India
and Pakistan but to do so along distinct tracks and in differentiated ways, one matching
their respective geo-strategic weights. From New Delhi’s perspective, this is a distinct
advance. Nonetheless, there will remain a residual Indian suspicion that any American
efforts to assist Pakistan to become a successful state will represent means, potential
or actual, of limiting Indian power in South Asia and the Indian Ocean. Such concerns
have been diminishing; nonetheless, New Delhi will try to weaken or modify U.S.
policies intended to strengthen United States-Pakistan ties, including continuing plans
to sell the latter a large package of military equipment.
The terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001 and on the
Parliament on December 13, 2001 have led to a deepening of Indo-US cooperation
in combating international terrorism. In 2010, US President Obama visited India.
President Barack Obama’s three-day visit to India came on the heels of an
economic recession and a losing war in Afghanistan. The creation of jobs in the
United States was his prime objective.
American businesses desperately need markets to sell their products. They
are looking towards the developing world with great optimism. India, being the second-
fastest growing economy after China, is a major consumer of everything from bikes
to aircrafts, nuclear power to defense equipment. In order to take advantage of the
burgeoning demand from India, on the very first day of Obama’s visit, 20 business
deals worth a total of $10 billion were signed between the two countries.
The deals included sales of Boeing passenger aircrafts, Boeing C-17
Globemasters to Indian armed forces, GE 107 F414 jet engines to the Indian Air
Force, GE power turbines, and the setting up of a Harley Davidson assembly plant,
among others. Obama declared that these deals would create around 54,000 jobs in
the United States. All this was said and done despite the restriction on outsourcing
from India.
Regional dynamics
Though there have been positive developments in Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, a
closer look at the neighbourhood and the wider region continues to present a disturbing
picture. Many of the countries face internal instability threatening their economic
progress and peace. However, the single greatest threat to peace and stability in the
region is posed by the combination of terrorism nurtured in and by Pakistan for its
strategic objectives, and the ingrained adventurism of the Pakistani military motivated
by its obsessive and compulsive hostility towards India. Virtually every terrorist act
anywhere in the world today has a Pakistani fingerprint somewhere. It is the root
and epicentre of international terrorism in the region and beyond.
Foreign Policies of Afghanistan has, with the intervention of the international community, only
Various Countries
just emerged from the dark years of a reactionary, medieval and fundamentalist
regime essentially created by Pakistan. While the new Government has international
legitimacy, the task of reconstruction and rebuilding the institutions is formidable.
NOTES Pakistan has a vested interest in a weak and unstable Afghanistan which provides it
an opportunity to meddle in the internal affairs of the country in pursuit of its quest
for strategic depth vis a vis India and Central Asia. Any revival of jehadi activities
supported by Pakistan is of direct security concern to India in view of their linkages
with terrorism and the proxy war against India. India is also committed to international
engagement in Afghanistan so that Pakistan cannot exploit the neglect and inattention
of the international community, as it did after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan,
to sponsor jehadi politics and training in the region.
In Pakistan, fundamentalist political parties have taken advantage of the
manipulated elections that debarred the two most popular political leaders from
contesting, to seize power in two provincial governments and a share in the coalition
government at the Centre. Reports and evidence mount of both inward and outward
proliferation of nuclear weapon technologies. Pakistan has also not lived up to its
much-publicised promises to the international community to cease cross-border
terrorism against India reversing even those cosmetic steps that it took at the beginning
of the year, under international pressure, against fundamentalist organizations. Worse
still, periodic Pakistani nuclear sabre-rattling, veiled and unveiled, has passed virtually
unreprimanded by the international community.
In Bangladesh too, conservative, right wing, religious fundamentalist political
parties now have a place in the coalition government. Pakistan continues to take
advantage of a favourable environment in Bangladesh and of weak government in
Nepal, to promote fundamentalist thinking and ISI activities in India in both these
countries. In Sri Lanka, the ceasefire between the LTTE and the government is a
positive development though the LTTE remains a potent non-state military force
that continues to arm itself, and the danger of backsliding of the political process
remains. In Myanmar, the tussle between the forces of democracy and the military
government remains alive.
Further west of the region, the US-led war against Iraq has generated a
series of security concerns for India notably in relation to the security of the large
Indian community resident there, and of oil and energy supplies. There is also a very
real risk that the US-led coalition war in Iraq will distract attention from Pakistani
behaviour in its neighbourhood, particularly in India but also Afghanistan, which
Pakistan will use to step up its adventurist activities in the region as it did after the
Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. The war against Iraq could also aggravate the
divide between the Muslim and non-Muslim world.
Against this backdrop, India remains fully committed to maintaining peace
with its neighbours and stability in the region through a combination of defence-
preparedness and unilateral restraint, confidence building and dialogue and expanding
bilateral interactions. In the area of defence-preparedness, it has reformed its higher
defence management and streamlined procurement procedures. Its defence policy
and force postures remain defensive in orientation while its nuclear policy is
characterized by a commitment to no-first-use, moratorium on nuclear testing, Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
minimum credible nuclear deterrence, and the rejection of an arms race or concepts
and postures from the Cold War era.
Pakistan NOTES
Pakistan’s polity has been repeatedly hijacked by the military that has a vested
interest in tension with India as it strengthens their pre-eminence in the Pakistani
power structure. The past year witnessed a progressive consolidation of the role of
the military, and in particular that of Gen. Musharraf, in the Pakistani polity through
the ‘referendum’ of April 2002, the Legal Framework Order (LFO) of August, the
enhanced and institutionalized role of the army in the strengthened National Security
Council of Pakistan, and the patently manipulated elections of October. Together
with the rise of fundamentalist MMA, these developments do not augur well for
India’s security.
India has been on the receiving end of Pakistan’s policy of a proxy war
against India using terrorism for several decades now, first in the Punjab and then in
Jammu & Kashmir and elsewhere. Pakistani provocation reached a dangerous point
with the 13 December 2001 attack on the Parliament. A more forceful response
became necessary. Additional troops were moved along the Line of Control (LoC)
and the International Boundary in a state of readiness, inter-alia to prevent further
infiltration of terrorists into India.
In response to these measures and international pressure, the then Pakistani
President, General Pervez Musharraf announced in a speech on 12 January 2002,
that ‘Pakistan will not allow its territory to be used for any terrorist activity anywhere
in the world’, that ‘no organization will be allowed to indulge in terrorism in the name
of Kashmir’ and that ‘anyone found involved in any terrorist act would be dealt with
sternly’. There was a temporary crackdown on extremists in Pakistan. Terrorist
groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Tayyaba were banned and some
of their financial assets were frozen. Some leaders were placed under house arrest
and around 2000 low-level cadres of terrorist organizations were arrested.
There was a temporary decline in cross border infiltration and terrorist violence
linked to it in the months of January-March 2002 while ‘jehadi’ cadres were advised
to lie low. However, cross border infiltration and terrorist violence continued and
increased as the measures were relaxed with time. On 14 May 2002, terrorists
attacked family lines of an army camp in Kaluchak, Jammu district, killing thirty-two
civilians including eleven women and eleven children. On 18 May 2002, India asked
the Government of Pakistan to recall their High Commissioner in New Delhi in view
of Pakistan’s continued support to cross border terrorism. Once again, under pressure,
General Musharraf responded in his speech of 27 May 2002 with a commitment to
stop cross border infiltration and terrorism on a permanent basis.
Despite Gen. Musharraf’s commitments, cross border infiltration and related
terrorist violence increased from July 2002 onwards. On 13 July 2002 Pak-based
terrorists attacked a low-income neighbourhood in Qasimnagar. Attacks on soft
targets calculated to inflame sentiments have continued. These include the attacks
on temples at Akshardham, and in Jammu and on women in J&K. As recently as on
Foreign Policies of March 20, 2003, Kashmiri Hindus living in Nadimarg, Jammu were targeted in which
Various Countries
twenty-four Pundits, including eleven women and two children were massacred in
cold blood. These incidents underscore once again that there has been no respite in
terrorism from Pakistan. They also underline the need for Pakistan to take decisive
NOTES steps to end infiltration on a permanent basis and wind down the infrastructure of
support to terrorism.
Cross border infiltration and linked terrorist violence reached a height in the
run up to the Jammu & Kashmir Legislative Assembly election. However, the
successful conduct of elections to the Jammu & Kashmir Assembly with a voter
participation of 43.70 and per cnt; in the face of terrorist threats and intimidation,
and public satisfaction with the results, was seen as a vindication of the desire of the
people of Jammu & Kashmir for peace and of the credibility of the elections.
On 16 October 2002, the Government decided to re-deploy the troops from
positions on the international border as the Armed Forces were deemed to have
achieved the immediate objectives assigned to them. It was also decided that there
would be no lowering of the vigil in Jammu & Kashmir.
India remains firmly committed to the path of dialogue and reconciliation in
keeping with the Simla Agreement and the Lahore Declaration and has repeatedly
called upon Pakistan to end its sponsorship of terrorism in India so that a conducive
environment can be created for the resumption of bilateral dialogue. Should Pakistan
move purposefully towards eradicating cross border terrorism, India will be prepared
to resume bilateral dialogue to address differences and enhance cooperation. It
should not be forgotten that the two most bold and meaningful initiatives for dialogue
at Lahore and Agra came from India. With this in background the latest peace
initiative of Prime Minister will make worthwhile progress only with end of cross-
border terrorism.
China
China, India’s largest neighbour, is passing through a period of rapid economic growth
and modernization with the aim of achieving great power status in the shortest time
possible. India’s border with China is almost 3,500 km long. China continues to
occupy approx. 38,000 sq. km of Indian territory mainly in the Aksai Chin Area, and
claims yet another 90,000 sq km in the Eastern Sector. Further, 5,180 sq. km of
territory under Pak occupation in Northern Kashmir was illegally ceded to China by
Pakistan in 1963.
China is rapidly modernising its Armed Forces. In its White Paper on National
Defence issued recently, China has stressed the vital importance of maintaining
international stability and a global strategic balance, as also a legal regime governing
international arms control and disarmament, in order to address an international
situation that is undergoing profound changes including a serious disequilibrium in
the balance of military power especially between the developed and developing
countries. As reported by the Chinese Government to the 16th National Party
Congress in November 2002, strengthening of national defence is a ‘strategic task
in China’s modernization drive’.
As far as India is concerned, it cannot be ignored that every major Indian city Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
is within reach of Chinese missiles and this capability is being further augmented to
include Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs). The asymmetry in terms
of nuclear forces is pronouncedly in favour of China and is likely to get further
accentuated as China responds to counter the US missile defence programme. NOTES
China’s close defence relationship with Pakistan takes a particular edge in view of
latter’s known belligerence and hostility to India and its acquisition of nuclear assets.
Notwithstanding these concerns, India continues its endeavour to seek a long
term and stable relationship with China, based on the principles of Panchsheel, mutual
sensitivity to each other’s concerns and equality and is committed to the process of
dialogue to resolve all outstanding differences. Some Confidence Building Measures
(CBMs) have been initiated and while these are bearing fruit incrementally, the
pace of progress has been less than satisfactory. A number of high level visits have
taken place in recent years. The President of India visited China in the year 2000.
This was followed by Mr. Li Peng’s visit to India in January 2001. These high level
visits have improved bilateral relations and understanding of each other’s viewpoint
thereby contributing to further reduction in tension.
Important developments marking the progress of India-China relations in 2002-
03 included the initiation of direct Delhi-Beijing flights, the first meeting of the India-
China dialogue mechanism on counter terrorism, the completion of the process of
exchange of maps for clarification of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the Middle
Sector, the implementation of the MOU (signed during Premier Zhu’s visit) on sharing
hydrological data from the upper reaches of the Brahmaputra and accordance of
‘Approved Tourist Destination Status’ to India by China. The Joint Working Group
on the Boundary Question met in its 14th session in November 2002. The first
informal Foreign Minister level India-China-Russia dialogue took place in September
2002 on the sidelines of the UNGA. Interaction in other agreed dialogue mechanisms
also continued.
India has, of late, commenced some cooperation with the armed forces of
China. Naval ships of both the countries have been exchanging visits and some of
India’s mid level officers are undergoing courses in Chinese institutions. During
2002-2003, exchange of high level defence delegations continued.
Bangladesh
India’s relation with Bangladesh is characterized by both affinity and occasional
friction. Key security concerns relate to the problem of uncontrolled migration, which
Bangladesh refuses to recognize, across the 4,000 kms common boundary, the
presence and activities of Indian insurgent groups and leaders from the north-east
of India on Bangladeshi soil which it refuses to acknowledge, the rising influence of
political parties and organizations of radical Islamic and fundamentalist orientation
within and outside the coalition government led by the Bangladesh National Party,
and border demarcation and border management problems which give rise to ugly
incidents from time to time. Border management problems, such as smuggling, illegal
immigration, insurgency, trafficking of women and children, and the construction,
repair and maintenance of boundary-related structures are addressed through Border
Foreign Policies of Coordination Conferences between the Border Security Force (BSF) and Bangladesh
Various Countries
Rifles (BDR) while issues such as exchange of enclaves and adverse possessions
are addressed by the Joint Boundary Working Groups (JBWGs) constituted for the
purpose. Following the elections, India continued with its policy of close engagement
NOTES with its eastern neighbour discussing all issues in a forthright manner.
Sri Lanka
The ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka has, over the years, extracted a severe political and
security cost for India, internally and externally, that goes beyond the assassination
of a former Prime Minister through a terrorist act and serious casualties incurred by
the Indian Armed Forces in an effort to ameliorate the situation. It has created the
possibility for countries hostile or unfriendly to India to establish a foothold there in a
manner inimical to India’s security interests. The LTTE remains a proscribed terrorist
organization in India and its leader, a proclaimed offender under the law.
The keystone of the Government of India’s policy towards the ethnic conflict
in Sri Lanka is a firm commitment to the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of
Sri Lanka and to the restoration of a lasting peace through a peaceful, negotiated
settlement that meets the just aspirations of all elements of Sri Lankan society. On
the political front, India continues to support the activities of the Sri Lankan
Government towards the Peace Process. The Government of India welcomed the
ceasefire agreement stating that it would provide an opportunity to both sides to
move forward towards a substantive dialogue for a negotiated political settlement of
the ethnic conflict. The regional dynamics has changed a lot after the end of the
ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka with the elimination of LTTE.
Nepal
Relations between India and Nepal have consistently been close and extensive,
reflecting the historical, geographical, cultural and linguistic links between the two
nations. In keeping with this close relationship, several high-level interactions took
place between India and Nepal. Defence relations too have been traditionally close.
During the year, Nepal was beset on the one hand by a political and
constitutional crisis and on the other, by a growing Maoist insurgency and violence
that had spread to almost all the districts of Nepal, with mid-West to Western districts
as thrust areas.
Another area of growing concern for India’s security is the increased activities
of Pak ISI and terrorist organizations amongst Nepal’s Muslim minority.
Afghanistan
India is closely watching the changing scenario in Afghanistan since it has ramifications
on the security scenario of the region and the country, including in the state of
Jammu and Kashmir. India would not like to see Afghanistan once again becoming
a breeding ground for terrorism, or a victim of terrorism sponsored from across its
borders. India was amongst the first countries to appoint a Defence Attaché in
Kabul. India-Afghanistan ties continued to expand and strengthen during the year.
In general, the situation in Afghanistan has improved. However, the security Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
situation in crucial parts of Afghanistan is still not stable. Two senior ministers have
been assassinated. Armed clashes have been taking place between different groups
in Northern and Western Afghanistan. Of particular concern are the signs of the
regrouping of the Taliban and Al Qaeda remnants and the forces of Gulbuddin NOTES
Hekmatyar in the southern and eastern Afghanistan.
Terrorism and India’s Nuclear Policy
India has been a victim of terrorism for many decades, much before the West
experienced its deadly reality on 11 September 2001. The terrorist menace in Jammu
and Kashmir has its roots in Pakistan and is supported financially and materially by
the government and institutions of that country. The Indian Armed Forces have
dealt with the problem of cross-border terrorism with a multi-pronged strategy that
includes psychological warfare, innovative military tactics and counter intelligence
methods. These efforts have met with reasonable success but this is a prolonged
battle. India’s long experience in tackling terrorism can be of valuable help to other
countries that are facing similar challenges now. Despite the assurances of the
Pakistani Government, infiltration continues across the border.
For any terrorist movement to be contained, the Government’s resolve and
the security forces’ firmness are a must. India’s fight against terrorism has been a
long and arduous one and the Indian Armed Forces are fully geared to handle any
problem that may arise in future. It is important that the state support for any form
of terrorism must cease. Terrorist organisations have long arms and global reach.
The world, therefore, has to fight a united battle by pooling resources in order to
remove this scourge from the face of the earth.
India’s Nuclear Policy
India remains a firm and consistent proponent of general and complete disarmament
and attaches the highest priority to global nuclear disarmament. India’s policy on
disarmament also takes into account changes that have taken place in the world,
especially in the 1990s. The nuclear tests of May 1998 do not dilute India’s
commitment to this long-held objective. As a nuclear weapon State, India is even
more conscious of its responsibility in this regard and, as in the past, continues to
take initiatives in pursuit of global nuclear disarmament both individually and
collectively. The steps that were announced after the tests and the initiatives that
India has taken since, strengthen this commitment.
India’s nuclear weapons capability is meant only for self-defence and seeks
only to ensure that India’s security, independence and integrity are not threatened in
the future. India is not interested in a nuclear arms race. This is the rationale behind
the two pillars of India’s nuclear policy – minimum deterrence and no-first use. The
determination of the profile of this deterrent, including accurate and refined delivery
systems, is a sovereign responsibility.
After concluding the series of tests of May 1998, India announced a voluntary
moratorium on further underground nuclear test explosions. In announcing this
moratorium, India accepted the core obligation of a test ban and also addressed the
Foreign Policies of general wish of the international community to foreswear testing. This moratorium
Various Countries
continues, subject to the supreme national interests, a provision granted under the
CTBT to every country. India has also announced its willingness to move towards a
de jure formalisation of this voluntary undertaking.
NOTES
Planning considerations
The security environment that has been highlighted above clearly brings out four
key elements that are fundamental determinants of our security planning. These are
as follows:
(a) The Indian Armed Forces have a two front obligation, which require them to
safeguard the security of our borders with Pakistan as well as with China ;
(b) India is not a member of any military alliance or strategic grouping, nor is this
consistent with our policies necessitating a certain independent deterrent
capability;
(c) due to external abetment, India’s Armed Forces are involved in internal security
functions on a relatively larger scale than is normal requiring a force structure
that will be able to cope with it; and
(d) India’s interests in the North Indian Ocean, including the security of our EEZ
and Island territories, highlight the need for a blue water Naval capability
commensurate with our responsibilities.
India’s Relations with Israel
India's ties with Israel can be discussed under the following headings:
Political Relations
On 17 September 1950, India announced recognition of Israel. Soon after India’s
recognition of Israel, the Jewish Agency established an immigration office in Bombay.
This was soon converted into a Trade Office and later a Consulate. Sporadic
governmental contacts continued between India and Israel in the fifties and early
sixties, including visits by several Israeli and Indian ministers. Following decision to
establish diplomatic relations, Israel opened its Embassy in Delhi in February 1992
and India opened its Embassy in Tel Aviv on 15 May 1992. Since then relations have
seen rapid growth across a broad spectrum.
Recent important high level visits from India include that of Chief Minister of
Punjab Shri Parkash Singh Badal and Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh Shri
Prem Kumar Dhumal in November 2009; Minister of State for Commerce and
Industry Shri Jyotiraditya Scindia in February 2010; Minister of State (I/C) for Science
& Technology Shri Prithviraj Chavan in March 2010; Members of Parliament in
July 2010. Minister of Industry, Trade and Labour of Israel Binyamin Ben-Eliezer
visited India in January 2010.
Bilateral mechanisms
The period since 1992 has been utilized to put in place the framework of normalstate-
to-state relations, including agreements and MOUs in diverse areas of cooperation.
Bilateral institutional mechanisms include Foreign Office Consultations; Strategic Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
dialogue between NSAs; JWG on Counter-Terrorism and Non Proliferation Dialogue;
JWG on Defence Cooperation; JWG on Trade and Economic cooperation; Joint
Committee on Agriculture; Joint Committee on Science and Technology.
NOTES
Economic and Commercial relations
Bilateral trade and economic relations have progressed rapidly since the establishment
of diplomatic relations between India and Israel in 1992. From a base of US$ 200
million in 1992 (comprising primarily of diamonds), merchandise trade has diversified
and had increased sharply reaching US$ 4747.1 million in 2010 (an increase of
59.92 per cent compared to 2009 when bilateral trade in goods amounted to US$
2968.3 million).
In 2010, India stood at the sixth place in terms of Israel’s trade partner countries
and the third largest trade partner in Asia after China and Hong Kong (trade data
includes diamonds) and remained a ‘focus’ country of the Israeli Government for
increased trade effort.
While India’s exports to Israel in areas other than diamonds have increased
over the years, Diamonds constituted 42.1 per cent of the total bilateral trade in the
year 2009 and 49.35 per cent of the bilateral trade in 2010. Major exports from India
to Israel include precious stones and metals, chemical products, textile and textile
articles, plants and vegetable products, mineral products, rubber and plastic products,
base metals and machinery. Major exports from Israel to India include precious
stones and metals, chemical and mineral products, base metals, machinery, and
transport equipment.
While the traditional business thrust in diamonds, agriculture, chemicals,
information and communication technology and pharmaceuticals remains strong,
there is a growing interest from Israeli companies in clean energy, water technologies,
biotech, nanotech, homeland security, real estate, infrastructure and financial services.
Israeli companies have also begun making major strategic decisions related to
cooperation with India and are moving away from a buyer-seller relationship to a
focus on setting up Research and Development (R&D), development centres or
production units in India. Increase in India-Israel collaborations at corporate level
spanning various sectors is visible in real estate, IT & Software, telecom,
semiconductors, chemicals and agrochemicals, energy and so on.
Agriculture
Agriculture is a major area of cooperation between the two countries. The private
sector in India has also shown interest in accessing Israeli technologies and JVs
have been set up for manufacture of drip irrigation systems and in the areas of
floriculture and horticulture. A comprehensive Work Plan for cooperation in the field
of agriculture was signed on 10th May 2006. The Work Plan which was to be in
force till 1 June 2008 was followed by an Action Plan 2008-2010. Several Indian
states are running programmes with Israeli cooperation particularly Haryana and
Rajasthan.
Foreign Policies of Cooperation in Science and Technology
Various Countries
In May 2005, a MOU on Industrial Research and Development Initiative between
Department of Science & Technology, Government of India and the Ministry of
Industry, Trade & Labor, Government of Israel was signed with the objectives of
NOTES
promoting activities of bilateral industrial R&D cooperation and to identity and promote
specific projects that could lead to industrial R&D. Under this MOU, India and
Israel also set up a joint industrial Research and Development fund (called i4RD) to
encourage investment and joint ventures.
Training programmes
The Israeli MFA’s Centre for International Cooperation (MASHAV) has conducted
activities in diverse fields with India. These include courses in various fields in Israel
as well as in India, including health, agriculture, education and management. The
Horticultural Demonstration Farm located at IARI Research Institute in PUSA,
New Delhi is a result of technical cooperation between the two countries.
Culture & Tourism
India is known in Israel as an ancient nation with strong cultural traditions, and in
popular Israeli perception India is an attractive, alternative tourist destination. Israeli
youth are particularly attracted to India. About 35,000 Israelis, mostly youth, after
finishing military service, visit India annually. The level of understanding of and
knowledge about India is growing, in some measure as a result of India’s economic
advancement and image as an important centre for hi-tech. There is also an abiding
interest in Indian culture and spiritual traditions.
Indian Community- NRI/PIO
There are approximately 70,000 Jews of Indian origin in Israel, most of them Israeli
nationals. They are mostly engaged in agriculture or work in the new development
towns outside the traditional urban centres. Immigrants into Israel from India, who
came in the fifties and sixties from Maharashtra and smaller numbers from Kerala
and Calcutta, still maintain an Indian lifestyle and their cultural links with India remain
intact, while the younger generation is increasingly assimilated into Israeli society.
The resident Indian community of about 700 Indian citizens includes diamond traders,
some IT professionals, students and unskilled workers. There are also about 5,000
to 7,000 unskilled workers mainly employed in care-giving. There is a Central
Organization of Indian Jews, which brings together a large section of Indian Jews.
Other links
An Air Services Agreement was signed in April 1994. The Israeli national carrier
‘El- Al’Airlines currently flies thrice a week from Mumbai to Tel Aviv. State Bank
of India opened its branch in March 2007. It is located in Diamond Exchange and
caters to both the diamond business community and other major commercial actors
in the bilateral relationship.
2.6.2 United Kingdom’s Foreign Policy Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
Britain has been the greatest of imperial powers in history. For a long time, she has
had worldwide interests and commitments. Hence, the saying went: ‘The sun never
sets over the British Empire.’ But all that glory has now become history. Today, she NOTES
is declining in terms of relative importance and international commitments.
Decline of British power
The nineteenth century was known as the British century. However, the decline of
the British power began in the last quarter of the 19th century itself. In the beginning,
it was a gradual process. The causes of her decline were manifold. Technical
advances modified her insularity, reduced her naval pre-eminence and diminished
her industrial monopoly.
The rise of Japan and America challenged her naval supremacy, and as a
result, Britain lost the command of the seas—the main prop of Pax Britannica.
Moreover, a unified Germany (1871) threatened the balance of power in Europe.
Consequently, Britain lost the position of the holder of the balance— ‘the laughing
third’ status.
Sunset over the British Empire
The Second World War marked a turning point in the history of Great Britain. She
suffered a precipitous downfall in her power status because of this War. Though, a
nominal victor in the War, in winning it she lost her economic and military bases and
consequently, her status as a great power. The consequences of this decline was a
drastic revision in her foreign policy—the dismantling of overstretched empire, the
abandonment of unilateralism and the decision to seek much closer and paramount
economic, military and other ties with other powers. With the disappearance of her
empire and the emergence of two Superpowers—the USA and the Soviet Union,
Britain became a second rate power or a middle power by way of comparison.
‘Today, very little of the once mighty empire remains, although Britain still aspires to
have worldwide interests by the virtue of her role in the Commonwealth of Nations,
the Sterling area, the Colombo Plan and other associations or regional organizations.’
Foreign policy making process in Britain
In Britain—the mother of parliamentary democracy—foreign policy has been the
responsibility of the Prime Minister and of the Cabinet. In contrast to the American
political system, the policy making power here is not shared between the executive
and the legislative organs of the government. Next to the Prime Minister, the Foreign
Secretary holds a pre-eminent position in foreign affairs. However, unlike the
American Secretary of State, the British Foreign Secretary occupies a more
constitutionally defined office.
The Parliamentary Under Secretaries assist the Foreign Secretary and the
Prime Minister in handling matters on the floor of the Parliament and help in
maintaining liaison between the Parliament and the Foreign Office. The Foreign
Secretary is also advised by the permanent Under Secretary, the senior most civil
Foreign Policies of servant in the Foreign Office. Other departments that have a voice in the foreign
Various Countries
affairs include the Ministry of Defence, the Treasury, the Trade and Industry. Unlike
the US Congress, the British Parliament has no special constitutional powers to
regulate foreign commerce and consent to treaties. In Britain, ‘the Cabinet, not the
NOTES Parliament, declares war. Express consent of the Parliament is not essential for
ratification of treaties except those involving cession of territories or expenditure of
funds,’ or those affecting the power of the Parliament. To illustrate, the Treaty of
Maastricht (1992) required the approval of the British Parliament because it would
undermine the parliamentary sovereignty of Britain.
Objectives of UK’s foreign policy since 1945
The major objectives guiding the British foreign policy since 1945 are: (1) to enrich
and strengthen her economy; (2) to keep her military strength in proportion to her
resources; (3) to have political influence in her ex-colonies, by large scale investment;
(4) to support democracy and democratic institutions all over the world; (5) to stand
for stability and order in world’s situation; and (6) to play a leading role on the
continent (Europe) and a prominent role in the European Community or EU.
Until the Second World War, Britain had been following her traditional ‘balance
of power policy’, which, to quote Winston Churchill, ‘has been the unconscious
tradition throughout the centuries.’ She always relished the role of a holder of balance
and acted as what Carl Frederick has termed ‘the laughing third’. Her approach to
European politics was dual in the sense that she kept herself aloof from the European
affairs, but, at the same time, she had a keen concern with European politics. In
fact, she joined the two World Wars only in the interest of maintaining the balance of
power tradition, for Germany was attempting to become a dominant power. But in
the bipolar system that followed the end of the Second World War, the role of a
balancer was lost to her, for she was nowhere in terms of power to play this role any
longer. Hence, after the world politics was polarized into two blocs, it was natural
for Britain to join the US-led Western Camp. For the sake of economic and security
interests, she joined all the major military alliances sponsored by America, and
accepted her economic assistance with open hands. Thus, in the post-War period,
she abandoned her age-old policy of ‘splendid isolation’ and entered into peace-time
alliances.
Since 1945, the British foreign policy-makers, whether Labourites or
Conservativists, have followed Churchill’s three circle strategy and accordingly,
focused on three general areas, namely, (1) Special relationship with the US, (2)
Commonwealth of Nations and (3) Western Europe.
Britain and the United States
A unique feature of international relations since the end of the World War II has
been the special relationship between Britain and the United States. Ethnic, cultural
and linguistic ties apart, their close alliance during the War and their common
participation of the post-War World has made Britain the most steadfast ally of
America. In his ‘Iron Curtain’ speech (1946), Churchill had given a call for ‘fraternal
association of English speaking people’.
Again, in 1954, Churchill had observed that ‘the growth of ever closer ties Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
with the US ... is supreme factor in our future ... the whole foundation of our existence
stands on the alliance and friendship and, if I may say so, an increasing sense of
brotherhood with the US.’ The Britishers were fully aware of the contribution of
America to Britain’s survival before, during and after the Second World War. The NOTES
Americans also remember the Britishers’ magnificent spirit of 1940-41 (known as
Dunkirk spirit) and their tremendous contribution to the cause of freedom and
democracy. In the bipolar world that emerged in the post-War period, Britain, because
of common political tradition, common language and common interest joined the
American bloc. The common fear (though not as obsessive as with the Americans)
of advancing communism also forced this choice upon Britain. Britain readily
accepted the Marshall Aid and received a lion’s share under the Economic Recovery
Programme. She fully subscribed to the Truman Doctrine (1947) and the policy of
containment underlying it, and accordingly joined all the US-sponsored military
alliances like NATO, SEATO and CENTO. She equally subscribed to the subsequent
Eisenhower Doctrine (1957) for the Middle East, and even took action under this
Doctrine during the Jordan Crisis of 1958. She also stood by the United States on
the German question and the Berlin problem. Likewise, on the question of disarmament
and arms control, she sided with America and signed the NTB (1963) and NPT
(1968) as original signatory.
But this does not mean that Britain had no disagreements with America on
certain international issues or had no independent policy of her own. Some of the
main areas of disagreement between the two nations were: People’s Republic of
China, East Asia and West Asia. Despite the known and negative attitude of the US
towards the PRC, Britain was the first nation outside the socialist bloc to have
extended recognition to Mao’s regime. Moreover, she carried on normal trade relations
with communist China while America had placed an embargo on trade. In fact,
Britain’s approach has been that the Far Eastern situation could be better normalized
by the acceptance of the fact of Chinese power, admission of communist China to
the UN and the realization of legitimate Chinese interests. The conflicting China
policies adopted by the two countries continued to be the source of Anglo-American
discord for decades. On the question of Korea and Vietnam, too, they had divergence
of opinion. Britain often warned America against her growing involvement in Vietnam
imbroglio, particularly the bombing of targets in Hanoi and Haipong in late sixties. In
the Middle East, the Suez Crisis of 1956 made a serious breach in Anglo-American
friendship. The US position on Anglo-French aggression in Suez had compelled
France and Britain to withdraw their forces from the Canal. Naturally, Britain felt
badly let down by her ally. Similarly, both Britain and America had some differences
over Arab-Israel conflict as well. But despite differences with the US on certain
issues, the British policy on the whole remained firm on close collaboration with the
US. The special relationship is still sustained despite occasional tiffs and altercations.
As a matter of fact, the ‘bilateral relationship is based on self-interest, personal
chemistry and habit,’ as David Owen has observed. It was because of personal
chemistry that the two nations became still closer to each other when Margaret
Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were in power. Being ideological soul mates, they
Foreign Policies of operated on the same wavelength. Britain became very much beholden to America
Various Countries
for her open support on the Falklands War (April-June 1982) against Argentina,
even though the latter was an OAS partner. Again, Thatcher’s Britain was the first
country to join SDI (Star War Programme) launched (1983) by Reagan’s America.
NOTES She also supported the US bombing of Libya (April, 1968). Subsequently, during the
Bush period, Mrs. Thatcher had stated:
‘For us loyalty to the US is permanent.’ In fact, during Thatcher’s time, UK
almost appeared as a subservient partner of America. The same kinship and special
rapport continued between Clinton and Tony Blair (since May 1997). Both of them
worked in tandem to advance each other’s diplomacy. For instance, both stood
together against Iraq, UK even supporting the US missile attacks against that country
(Dec. 1998), and together engineered the North Ireland Peace accord. And the
same special rapport was sustained by Blair and George W. Bush as well.
However, in times to come, Britain may base her policy towards the USA not
on sentimental attachment but on a cool calculation of interests, for the British
membership of the European community has added a new dimension in her foreign
policy matters. Now Britain has much more in common with the European Community
than with the USA. So far Britain has maintained a certain balance between the two
complex relationships. While still closely tied to the US, ‘Britain knows that it can no
longer be the neck that turns the American hand, let alone, “a Greece to the American
Rome”.’
Britain and the Commonwealth of Nations
The Commonwealth of Nations is the second area of interest for Britain, though
lately it has become the third arrow to her bow in international relations—next to the
American and European dimension of policy.
The Commonwealth of Nations is a unique achievement of Britain, whose
members are sovereign yet bound with a link which is though invisible but real. It is
comprised of states once part of the British Empire. It is significant to note that the
former British colonies even after gaining their independence decided to maintain
their association with Britain through the Commonwealth by forming part of the
British Empire. In fact, the old imperial conference formally turned into the British
Commonwealth after the Second World War. Though the former colonies after
decolonization were free to join or not to join the Commonwealth, but almost all of
them opted for it. However, in 1949, the designation ‘British’ associated with the
Commonwealth was deleted at the insistence of India. But the British Head of State
(British Queen) is still recognized as Head of the Commonwealth. However, the
Commonwealth of Nations is not just a symbolic prolongation of the Empire or a
moral substitute of post-Imperial Club or just a ghost of the deceased, British Empire.
As a matter of fact, it is a unique experiment in living together of many different
people who share a common heritage of ideals and institution. It is a form of free,
uncommitted and non-binding association with the spirit of peaceful coexistence.
The Commonwealth, however, is neither a confederation nor a super-state. It
has no constitution or charter. Members are not bound by any treaty as such. The
alliance has no personality, can own no property except as a partnership, has no
corporate conscience and has only a common will, when acting together after Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
consultation and agreement in a definite transaction. However, there is a common
Secretariat (since 1965) and the Commonwealth Heads (CHOGM) meet every two
years.
The members of the Commonwealth come from all the five continents, NOTES
stretching across the globe and widely differ in history, geography, religion, people
and culture, race, state of development and form of government, yet they are linked
together on the basis of common interests and aspirations. Although a few members
have left the institution (Eire in 1939, Burma in 1948, Sudan in 1956, Somaliland in
1961, Cameroon in 1961 and the Republic of South Africa in 1961), its membership
has been steadily growing. Today the 54-member Commonwealth brings together
one billion people across the frontiers of race, religion, geography and political system
and makes the association a multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-lingual and multi-purpose
body. To be sure, it has become an increasingly heterogeneous and unwieldy
association, whose members have often had conflicting policies and interests.
Nonetheless, through following different policies, they have learnt the art of consulting
one another on different points of view. Indeed, the Commonwealth of Nations is an
essay in coexistence.
Relevance of the Commonwealth of Nations
Although, vast changes are occurring within the Commonwealth and its future seems
uncertain, the organization is still probably one of the most successful of all
international groupings to date. The looseness of communication, informality of
procedures, creative flexibility are the keys to its survival. Above all, it has shown
concern for all global issues.
But primarily, it is a forum for a dialogue between the North and the South,
between the rich and the poor. It is worth mentioning here that it has also promoted
the cause of democracy by endorsing the suspension of military regime of Pakistan
from the Councils of the Commonwealth pending the restoration of democracy at
the Summit meet at Durban in November 1999.
But since the Commonwealth of Nations has ceased to be Anglo-centric,
Britain has started losing interest in this organization. Though the Commonwealth
sprang from the British apron strings, Britain now prefers to take a back-seat in this
body. Though she still underwrites one-third of the expenditure of the Commonwealth
Secretariat, Britain is losing her moral authority to lead the organization, because on
several issues, she has stood on the wrong side of the majority position.
Britain and Western Europe
As has been pointed out earlier, the British interest in the post-1945 period has
mainly focused on the USA, the Commonwealth and Europe. The last is now
predominant in what is called ‘three circles’ formula. In the post-War period, the
central theme has been shaping the future of Britain as part of the gradually uniting
Western Europe. Consequently, she has abandoned her traditional policy of aloofness
and has reversed the policy of refraining from peace time alliances.
Foreign Policies of At the end of the Second World War, the war torn nations of Western Europe
Various Countries
realized their relative insignificance in the world politics. They found themselves
squeezed between the two superpowers. They discovered that they were no longer
shapers of their own destinies. To avoid this catastrophe, they felt that they should
NOTES pool their resources and unite economically, militarily and even politically. The USA
also encouraged the idea probably in her own interest. As far back as 1946, Churchill
had advocated: ‘We must build a kind of United States of Europe.’ Accordingly, he
gave the slogan— ‘Europe unite or perish.’
Interestingly, a nation which always maintained that ‘a fog in the English
Channel got the Continent isolated’ was now frightened of isolation in a two-track
Europe. The Labour party, which was in power from 1945 to 1951, was too eager
for intimacy with the West economically, politically, and militarily. Of course, she
was not in favour of a federation as such. In 1947, Britain concluded her first peace-
time alliance treaty with France for a period of fifty years known as the Treaty of
Dunkirk, directed against Germany. In March 1948, Ernest Bevin (Labour Foreign
Secretary) delivered his famous West European speech and signed the Brussels
Treaty along with Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and France. Later on, the
Brussels Treaty Organization was expanded to include Italy and West Germany
(1955) to constitute the West European Union. In 1949, Britain along with other
West European countries joined the US-sponsored North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
Earlier in May 1948, Britain had joined other West European powers to establish the
Council of Europe as a step towards political union. But being a classical unitary
state, Britain has little understanding of the notion of sharing of sovereignty. The
strength and stability of the country’s parliamentary system have made the Britishers
extremely possessive of sovereignty. To illustrate, at the time of formation of the
Council of Europe, Churchill had remarked: ‘We are with them, not of them.’ But
later on, Britain also took steps towards collaboration in the economic field and
played a leading role in the European Recovery Programme, and cooperated fully in
the Organization for European Economic Cooperation, which was set up in 1948 but
converted into Organization for Economic Cooperation Development in 1960.
Britain and the European economic community
The history of British attitude towards European integration has been a chequered
one. Conscious of its own position as a ‘global’ power along with the Superpowers,
Britain was content to view Europe as the only one of the three distinct circles of
influence, in so far as her foreign relations were concerned. The two of her circles—
special relationship with the US and the evolving links with the post-imperial
Commonwealth enjoyed precedence over that of Europe. In the beginning, Britain
remained somewhat hesitant as far as economic community moves were concerned.
Accordingly, she kept herself away from the European Coal and Steel Community
formed in 1952. Similarly, when the European Common Market was established in
1958 under the Treaty of Rome (1957), signed by six countries (France, West
Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and Netherlands), Britain was unwilling to
join it. She had several reasons for not joining the Common Market. Firstly, she had
serious doubts about its success. Secondly, the Commonwealth partners were opposed
to the idea of Britain’s association with the Market. Thirdly, she was not prepared Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
for joining any association without enjoying its leadership. Instead of joining the
Common Market, Britain set up another parallel organization called European Free
Trade Area. In May 1960, it was joined by Austria, Denmark, Norway, Portugal,
Sweden and Switzerland apart from Britain. It was meant to be a rival organization NOTES
to the Common Market—the Outer Seven against the Inner Six. But very soon, it
was revealed that the EFTA was no match to the ECM. Further, Britain was losing
the market of Europe.
The British calculations about sustaining an independent world role through
the three distinct circles of influence went awry during the late fifties. Eventually,
she realized the mistake and was forced to leave the standoffishness. Faced with
the prospect of being reduced to a political nonentity (after the Suez debacle), London
opted for a radical change in its strategy. Thus was vindicated Jean Monnet’s (father
of European Community) prediction about the British reaction to European
Community. ‘There is one thing you Britishers will never understand: an idea. And
there is one thing you are supremely good at grasping: a hard fact. We will have to
build Europe without you, but then you will come in and join us.’ Incidentally, it was
a Conservative Prime Minister, MacMillan, who moved an application in 1961 for
the membership of the Common Market. But two successive vetoes by France kept
Britain in the waiting room for nearly twelve years. It was certainly a rude rebuff on
the part of De Gaulle (France).
Hence, it was only after the departure of De Gaulle (1969) that the veto was
lifted, and Britain was finally allowed to take its place inside the Common Market,
along with Denmark and Ireland (1973). But even after joining the Market, Britain
remained a reluctant and at times a recalcitrant partner. For instance, in 1975, a
referendum had to be held on the issue whether she would remain in the Market or
leave it. The people, however, overwhelmingly voted in favour of continuing the
membership.
Ironically, Britain now seemed to have reconciled to its minor position in the
European Economic Community in spite of the occasional difference with other
partners, though she is still not prepared to accept the Community as an embryonic
European Super State. Now the 15-member European Community is heading towards
political integration. There is already a directly elected Parliament with British
willingness. As regards, Economic and Monetary Union by the end of the 20th
century, as envisaged in the Treaty of Masstricht (1992), John Major agreed to it.
He had declared that ‘Britain is at the very heart of Europe,’ and had clearly taken
a pro-European position. The UK has affirmed its commitment to the Treaty but, at
the same time, it has opted out of commitment in relation to EMU and Social Chapter.
Review of the British foreign policy
Since the close of the Second World War, British foreign policy has been an exercise
in adjustment and search for a post-imperial role. Over the years, she has learnt to
live with its reduced status—from a paramount power on the globe to just a partner
position of the Anglo-American Alliance and the European Union.
Foreign Policies of It is interesting to note that just as it was, the post-War Labour Government
Various Countries
which took the first step towards the liquidation of the British Empire, it was again
the Labour regime that took the second step in further decolonization by deciding to
relinquish the vestigial remains of imperial role in the late sixties. In a historical
NOTES statement in the House of Commons, the Prime Minister Harold Wilson announced
on January 16, 1968, his government’s decision to withdraw the British forces from
East of Suez by the end of 1971 and to cease to maintain military bases outside of
Europe and the Mediterranean.
Thus, she relinquished her role as a world keeper of peace and decided to
face the facts of life and to search for a post-imperial role in the world. Wilson,
however, added: ‘Britain will continue to think big but in a very small way.’Again in
1976, as a measure of economy, the Labour government under James Callaghan
decided to dismantle the air staging post in Guam and withdraw forces from Singapore,
Maldives, Mauritius and Brunei. Now Britain has decided to maintain her status as
a medium power, and to concentrate her resources in the NATO, the linchpin of
British security.
But with the return of the Conservative regime, the ‘East of Suez’ policy was
subjected to minor revision. In 1970, the Prime Minister Edward Heath reconsidered
the East of Suez policy and decided to keep a modest presence. For instance, he
took measures to reactivate the Simonstown Agreement of 1955, which provided
for the protection of sea routes around South Mrica, and to build a naval
communication centre in Diego Garcia with American collaboration. Since Britain
also wanted to be a partner in the Oil Strategy of the West, she decided to go for
further withdrawal from the Persian Gulf. All these moves show that there is a
persistent secret desire on the part of Britain to have ‘a finger in every pie’. ‘In spite
of the loss of her old position, the Britishers are in no mood to function solely as a tail
to any power. Britain still continues to think in world terms, even though she is no
longer a world power. Perhaps, this is so because she can ill-afford to exist without
allies, without markets abroad, without substantial imports of food stuff and raw
materials. Her position is dependent on her triple partnership—with the
Commonwealth, the Western Europe and the USA. In a very special and vital sense,
her general objective is to retain as much of her former prestige and power as
possible.’And to achieve this aim, a country long accustomed to playing a creative
and balancing role, now wants to build up the European Community as a friendly
rival to the US.
True, the country has considerably declined, but it is wrong to think that Britain
is quite played out. Though, short of fangs and nails, the ‘lion still roars’. The Falklands
War (1982) amply proved it, for Argentina had to lick the dust when it tried to twist
the tail of the old lion. But the Falklands glory notwithstanding, Britain is no more
than a ‘crippled giant’ or a ‘fallen mighty’. There is no denying the fact that Britain
is not a major entity even within the European Community, and it is difficult to hold
her own vis-a-vis West Germany and France, which have larger population and
greater stability of the economy. The Brexit- UK’s breaking off with European
Union in 2016 has garnered various different opinions as to whether Britain will
benefit or suffer from this decision. With every passing year it is becoming difficult
for Britain to compete in the international Market. With all that’s said, the importance Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
of Britain has become greatly diminished.
Whatever importance it still retains is due to the fact that it still has a certain
reservoir of experience, deftness, a stored up understanding of world affairs, pragmatic
orientation, and a certain finesse in diplomacy. NOTES

‘America now bestrides the world. She is the ‘colossus’ of our own time. Whatever
is said or done in the US may easily change the lives of unnumbered millions thousands
of miles away.’ To Henry Luce, ‘the twentieth century to a significant degree is
(was) an American century.’ On all significant counts—in terms of industry,
agriculture, finance, commerce, gross national product, per capita income, scientific
discoveries, technological inventions, techno-scientific manpower, defence outfit and,
above all, nuclear capability, the USA is a pre-eminent world power. In other words,
she is at the top of major powers by virtue of her overarching military, diplomatic,
political and economic assets. She evokes not only awesome fear but also well-
deserved regard and admiration for her contributions. Parts of its history are main
milestones in the march of mankind.’ American ideas, images and artefacts have
fired the world’s imagination and flooded markets. In short, America today represent
the epitome of human achievement not only in material terms but also in the quest
for knowledge in science, medicine and other fields of human endeavour. Now with
the eclipse of the Soviet Union America remains the sole surviving Superpower.
The world order in the post Cold War period has conferred unparalleled power,
clout, prestige and prosperity on the United States. In short, today the United States
of America has become ‘hyperpower’, a ‘unipolar globocop, dollar dictator and
world’s ‘only indispensable nation’. No wonder, Washington happens to be the
common denominator in almost every high-profile peace process.
The American people and their character
The American society which accounts for six per cent of mankind (268 million) and
possesses great economic, military and political strength, is based on the principles
of democracy and liberty. Americans regard their country as the ‘goddess of liberty’.
‘Their spirit of ‘spreadeagalism’, their bumptiousness and exaggerated confidence
in themselves, their blind optimism which together with their idealism tends to give
them a false picture of the world and to lure them into moral crusades.’ They are at
once aggressive, offensively self-assertive, optimistic, philanthropic and wasteful;
they are at once moralists as well as hard-headed cynics. But they are soft-hearted
people despite their apparent swagger. For Americans, in whom a progressive
liberalism and faith in technology has combined to breed an almost casual self-
confidence, little seems impossible. In other words, they have no philosophy of failure,
for they don’t live in the past but in the future. Hence they believe in the cult of the
future.
Decision-making in American foreign policy
‘Of all major countries, the USA has the most open decision-making process.’ There
is a high degree of diffusion in the decision-making process.
Foreign Policies of In his ‘Presidential Power’, Neustadt maintains: ‘the Constitution has created
Various Countries
not a government of separated powers but a government of separated institutions
sharing power.’ Both the Executive and the Legislature thus have a say in foreign
matters. Though the Constitution assigns special power to the Executive, the Congress
NOTES alone has the authority to raise armies, to declare war, to make peace and to advise
on the conduct in making of treaties and appointment of diplomatic representatives.
Because of this sharing of power, serious frictions are bound to occur between the
President and the Congress, in spite of bipartisan tradition observed by the two
major political parties. However, the Executive has acquired a dominant position in
foreign affairs since the Second World War until the mid-seventies—until passing of
the War Powers Act (1973). The power of the President went on increasing along
with American involvement in world affairs. Since the President’s role as chief
formulators has increased, so has the impact of bureaucracy on the foreign policy
formulation process. Yet he does not exercise exclusive control in the foreign field.
The control of money legislation, the power to confirm appointments by the Senate
and ability to investigate and publicise executive branch actions represent important
restrictions. Together, constitutional limits, Congress action, bureaucratic processes
and the weight of past commitments constitute formidable potential constraints on
any President. Thus, powers assigned to the President are initiative in character and
those enjoyed by the Congress appear to be largely restrictive. However, the US
President enjoys a good deal of initiatives. The Congress can only discuss, debate,
defer or delay but it can rarely destroy them. But in the ultimate sense, the power of
a President is the power to persuade.
Role of political institutions
The formal foreign policy process is determined by five large institutions—(1) White
House, (2) Department of State, (3) Department of Defence, (4) Central Intelligence
Agency and (5) Congress—represented by the House and Senate Committees.
The President is responsible to orchestrate interrelated groups that contribute with
some autonomy to policy making, such as the Foreign Office, Bureaucracy, the
White House, the Interested Committees of the Congress. Apart from these organs,
the National Security Council also advises the President with respect to integration
of domestic, foreign and military policies relating to national security. The NSC
consists of the President, the Vice-President, the Secretary of State and the Secretary
of Defence as statutory members. It is chaired by the President and its meetings are
also attended by the Director of the CIA. The role of the House Staff, though
significant, should not be magnified, because the President’s men often tell what he
wants to hear.
Role of public opinion
There are few countries in which public opinion counts as much as in the USA. At
times the public opinion exercises limits on President’s decisional latitude. To illustrate,
the Cuban offensive missiles supplied by the Soviet Union were not strategically
important but President Kennedy had to act under public pressure. Similarly, President
Johnson had to agree to withdraw from Vietnam under the weight of public opinion
despite the loss of face. However, the role of public opinion is generally negative
and retrospective. Altogether, the American foreign policy is obliged to be public Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
policy subject to public scrutiny, appraisal and approbation.
Principles of American foreign policy
It is often said that America does not have a discernible foreign policy. Priestly NOTES
maintains ‘that the most powerful nation on earth seems to have no continuing
foreign policy (tradition) to guide it’(sic). But it is just a superficial view. Rather, it is
more correct to say that ‘throughout its history the United States has pursued a
constant foreign policy.’ Generally speaking, physical security, material wealth,
international prestige—these and other tangible and intangible values actuate all
foreign policies and so is the case with American foreign policy. In other words,
American foreign policy has always been guided by certain traditions as defined by
its national interest corresponding to its power status in the changing world order.
That is why there is a certain uniformity about the US foreign policy, which focuses
solely on what suits Washington’s interests and eliminates nearly all non-essential
elements. But, since the US policy has been changing in the light of new meaning
given on its national interest by its leadership from time to time, some critics have
remarked that America lacks any serious tradition to guide its foreign policy. The
change in American foreign policy orientation from isolationism to total involvement
and from ‘non-entangling alliances’ to alignment galore in the post-’45 period lend
some support to their observation. At the same time, an element of idealism and a
deep sense of ‘historic mission’ have always been an animating force in American
foreign policy. To sample a few of these ideals, one can mention the idealism of
Jefferson and Lincoln, American crusades like ‘war to end all wars’, ‘war to make
democracy safe’ , ‘new world order’ and ‘internationalisation of human rights’, etc.
Determinants of American foreign policy
Like that of any other state, the US foreign policy, too, was shaped largely by
geographical and historical considerations. It was affected by the following:
• By her political and social systems
• By her economic strength and military power
• By her relative power position
• By the policies of other states
• By the world environment.’
Evolution of American foreign policy
The founding fathers of the United States believed that the US should remain aloof
from European politics. They wanted to steer clear of ‘entangling alliances’ and
‘ordinary vicissitudes’ of European politics. The first phase of her foreign policy,
therefore, was governed by the principle of isolationism and non-interventionism. It
was designed to promote security, trade relations and general prosperity among
states of America. This phase was marked by pan-Americanism. But by 1823, the
policy of non-intervention moved a step further. It was based on the Monroe Doctrine.
This Doctrine was originally directed against the Russian attempt to exclude non-
Russian ships from north-east coast of America and the reactionary Holy Alliance
Foreign Policies of of Russia, Prussia and Austria contemplating intervention in the newly created South
Various Countries
American Republics. The Doctrine established a fundamental principle of American
policy—implying two aims: (1) No territorial aggrandisement on American soil will
be allowed and (2) No intervention in European politics. The ulterior motive behind
NOTES this Doctrine, however, was to serve a warning to European powers that the American
continents are henceforth not be considered as subjects for colonisation and to assert
hegemony over the whole Western Hemisphere. The Doctrine gave the US a vast
hinterland in control, and South American bloc served both as a source of raw
material and a captured market. With such ‘natural colonies’ the US had so little
interest outside America. American isolationism was thus the political reflection of
economic self-sufficiency. From its original concept the Monroe Doctrine was
essentially defensive. But it became expansionist by 1840s, when the US became
strong enough to implement it. Thus, the Monroe Doctrine became the cornerstone
of American foreign policy. Although successive Presidents have modified it according
to requirements, it has never been abandoned altogether and is still alive and kicking.
Beginning in 1898, the US embarked on a bolder course. This was the
springtime of ‘open door’ and ‘manifest destiny’. The President at the moment,
Theodore Roosevelt, thought that America was entitled to exercise police power
over the Western Hemisphere.
The foreign policy of America in the first decade of the twentieth century was
characterised as participation in Asia, a sphere of influence in the Caribbean Sea and
continued non-participation in European politics. But with the coming of the First World
War, she acquired a new position in the changed world order. Though she participated
in the First World War under the leadership of President Wilson and took a leading part
in establishing an international organisation—the League of Nations, but the Senate
failed to ratify the Versailles Treaty along with the Covenant of the League of Nations.
The reason was that America still retained the sense of physical security that underlay
their isolationist past. Hence again for twenty years she sank into isolationism, until
1940. But it is to be noted that it was an act of self-denial in the political sphere and not
from any internal weakness that the US leadership was not exercised. Even when the
menace of Hitler and Mussolini was haunting Europe the Americans kept aloof and
abandoned their traditional policy of freedom of the seas rather than risk war. American
neutrality reached its nadir in the Neutrality Legislation of late 1930s. Thus, for almost
a century after the declaration of Munroe Doctrine, America remained aloof from
European political affairs, even though her economy had grown with leaps and bounds.
Until the Second World War, she played only intermittently a central role and made
only periodic forays into international politics.
For more than a century, her bountiful nature allowed Americans to hold
belief that progress was to be found within the country and the Western Hemisphere.
This natural abundance and sense of physical security permitted her leadership to
remain away from the traditional world politics, and to make legalistic and moralistic
declarations about external affairs from time to time. ‘Protected from invasions by
oceans and benign power of the British navy, and blessed with abundance of natural
resources, the US was famously fortunate to limit its participation in international
affairs to merchantile pursuits.’
Revolution in American foreign policy Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
However, this neutralism came to a final end with the attack on Pearl Harbour in
1941, and ever since she did not look back to the isolationist past. The shift from
isolationist inclination to new internationalism took place somewhere between 1940
NOTES
(fall of France) and the middle of 1945 when the Senate ratified the UN Charter.
Reasons for this transition are: (1) Partly American involvement with European
affairs which was a by-product of British efforts to resist the Nazis. In 1940, President
F.D. Roosevelt agreed to exchange fifty destroyers in exchange for bases in the
Western Hemisphere and (2) In the spring of 1941 the Land-Lease Act passed to
help Britain with supplies and munitions. The one action clearly marking a break
with the past was the Atlantic Summit of August 1941 from which was enunciated
the Atlantic Charter. The Atlantic Conference, indeed, marks the beginning of a
revolution in the US foreign policy. In 1941, however, only few Americans wanted
her nation to enter the war, as she was yet unprepared for it. The Atlantic Charter
was an authoritative expression of the eight principles, some of which are as follows:
(1) to seek no territorial gains, (2) to work for improving living standard of all peoples,
(3) to protect nations to live under governments of their own choice, (4) to seek
disarmament of the aggressive nations, etc. But there was yet no provision for
international organisation. It was only in 1942 that the United Nations Declaration
was signed by twenty-six nations at Washington. The Atlantic Charter and the UN
Declaration were important steps in the assumption of world responsibility on part
of America. The Atlantic Conference became the prototype for other such
conferences in Casablanca, Cairo, Teheran, Quebec, Yalta and Potsdam. After Pearl
Harbour attack by Japan on 7 December 1941 the US joined the War. By the time
the War in Asia was nearing its conclusion, fifty nations signed the UN Charter on
26 June 1945, and the USA was the first nation to ratify it. Thus, in a course of a
century and three quarters America shifted from a policy of non-involvement to one
of active involvement taking upon herself a global responsibility.
The setting and course of post-war policy
By the end of World War II, Western Europe lay in smoking ruins. Germany had
been reduced to a lumber landscape. The Soviet Union too suffered indescribable
physical and human damage. Japanese industries were devastated. Only the United
States remained unharmed. The War also brought a profound reassertion of
Wilsonianism. Thus, by design and circumstances, America found itself at the apex
of the new system that emerged following the collapse of the old international order.
Although she emerged as the mightiest power on the world scene as a result
of the Second World War and had to occupy a leading and dominant role in the
world affairs, she was ill-prepared for the new role. It was not easy for her to adjust
to her new position and to the realities of a post-war world. Yet it was incumbent on
her to assume a global responsibility. While writing at that time, Palmer and Parkins
remarked: ‘There is ample evidence for concluding that she has not yet learned how
to act like a world power or how to wield such tremendous responsibility.’ However,
there was now a general acceptance among Americans of the policy of involvement
in the world affairs. The post-War American policy was therefore, directed towards
Foreign Policies of facing the challenge posed by post-war developments—challenge of communism,
Various Countries
the growing power of the Soviet Union and power vacuum after withdrawal of the
West from their former colonies.
NOTES The Truman period (1945–53)

After the death of F.D. Roosevelt on 12 April 1945 Harry Truman took over as the
33rd President of America by right of succession. The foreign policy under the
Truman Administration can be divided into four periods: The first period (April 1945
to July 1946) lasting for about one and a half years was one of cooperation and
accommodation between the USA and the Soviet Union. It was highlighted by the
emergence of the United Nations and peace-making efforts, post-War rehabilitation
and reconstruction. But soon the short honeymoon period came to an end. Serious
disagreement and suspicion began to erupt on issues relating to Germany, East Europe,
Peace Treaties with Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Finland, functioning of
the UNO and Soviet pressure on Iran, Turkey, and Greece.
The second period (August 1946 to March 1947) was characterised as one
of fimness and patience. The relations between the Superpowers became strained
because of disagreements over the occupation of Germany, the unification of Korea,
the Soviet demand on Turkey, her refusal to withdraw her forces from Iran and the
engineering of communist revolution in Greece. By now, the US was confirmed of
the fact of a divided world. As a result of these developments, the US foreign policy
towards the Soviet Union underwent a revolutionary change.
Truman doctrine
The third period (1947–50) was marked by the beginning of the Cold War and the
subsequent policy of ‘containment’. The Western powers had become unduly alarmed
at the Sovietisation of Eastern Europe and the Soviet pressure on Turkey and Greece.
George F. Kennan, the author of the policy of ‘containment’ advocated the
maintenance of force all around the Soviet bloc.
America’s new role of policing the Continent was signalled by the Truman
Doctrine and the Greek-Turkish Aid programme. In late 1947 , Britain announced a
deficit of $ 350 million. Since she was confronted with the problem of cutting down
expenditure, Britain began to prepare to abandon its historical and imperial
commitments. Incidentally, for Britain the price of victory was the liquidation of the
British Empire. In March 1947, the British government informed Washington of its
inability to support Greek and Turkish governments in resisting communist attacks
and infiltration, while both of them needed desperately outside support. Now Britain
shifted its Atlantic responsibility to America. Truman knew that US support to Greece
and Turkey will be a departure from her tradition and was aware that it was a costly
obligation. But he said that freedom from aggression was the minimum requirement
for peace in the world. The new departure in American foreign policy was dramatised
by the Truman Doctrine. In his speech on 12 March 1947, he called for a programme
of aid to Greece and Turkey and asked the Congress to grant 400 million dollars in
economic and military aid to them. To quote Truman, ‘I believe it must be the policy
of the US to support free people who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed
minorities or by outside pressure.’ He declared: ‘wherever aggression direct or Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
indirect threatens peace, the security of the USA was involved.’
The significance of the Truman Doctrine lies in the fact that it was the first
step in the direction of containment of communism—in fact, of the Soviet Union. It
was a formal renunciation of American policy of isolationism. It confirmed the fact NOTES
of a divided world and also the ‘two-camp’ thesis of Zhadnov. It also marked the
final inauguration of the Cold War. Indirectly, it also implied the bypassing of the
United Nations, as the US had decided to help Turkey and Greece directly and not
through the world body. Virtually, it served a notice that the march of communism
would not be allowed to succeed by default.
Marshall plan
In pursuance of the policy of ‘containment’, the Truman Doctrine was followed by
the Marshall Plan as its logical corollary. If the Truman Doctrine had political
overtones, the Marshall Plan was the policy of containment on economic level.
Kennan maintained that ‘a new programme based on economic, not military aid, will
be more effective than the Truman Doctrine in securing Europe against infiltration
and conquest.’ On 5 June 1947 , the Secretary of State, George S. Marshall, in his
address at the Harvard University, spoke in terms about Europe’s need for help to
rebuild her economy and initiated the European Recovery Programme. He said:
‘The US should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic
health in the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured
peace.’ The Plan was apparently meant for all the European countries, but its
underlying aim was to save Western Europe from the march of communism. The
sixteen European nations (excluding communist countries) had concluded that their
rehabilitation required 15 billion dollars over the next four years. Such a burden was
no doubt staggering for American tax payers. Anyway, a bill was moved in the
Congress for 17 billion dollars for four years. Mr. Vandenberg (a Republican) called
the bill ‘a calculated risk to help stop the World War III before its start. The ‘iron
curtain’ must not come to the ruins of the Atlantic either by aggression or by default.’
By the end of 1951, the Aid reached a total of l3 billion dollars. Indeed, the Aid was
‘like a life line to sinking man,’ as Ernest Bevin put it. It was meant to achieve a
revival of a working economy so as to permit the emergence of political and social
condition in which free institutions could exist. One unforeseen consequence of the
Aid was closer economic integration of separate economies of Europe. The Marshall
Plan was evidently a step further in carrying out the policy of containment. It was an
economic counterpart of the Truman Doctrine. It was Cold War by other means.
However, this Aid pulled Europe out of the wreckage of World War and propelled it
to prosperity. To Churchill, ‘it was the most unsordid act in history. Yet it was not
simply charity, nor just a reconstruction scheme’.
North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
In pursuing the policy of containment, the US moved towards taking corresponding
step at the military level side by side with political and economic level. When the
Brussels Pact of 1948, concluded among five European powers (France, Britain,
Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxem- bourg) was found inadequate to resist Soviet
Foreign Policies of aggression in the wake of Berlin Blockade, the USA associated herself with the
Various Countries
Western Europe in a military alliance called the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.
Originally, it had twelve members but now it has ninteen members. This is the first
military alliance by which the United States assumed the direct responsibility of
NOTES West European Security.
Thus, the new departure in American foreign policy was highlighted by the
Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan and the North Atlantic Treaty. Together, they
marked the end of American avoidance of formal commitments with European
nations, as enshrined in the Munroe Doctrine, and the beginning of a new emphasis
on military alliance or coalition diplomacy. Indeed, it was a remarkable revolution in
the political thought of America. Once so isolationist was not to join even the League
of Nations and the Permanent Court of International Justice, America was committed
to the defence and rehabilitation of a Continent.
The Soviet explosion of an atom bomb in 1947, the communist coup in
Czechoslovakia in 1948, the communist victory in China in 1949 symbolised the
growing strength of the communist camp. All this impelled the US to build up ‘situations
of strength’ throughout the non-communist world. This programme included the Rio
Treaty (1947), Brussels Pact (1948), Berlin Airlift (1948), NATO (1949),
encouragement of integration in Western Europe and association of West Germany
with Western Europe.
The fourth period of the Truman Administration (1950-53) was marked by
open confrontation. In June 1950, when North Korea invaded South Korea, the
Cold War turned into a hot war. The Korean crisis continued till 1953. Under the
banner of the UN, the American forces fought against the North Korean aggression.
The impact of the Korean war on the US foreign policy resulted in the increased
emphasis on military strength. The USA concluded a peace treaty with Japan on
8 September 1951. She also entered into security pacts with Japan, the Philippines,
Australia and New Zealand (1952). Besides, she guaranteed protection to Formosa.
As with Japan, she concluded a separate peace treaty with West Germany and
incorporated the West German forces into West European army under the NATO
command.
Review of Truman regime
On the whole, the Truman Administration acquitted itself quite creditably and beyond
all expectations. The credit for making a water-shed departure in American foreign
policy rightly goes to his regime. To quote Henry Kissinger, ‘Though Harry Truman
knew little about foreign policy (to begin with), yet he laid the groundwork for a
generation of successful foreign policy.’ However, Truman’s action of dropping atom
bombs on innocent people of Japan will be recorded in future history of mankind as
the greatest tragedy and shame for humanity and therefore a serious blot on his
administration.
Eisenhower period (1953–60)
With the departure of Truman, the long period of Democratic Presidency inaugurated
in 1933 came to an end. The White House was again occupied by a Republican
President, General Dwight Eisenhower after a lapse of twenty-four years. For some Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
time, people were apprehensive that the new regime led by a General might be more
war-like. But it was eventually proved that the Soldier-President had no disposition
towards recklessness in word or deed, as feared. Instead, the Eisenhower
Administration attempted to give a new look to American foreign policy. NOTES
The events of 1953-55 offered new hopes. On March 5, 1953 Joseph Stalin
died giving place to leader who believed in following flexible and conciliatory policies.
On 27 June 1953, the Korean war was brought to an end. These developments led
to lessening of tension. The years of 1954 and 1955 are known for successful
conferences. The Geneva and Berlin conferences were followed by the Austrian
Peace Treaty of 1955. These were some positive developments which contributed a
great deal to cold war relaxation. But there were some negative developments, too,
which neutralised it to some extent. The Soviet explosion of a hydrogen bomb (1953),
the communist China’s confrontation with America, forces in the Korean war, and
its aggressive stance thereafter and the crisis of Indo-China forced the USA to
adopt a tough stance in her foreign policy. The American foreign policy-makers led
by foreign secretary, John Foster Dulles, were not prepared to tolerate communist
expansion in South-East Asia. ‘But since the Soviet Union began to show conciliatory
stance, the Eisenhower administration had to adopt a dual policy. The USA sought
to develop ‘situations of strength’ on the one hand and to work for a peaceful world
on the other. The Eisenhower administration not only gave up the policy of liberation
(rolling back) and the policy of ‘brinkmanship’ hitherto advocated by Dulles, but put
forward the Atom for Peace proposal in 1953.
Containment of communism in South-East Asia
The end of the Korean war was followed by the French defeat in Indo-China.
America became alarmed and began to nurse a feeling that a power which controls
lndo-China will ultimately dominate the entire South-East Asia as it will have a chain
reaction upon these countries and the whole structure will fall down. She was guided
in her perception by what is known as ‘domino theory’. Though not directly
threatened, America started taking a keen interest in this region. Accordingly, she
opposed the Geneva Settlement of 1954-—partition of Vietnam at 17th parallel, to
be followed by nation wide elections. She was firm in her determination to contain
the expansion of communism in this part of the world. Hence, immediately after the
Geneva Conference, she sponsored the Manila Pact in September 1954 establishing
the South-East Asian Treaty Organisation. All this led to shifting of Cold War theatre
from Europe to South-East Asia.
Containment of communism in the Middle East
Next to South-East Asia, America turned towards the Middle East (West Asia).
Olaf Caroe in his ‘Wells of Power’ had presented a thesis that the Soviet Union
would seek to push towards the warm waters of the Persian Gulf to deny the Middle
East oil to the West. Therefore, the USA sponsored the conclusion of the Baghdad
Pact—a pact of mutual cooperation among Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Turkey and the UK,
which later came to be known as CENTO after the withdrawal of Iraq in 1958.

Foreign Policies of With this security arrangement America wanted to establish military bases for use
Various Countries
as launching pads for nuclear attack on Soviet targets in the event of a hot war.
Eisenhower doctrine
NOTES The Anglo-French invasion of Egypt in 1956 following the nationalisation of the
Suez Canal by Gen. Nasser had undermined the prestige of the Western powers in
the Middle East. Surprisingly, America did not lend her Support to allies (Anglo-
French) action on Egypt during the Suez Crisis. Instead, she joined hands with the
Soviet Union in bringing a halt to their aggression. Whereas the Western influence
was dented because of Aglo-French action, the prestige of the Soviet Union was
greatly enhanced because of her pro-Egyptian stand. The demonstration of Anglo-
French weakness and their growing unpopularity created a power vacuum in the
Middle East. Apprehending that the Soviet Union might take advantage of this vacuum,
Eisenhower, in a message to the Congress on 5 January 1957, announced the US
policy for the Middle East known as the Eisenhower Doctrine. This Doctrine
proclaimed the American intention to use armed forces against any communist
aggression in the region. In fact, it was directed against any intervention by the
Soviet Union in the Middle East. President Eisenhower asked the Congress to give
him authority to use armed forces against communist aggression in the Middle East,
if requested so by the nation or nations under attack. The Doctrine also aimed at
providing economic and military aid to any nation threatened by communism. It
declared that America would assist any nation in the area in the development of
economic strength dedicated to maintenance of national independence. The Congress
adopted a resolution the main provision of which read: ‘The United States regards
as vital to the national interest and world peace the preservation of the independence
and integrity of nations of the Middle East.’ It also sanctioned a sum of $ 200 million
for military and economic aid to the region.
The Eisenhower Doctrine, in fact, was, nothing but an extension of the Truman
Doctrine. While the Truman Doctrine specified the countries to be helped, the
Eisenhower Doctrine covered the entire region of the Middle East. Under this
Doctrine, the US could deal with any situation in the region on her own terms. The
underlying aim of this policy was to control oil and raw material of this region. But
contrary to American expectations, the Doctrine was not welcomed and evoked a
mixed reaction among the countries of the Middle East. It was considered by some
of them as a cover to establish American hegemony in this region. While Iran, Iraq,
Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan welcomed it, Egypt and Syria condemned it. The latter
viewed this Doctrine as an effort to replace Anglo-French imperialism by American
hegemony in order to checkmate Arab nationalism and to encourage Israel in her
aggressive intentions against the Arabs.
The first demonstration of its application came in 1957 when Jordan passed
through a crisis as a result of differences between king Hussain and his Prime
Minister who showed sympathy with Arab nationalism. The king dismissed his premier,
Nabulsi, along with his Chief of Army Staff. This created a crisis in Jordan in 1958.
During this crisis, the American Sixth Fleet presented itself in the Eastern
Mediterranean. The USA gave open support to the king and sent massive aid and
large deliveries of arms.
The second occasion for the application of the Doctrine arose in 1958 in Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
Lebanon. In 1958, the term of office of Lebanon’s Christian President, Camille
Chamoun, expired and since the Constitution did not permit re-election, the President
proposed to change the Constitution to secure his re-election. This move was violently
resisted by his opponents, and eventually it resulted in a minor civil war. President NOTES
Chamoun lodged a complaint with the Security Council against Syria who was
charged with giving assistance to the rebels. At his request, American marines (in
thousands) were sent into Lebanon to help the President. No doubt, the intervention
suppressed the rebellion but it was resented by the people of Lebanon.
Again, in July 1958, a coup in Iraq overthrew the pro-Western regime of king
Faisat-II and brought General Qassim to power. This development alarmed Jordan,
and the king sought assistance from the Western Powers. Invoking the Eisenhower
Doctrine, America advised Britain to send her troops to Jordan by October 1958.
Later on, with the good office of the UN Secretary General, the Anglo-American
troops were withdrawn from Jordan and Lebanon.
The Eisenhower Doctrine, however, failed in its principal objective of
establishing American influence in the Middle East. As a matter of fact, America
failed to take into account the force of Arab nationalism that dominated all Arab
political thinking. On the other hand, the Soviet Union took the advantage of anti-
Western attitude and gained influence at the expense of the Western Powers. Soon
the Doctrine became unpopular and died a natural death.
Review of Eisenhower’s foreign policy
It is generally believed that Eisenhower’s foreign policy was, in fact, Dullesian foreign
policy and foreign affairs was not his cup of tea. There is no denying the fact that
for about six years (1953-59) Dulles exercised a powerful influence on American
foreign policy. Perhaps few foreign Secretaries have been so powerful as Dulles
and few Secretaries have been more praised and named as he was. No wonder, the
Cold War was at its coldest under his stewardship, for he had provided moral sanction
to the Cold War. Dulles was, in fact, a Pactomaniac. It was he who advocated a
policy of ‘liberation’, ‘massive retaliation’ and ‘brinkmanship’. His crusading bigotry
led to renewal of tension between the two Superpowers. There was a renewed
crises over Berlin in November 1958. This crisis was, however, averted by extending
on invitation to Khrushchev to visit America, the Camp David Summit (1959) helped
much in lessening the Cold War which has been aggravated because of the
Eisenhower Doctrine. It proved a turning point in the history of the Cold War. Both
leaders decided to convene a summit meeting in May 1960. But the Paris Summit
could not come off due to U-2 incident in which the US spy plane was shot down
while it was 1300 miles inside the Soviet territory. This episode set at naught the
prospects of the Paris Summit, as Khrushchev, in reaction, announced the boycott
of the Summit. Ultimately, Eisenhower had to apologize for the incident. In fact
Eisenhower’s administration was run by two Dulles brothers one was the Secretary
of State and the other (Allen Dulles) was the Creator of C.I.A. It was duing his time
that in the name of anti-communism a ‘Truly American Movement’, known as
McCarthyism, raised its ugly head.
Foreign Policies of The Kennedy period (1961–63)
Various Countries
John F. Kennedy entered the White House on 20 January 1961 as the 35th President
of America at the young age of fourty-three. He was energetic, intelligent, good
looking, inspiring, aggressive, dynamic and outspoken. ‘He was a man both cool and
NOTES
concerned, wily and profound, profane and highly eloquent with a subtle mind and a
passion for cutting through cliches.’All in all, he was a highly gifted man of unusual
charm and aristocratic distinction. His administration promised to seek a new approach
towards world issues. The US, foreign policy in his regime sought new frontiers.
Besides, Kennedy started with fresh faces and fresh ideas. For the first time, he
associated learned professors not only for advisory role but for operational
responsibilities.
Kennedy made a serious attempt to seek areas of cooperation with the rival
Superpower. On a chance meeting with Khrushchev in June 1961, in Vienna, he
accepted the latter’s concept of coexistence, but at the same time he was firm
where security interest was involved. Khrushchev also found the young Kennedy
unyielding.
In his inaugural address, Kennedy declared ‘Let us never negotiate out of
fear but let us never fear to negotiate.’ He warned: ‘The world is very different
now. For man holds in mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of the human
poverty and all forms of human life... War appeals no longer as a rational alternative.
Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind.’ He cautioned:
‘Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price,
bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to
secure the survival and success of liberty .’Addressing his own people, he exclaimed:
‘Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.’
He asked for ‘willingness to risk position, power and career for the sake of some
abiding convictions.’ Indeed, his inaugural speech was highly inspiring and refreshing
and he started on a very optimistic note.
But, to his ill-luck, the time was not opportune and the odds stacked against
his Administration were heavy. In Asia, the PRC was becoming more and more
militant and aggressive, any agreement on Laos was still remote, the mysterious
death of the UN Secretary General, Dag Hammerskjold, who was trying to resolve
the Congo Crisis (1961), the Berlin Crisis (1961), followed by the biggest crisis since
the Second World War—the Cuban Crisis, which almost brought the world to the
brink of a Third World War. Nevertheless, the Kennedy regime did its best to negotiate
for peace everywhere.
Kennedy administration and Western Europe
The Suez Crisis of 1956 had embittered relations between the NATO partners.
Kennedy not only tried to patch up with the UK and France who were antagonised
but also attempted to strengthen the Atlantic Alliance. As a result, in 1961, the
Western powers stood solidly behind Kennedy and jointly challenged the unilateral
actions of the Soviet Union during the Berlin Crisis (1961). This crisis arose when
Khrushchev reinstituted a deadline for a separate peace treaty with East Germany

and sealed off the East Zone and thereby blocked access routes to West Berlin by Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
erecting a 25 mile-long Berlin wall against the Western powers.
Kennedy and the Cuban crisis
The last days of October 1962 witnessed one of the gravest international crises NOTES
since the Second World War. Paradoxically, this crisis was the most frustrating
experience as well as the finest hour of Kennedy’s regime. Cuba is an island state in
the Caribbean Sea just 90 miles off from the American mainland. She has been
virtually an American protectorate for a long time. In January 1959, Fidel Castro
came to power by overthrowing a pro-American regime headed by Batista. The
Castro regime being Marxist in character (the first of its kind in the Western
Hemishpere) turned unfriendly towards America and became a close ally of the
Soviet Union. Obviously, it was an intolerable situation for an American administration.
Secret records show that there was a bumbling attempt to eliminate Fidel Castro.
On 17 April 1961, the Cuban refugees, encouraged by American aid and abetment,
invaded Cuba. But they were defeated at the Bay of Pigs. Undoubtedly, in this
misadventure, the invaders had the blessing of the Kennedy Administration, which
was misguided by the CIA. This ‘Operation Mongoose’ was, indeed, a great blot on
his otherwise bold leadership. Since this attack was instigated by Washington, the
relations between the US and Cuba have remained hostile to this date. As a sequel
to this event, the Castro regime sought the support of the Soviet Union. With the
result, in 1961, a Russian military mission arrived in Cuba, which was followed by
the arrival of complete combat unit of Russian mechanised troops. Again, in 1962,
some anticraft batteries equipped with ground-to-air rocket reached Cuba. The same
year, launching equipments for medium range missiles also arrived. With this arsenal
of arms and fire power deployed on America’s next door, Khrushchev thought that,
if required, he could afford a blackmailing threat the next time he pressed his demands
on Berlin. Obviously, these developments alarmed the Kennedy Administration, and
the US could no longer tolerate such offensive moves. In response, President Kennedy
ordered a naval quarantine around Cuba and imposed restrictions on all ships carrying
communist cargoes to the island.
The world learned with dread and horror the full gravity of the crisis when
Kennedy broadcast on 22 October 1962, his government’s counter-challenge. He
warned: ‘any hostile move anywhere in the world against people to whom we are
committed, including West Berlin, will be met by whatever action is needed.’ He
added: ‘It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear missiles launched
from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the Soviet
Union on the United States requiring a full retaliatory response on the Soviet Union.’
With this clear warning, Khrushchev had no reason to believe that Kennedy was
just bluffing.
The Cuban crisis brought the world to the brink of Superpowers’ showdown.
To be sure, any invasion on Cuba could have led to nuclear conflagration. Indeed, it
was a hair-trigger encounter. In Robert Kennedy’s chilling words: ‘the world stared
at the barrel of the nuclear gun.’ To quote Dean Rusk, ‘it had been a very near
thing.’ Fortunately, sanity prevailed ultimately and the crisis was averted both by
Foreign Policies of Kennedy’s firmness and Khrushchev’s unwillingness to challenge. Both displayed
Various Countries
statesmanship of the highest order. Khrushchev was ultimately forced to blink in this
eye-ball to eye-ball confrontation, for he agreed to withdraw Russian missiles and
bombers from Cuba. But this he did after getting no-invasion pledge on Cuba from
NOTES Kennedy. Besides, Kennedy gave Khrushchev a face-saving device by agreeing to
dismantle American Jupiter missiles in Turkey. Kennedy’s handling of the crisis was
‘a model of textbook diplomacy,’ as Dewis Healey put it. Khrushchev also felt that
saving peace was more important than saving face.
Kennedy and Latin America
President Kennedy adopted a more liberal and friendly policy vis-a-vis Latin America.
He personally visited some of the countries of this region. He proposed that the
people of the Western Hemisphere join in a new ‘Alliance for Progress’—a new
10-year plan for the Americans. To begin with, a fund of 200 million dollars was
created for the financial assistance of Latin America and the US bore the brunt of
this burden. Impelled by the Cuban Crisis the assistance was increased by the
Administration. The Alliance for Progress represented a significant new approach
by the USA towards Latin America.
Kennedy and Vietnam
In his inaugural address, Kennedy had hinted at Indo-China being the key-post in
defence of liberty. The situation in South Vietnam had deteriorated alarmingly because
of growing communist guerilla activities. In 1960, the establishment of a National
Liberation Front was proclaimed. The Vietcong, the military wing of the NLF, had
gained considerable strength in South Vietnam by the time Kennedy took over. It
was at this stage that the Kennedy administration decided to step in. With the result,
the ongoing civil war turned into a full scale war. On appeal from South Vietnam
government, the USA decided to extend economic and military aid to South Vietnam.
In February 1962, an American command was established in Saigon, and 4,000
troops were despatched and thus began the story of direct US involvement in Vietnam
imbroglio and the Vietnam war became a war between Hanoi and Washington. The
US commitment to South Vietnam became deeper and deeper with the passage of
time. In 1963, the situation in Vietnam further deteriorated under the regime of Ngo
Diem. The latter was ultimately overthrown and assassinated in November 1963.
After the Cuban Crisis, the relations between the Superpowers saw some
improvement in the wake of which the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed in
Moscow in July 1963. This Treaty was a significant measure in the direction of arms
control and a great achievement of Kennedy’s administration. In the same year, the
US-Soviet Hotline Agreement was also concluded.
On the whole, ‘Kennedy created a favourable image at home and abroad.
That image never faded in spite of some errors and reversers in both domestic and
foreign affairs.’ Despite his brief tenure, he left an indelible imprint on the international
landscape. He was taken as the spokesman for the new generation in many lands.
He emerged as the hero of the Western world and came to be regarded as the
author of a new hope for humankind. Though his presidency was shortlived, Kennedy
brought a rare charm to his office... American’s long and unprecedented love affairs Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
with Kennedy still goes on. The mystique of Camelot magic still remains incendescent.
But his regime had a darker side too—Vietnam misadventure, Bay of Pigs fiasco,
strained relations with the Soviet Union, charge of libertarianism and unsavoury
connections cast a shadow of scandal over the memory of a leader projected as a NOTES
champion of idealism. In the light of latest revelations about his personal life the
Camelot magic has begun to taper off.
Johnson period (1963–69)
After the unfortunate assassination of Kennedy at the hands of a Texan goon, Lee
Harvey Oswald on 22 November 1963, the then Vice-President, Lyndon B. Johnson
succeeded as the 36th President of the USA. Though lacking the charm and vitality
of Kennedy, Johnson also got the second term in November 1964 elections and
continued till January 1969. On assuming powers, he announced to continue the
policies of his predecessor abroad as well as at home.
Johnson and the Vietnam War
Johnson was obliged to carry on the logic of his inheritance. The initiation of an
aggressive policy in Vietnam is rightly attributed to Kennedy. After the fall of Diem
in 1963, the situation in South Vietnam further deteriorated. In December 1963, the
US promised unlimited military assistance to South Vietnam. In August 1964, Johnson
decided to bomb the strategic places in North Vietnam to control Vietcong guerillas.
He ordered bombing on North Vietnamese coastal bases in retaliation for alleged
attack on American fleet units (two destroyers) in the Gulf of Tonkin. As a
countermove, the Vietcong sped up their attack and inflicted heavy losses on military
bases in South Vietnam. By December 1964, the US forces were further reinforced
and their total touched 20,000. In February 1965, following the Vietcong attack
against US installations, the US started bombing strategic places in North Vietnam.
In March 1965, 3,500 US marines were sent to South Vietnam. Air attacks were
also multiplied. Gradually the strength of American troops reached a total of 1,85,000.
In the next few years, the US further increased its military efforts in Vietnam.
But by 1968, the American public opinion had become antagonised to Johnson’s
policy of war escalation in Vietnam. In February 1968, North Vietnamese troops
launched fierce attack on strategic targets in South Vietnam. To meet this threat, the
US command made a request for two lakh more troops (in addition to 5 lakhs already
there). The communist ‘Tet Offensive’ of February 1968 was a major psychological
turning point and led to reappraisal of Vietnam policy in America. The strategic
victory of the communists played an important role in increasing war weariness
among the American people and accelerating the beginning of the Paris negotiations.
In the United States, the vocal groups led by professors and students staged
demonstrations against the policy pursued by Johnson and demanded that American
troops should be withdrawn forthwith. ‘We want our boys back’ was their buzzword.
Senators liked Fulbright and Mansfield also voiced uneasiness. No doubt, the Vietnam
war had surpassed in magnitude, devastation and savagery, even the Korean War.

Foreign Policies of Under the mounting pressure, Johnson on March 31, 1968 ordered cessation
Various Countries
of bombing in North Vietnam and simultaneously announced his decision not to seek
reelection for presidency. This paved the way for the peace talks at Paris, which
were formally inaugurated on May 13,1968. The four-party Paris Talks continued
NOTES about four years, though intermittently, and culminated in a ceasefire agreement by
the end of 1972 and the Paris Peace Accord on 27 January 1973. America
acknowledged the failure of its policy in Vietnam. According to Henry Kissinger, ‘It
was the incremental approach which doomed us in Vietnam.’
The Pueblo Incident
The Eisenhower Administration had taken the task of international surveillance in
great earnestness. President Johnson too pursued the same policy to a large extent.
In pursuance of this task the US spy-ship, Pueblo was sent near the territorial waters
of North Korea. On 13 January 1968, it was captured by North Korea while sailing
in international water off the coast of North Korea and its whole crew, numbering
eighty-three, were taken into custody for about a year. The US government, however,
maintained that Pueblo was not a spy-ship, and that it was captured on the High
Seas. But only after much diplomatic manoeuvre and even a reference to the Security
Council, the US could get the release of the ship and its crew of course after tendering
an apology to North Korea. This was another humiliation that the Johnson
administration had to face after the loss of face in Vietnam.
Johnson and Latin America
As regards Latin America, Johnson almost reversed the policy initiated by his
predecessor in this area. In January 1964, a dispute over the joint flying of the US and
Panamian flags in the Panama Canal Zone led to rupture between the two countries,
and only after the mediatory efforts by the OAS that the relations could be normalised.
Again, in May 1965, the US despatched its troops to Dominican Republic (a
Caribbean country) to prevent the imminent communist take over there. This
intervention toppled the popular government of Dr. Juan Busch, and installed a pro-
American regime of President Joaquin Balaguer. Justifying his action, Johnson said:
‘the US will never depart from its commitment to the preservation of the right of all
the free peoples of this Hemisphere to choose their own course without falling prey
to international conspiracy in any matter.’ He warned that he would never allow
another communist country to emerge in this region. This naked intervention was
regarded in Latin America as a revival of ‘gunboat diplomacy’.
Johnson and West Asia
In 1967, the third Arab-Israel war took place. Following American traditional
approach, the Johnson administration maintained an anti-Arab stance. On the eve of
the conflict, the US despatched the Sixth Fleet to Mediterranean in support of Israel.
Washington opposed the blockade of Gulf of Aqaba by the Arab nations. It sided
with Israel, who wanted only the conditional withdrawal of her troops. This stance
antagonised the whole Arab world and many of the Arab countries even broke off

their diplomatic relations with the USA. The upshot of Johnson policy was an Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
elimination of Western influence from the Arab world. This was another setback to
USA during the Johnson period.
Johnson and nuclear non-proliferation NOTES
In March 1968, the USA, the Soviet Union and Britain agreed to sponsor a joint
resolution to the Eighteen Nation Disarmament Committee and the UN Security
Council, agreeing to give guarantee of protection to non-nuclear powers from attack.
On 11 June 1968, the UN approved the NPT. By July 1968 about sixty-one nations
had signed this treaty. At the moment more than 157 nations are its signatories.
Those nations who have refused to sign this treaty point out to its discriminatory and
patently partial character, as it allows nuclear weapon powers to maintain their
monopoly in nuclear weapons. Anyway, the NPT was a feather in Johnson’s cap.
On the whole, during the Johnson period, America had to face many ignoble
reverses and setbacks. In the conduct of his foreign policy, Johnson had been very
unlucky. He failed miserably in his attempt to follow his pronounced policy of seeking
détente and agreement with the East. His administration also had to face rift with
Finance under De Gaulle, who aimed at the ultimate fusion of Western Europe to
form a ‘Third Force’, presumably under the leadership of France. To the chagrin of
America, France withdraw its military from NATO in 1966, though still remaining a
member of the organisation. Apart from this, France also recognised the People’s
Republic of China in 1964. The only successful achievements to Johnson’s credit
were: the Consular Treaty, the Outer Space Treaty (1967) and the Non-Proliferation
Treaty (1968). Altogether, he proved less successful in foreign affairs than in domestic
one. ‘The Great Society’ like ‘New Frontier’ initiated by Kennedy, was a measure
of welfarism that he launched successfully. The Civil Rights Legislation (1964) was
another significant laurel of his Administration on the domestic front.
Nixon period (1969–74)
On 20 January 1969, Richard Nixon assumed office as the 37th President of the
United States. After a lapse of eight years the White House was reoccupied by a
Republican President. It is interesting to note if the earlier Republican regime of
Eisenhower was faced with the task of bringing peace to Korea, the Nixon regime
was confronted with the problem of securing peace in Vietnam.
In his famous inaugural speech, Nixon gave a call to communist bloc ‘to join
the US in a peaceful competition not in conquering territory or extending dominion
but in enriching the life of man.’ Nixon felt that the most fundamental interest of all
nations lies in building the structure of peace; and that peace was more than the
absence of war, because peace must provide a durable structure of peace. He
added: ‘We seek an open world—open to ideas, open to the exchange of goods and
people—a world in which no people, great or small, will live in angry isolation. We
cannot expect to make everyone our friend, but we can try to make no one our
enemy.’After a period of confrontation, the Nixon administration did start an era of
negotiable.

Foreign Policies of Nixon administration and Vietnam problem
Various Countries
The first task that invited Nixon’s immediate attention was an honourable extrication
from Vietnam. To be sure, the problem of Vietnam was not his creation. He got it in
legacy from Kennedy and Johnson. Yet he was committed to resolve it. In fact, one
NOTES
of his election platforms had been the settling of Vietnam problem and gradual
disengagement.
Nixon ushered in a departure from the earlier US policy in Vietnam. His new
departure (a brainchild of Henry Kissinger) is known as Guarn Doctrine, which was
enunciated in a speech at Guarn. It contained three key points. He declared: ‘(1)
The US will keep all its treaty commitments, (2) We shall provide a shield if a
nuclear power threatens the freedom of any ally or of a nation whose survival was
considered vital to our security and the security of the region as a whole, and (3) In
cases involving other types of aggression, we shall furnish military and economic
assistance when requested and as appropriate. We shall look to the nation directly
threatened to assume the primary responsibility of providing the manpower for its
defence.’ The thrust of the Nixon Doctrine was to place the main burden of fighting
on local population of South Vietnam and that the US would supply only tools. The
Guarn Doctrine was meant to make Asians fight Asians; it aimed at Vietnamisation
of war or de-Americanisation of Vietnam war. Thus, Nixon departed from the earlier
policy by a tour de force—offering assistance along with withdrawal from South
Vietnam.
Nixon was convinced that Vietnam war could not be won by attempting to
impose a military solution on the battle field. So, immediately after assuming office,
he got the third round of Paris Peace Talks resumed on 6 February 1969. In May
1969, he announced the withdrawal of nearly fifty thousand American troops from
South Vietnam and also put forth in this connection his 7-point proposal. From July
1969, the effort to Vietnamese the war began in all seriousness and the first instalment
of American troops was withdrawn. But ironically enough, both the Paris parleys
and the US bombing of North Vietnam continued simultaneously. The withdrawal of
troops also continued, and Nixon promised to reduce American forces to 1,84,000
by 1 December 1971. Nixon declared that the rate of withdrawal would depend on
the progress of the return of the US POWs held in North Vietnam, and the creation
of a reasonable chance of South Vietnamese survival as a potential entity. On June
22, 1971, the Senate proposed complete withdrawal in nine months, provided a
settlement on the issue of POWs was reached. Ultimately, on 27 January 1973, the
representatives of the US, South Vietnam, North Vietnam and Provisional
Revolutionary Government in South Vietnam signed a Ceasefire Agreement in Paris.
Thus ended the eleven-year old Vietnam imbroglio. To be sure, the Nixon
administration, ably assisted by his astute adviser, Henry Kissinger deserves the
credit of ending the Vietnam war. Rightly, both Kissinger and Le Duc Tho, his
interlocutor, were honoured with Nobel Peace Prize, a year later (1974), although
the latter refused to accept it.

Nixon and Cambodia and Laos Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
The independence of Cambodia was recognised by the Geneva Agreement of 1954
and ever since she has been following the policy of non-alignment. Gradually, the
relations between the USA and Cambodia got strained and even diplomatic relations
NOTES
were snapped. In 1970, the Cambodian politics took a dramatic turn, when its Head,
Prince Sihanouk, while still holidaying abroad (France), was removed from power
by General Lon Nol. The General had undoubtedly a covert support of Nixon
administration. Sihanouk declared the new regime as ‘illegal’ and ‘illegitimate’ and
established his government-in-exile in China where he stayed as state guest till
1975. The communist forces by Vietcong began to fight against the Lon Nol
government. The latter was supported by South Vietnamese army and the US. Thus
developed a civil war situation in Cambodia. Ultimately, the US and South Vietnamese
troops had to be withdrawn from Cambodia.
Like that of Cambodia, the independence of Laos was also recognised by the
Geneva Agreement of 1954. It was decided that Laos would remain neutral. But
due to interference of external powers a situation of civil war developed in Laos,
too, since 1959. Subsequently, by the Geneva Agreement of 1962 (with fourteen
signatories) Laos was neutralised. But in 1971, the neutrality was again violated
when South Vietnamese forces entered Laos (the Sanctuary of Vietcong) and as a
consequence, the problem of Cambodia and Laos got linked up with that of Vietnam
until 1972.
Nixon and West Asia
With the end of Vietnam problem Nixon turned his attention to West Asia. The US
policy has been marked by a pro-Israel stance ever since its creation (1948).
Predictably, the US policy under Nixon continued to be anti-Arab and pro-Israel. In
1969, the Big Four met in New York but failed to arrive at any solution of the West
Asian problem. However, Nixon, in his second term, took a number of diplomatic
initiatives to bring about peace in West Asia. But all proposals, including the six-point
proposal of the Secretary of State, William Roger, failed to arrive at any agreement
between Israel and the Arabs.
Despite the efforts made by the Nixon administration, the fourth Arab-Israel
war (Yom Kippur War) took place in October 1973. In this war, the US support to
Israel was open and overwhelming. The US Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean was
kept alert and large deliveries of arms were made to Israel. It was with great deal of
Shuttle diplomacy on the part of Henry Kissinger (then the Secretary of State) that
the UN Security Council could adopt a joint US-Soviet Union ceasefire resolution
who came into effect in October 1973. And thus, a 19-day war was brought to an
end.
After the ceasefire, the Nixon administration made serious efforts to bring
peace to West Asia. On 11 November l973, an agreement based on Kissinger’s
6-point-proposal was concluded between Israel and Egypt (the leader of the Arab
world). The representatives of both Israel and Arab States (except Syria) were

Foreign Policies of brought together in a Conference at Geneva in December 1973 at the initiative of
Various Countries
the United States. In January 1974, Egypt and Israel concluded an Interim
Disengagement Agreement. The credit of winning over Egypt from the Soviet fold
goes again to shrewd diplomacy of Kissinger.
NOTES
Nixon and Sino-American reconciliation
Since the establishment of People’s Republic of China in 1949, the US had no relations,
except inimical, with communist China. The US not only did not recognise the PRC
but also blocked her entry into the United Nations. Instead, she managed to retain
Nationalist China (Taiwan) as a permanent member of the UN Security Council
upto October 1971.
‘For twenty years the US policy-makers considered China as a brooding,
chaotic, fanatical and alien realm difficult to comprehend and impossible to sway.’
But in 1971, under the compulsion of new realities of power equation, America
started reviewing her policy towards communist China. The need for reappraisal
was provided firstly by failure of America in Indo-China and secondly by the
worsening Sino-Soviet conflict. The Nixon administration was convinced that contact
with one quarter of humanity could restore new perspective to American diplomacy.
In fact, for quite a long time (about fifteen years), Warsaw based ambassadors of
the two nations had been carrying on Secret parleys in order to improve and normalise
their relations. The talks became public only after the Sino-Soviet clashes (1969) at
Ussuri and Amur river boundaries over the island of Chenpao (Damansky). Impelled
by the obvious menace of the Soviet buildup (fourty-five Divisions) on the 4,500 mile
long common border, China wanted to reduce the number of its adversaries and to
obtain another counterweight to Soviet pressure. She wanted strategic reassurance
and some easing of their nightmare of hostile encirclement.
As a gesture of cordiality, in April 1971, an American pingpong team visited
China and thus, began an era of what is called ‘Pingpong Diplomacy’. A realisation
dawned on both the nations that it was mutually advantageous to come to an
understanding with each other. The US felt it necessary to open normal diplomatic
channels with China in order to sort out differences. In pursuance of this opening to
China, Kissinger paid a secret visit to Peking via Rawalpindi in July 1971, and
succeeded in snatching a formal invitation for his President to visit China. On
16 July 1971 President Nixon announced his decision to visit Peking.
Now, let us examine what were the considerations on which Nixon’s decision
was based. One, the South-East Asia was the most impelling factor that prompted
the USA to come to some understanding with China. American involvement in Vietnam
had placed her foreign policy under several constraints. Since Nixon had already
declared to withdraw from South-East Asia, he wanted to do so without much loss
in geopolitical terms, and this would not have been done without coming to an
understanding with China. In fact, war in Vietnam could hardly be wound up without
China’s support, China too was highly impressed by peaceful return of Vietnam.
Commenting on this move, M.V. Kamath, an Indian commentator wrote: ‘ American
power has to be necessarily on the decline in the Pacific region, following the

withdrawal of US forces from South Asia. To beat strategic retreat from Asia and Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
not make a friend to a powerful residuary enemy will be a major blunder... It is
important for the US to leave an appeased China behind as a precautionary measure.’
In other words, a continued presence could be obtained through an understanding
with a surrogate power. Two, the US ultimately realised that it was not advisable to NOTES
ignore a big and potential power like China for long. There were all the advantages
in having rapprochement with her. Three, the trade interest of USA also called for
normalisation. She had already suffered a big economic loss by being deprived of
vast and potential Chinese market of over 800 million people. Four, the ever growing
Sino-Soviet rivalry was another contributory factor. The inevitable and sustained
rivalry between the US and the Soviet Union was bound to bring the US closer with
China as the latter was its enemy’s enemy. America realised that détente with
China would be extremely effective in strengthening its negotiating position vis-a-vis
the Soviet Union. She also felt that a détente with the Soviet Union may be easier to
achieve if she had China’s weight behind her. Similarly, it was in the interest of
China also to have a friendly America in order to counter the growing presence of
the Soviet Union in Asia. The Ussuri clash of 1969 had frightened China out of its
wits and forced her to mend fences with the US, as she could not afford to remain
hostile to both the Superpowers. Last, the growing power of Japan had alarmed
both China and America. But being closer to Japan, China was in a better position
than America to check the ambitious Japan.
Thus, both China and America needed each other. ‘In coming closer to each
other, both were fulfilling their own necessities,’ as Kissinger put it. As a follow up
action, in September 1971, Nixon announced his willingness to get a seat for the
PRC in the Security Council, but at the same time he wanted Taiwan to retain her
seat in the General Assembly. However, his two-China theory failed to click, and on
26 October 1971, the General Assembly adopted Albania’s resolution expelling Taiwan
from the UN and admitting PRC in its place.
Nixon’s journey to Peking (Beijing)
On 21 February 1972, Nixon arrived at Peking on his ‘bury the hatchet’ mission (or
was it a journey of penitence to Peking). He stayed there for a week and on the
conclusion of his visit, he remarked: ‘It was a week that changed the world.’ In the
words of Henry Kissinger, ‘it sparked a geopolitical revolution.’ Undoubtedly, it
brought about a dramatic upheaval in global political alignment. In his visit, Nixon
appealed to the Chinese leaders to join the US in its crusade for peace. His talks
covered a number of issues on Asian problems, particularly the growing Soviet
pressure on the Asian continent. Both sides, while conceding their differences,
particularly on Taiwan, expressed their hopes to continue peaceful relations. They
agreed for mutual cooperation in the fields of science, technology, cultural matters,
sports etc. Both undertook to respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
In February 1973, Kissinger again visited Peking to explore further avenues of mutual
cooperation. Later on, David Bruce was sent to Peking as Liaison Officer in March
1973.

Foreign Policies of Nixon and the Soviet Union
Various Countries
On 22 May 1972, Nixon paid a visit to Moscow. Notably, this was the first visit of
any American President to the Soviet Union. At this meeting significant progress
was made in the direction of Strategic Arms Limitation and the two countries concluded
NOTES
two historic agreements on 26 May 1972, known as SALT-I agreement and ABM
agreement. In June 1973, Brezhnev paid a return visit to America and further progress
was made in respect of strategic arms control. On 27 June 1974, Nixon paid a
second visit to Moscow and signed a Protocol to SALT-I prohibiting either party
from deploying ABM Systems outside a small area. The Interim Agreement signed
at the same time, sought to restrict the number of launchers for SLMBs and ICBMs.
Foreign policy achievements of Nixon administration
In the concluding chapter of his ‘Years of Upheaval’ (1982), Henry Kissinger, the
most powerful foreign secretary since Thomas Jefferson and the co-architect of
Nixon’s foreign policy, observes: ‘Nixon had striven for a revolution in American
foreign policy so that it could overcome disastrous oscillation between over-
commitment and isolation.’ His foreign policy eschewed both moralistic crusading
and escapist isolationism. ‘A normal Nixon Presidency would have managed to
attain symmetry between the two pillars of containment and co-existence.’ In his
opinion, the policy of détente that Nixon inaugurated was ‘not an escape from the
realities of the balance of power, a substitution of atmospherics for substance.’ He
added: ‘Détente, in fact, concerns the mitigation of conflict among adversaries, not
the cultivation of friendship; it was a means to conduct the ideological contest, not a
resignation from it.’ In his diplomacy ‘Nixon continued the exuberant idealism of
Kennedy but with unsentimental emphasis of national interest.’ Nixon wanted to go
down in history as a peace-maker and he did take some laudable steps towards
building the structure of peace.
But the critics of his foreign policy have to say something otherwise. For
instance, Saymour Hersh in his ‘Price of Power’ observed: ‘American policy during
Nixon era was the product of treachery, deceit, lies, personal jealousies, endless
calumny rather than rational behaviour.’ But whatever his critics might say about
American foreign policy during the Nixon era, his Administration had many
achievements to his credit. The Sino-US détente was his uncontested achievement—
his biggest laurel. It changed the power equation at the international level. It gave
birth to triangular détente; Nixon succeeded in mending fences with communist
China but not at the expense of détente with the Soviet Union. He maintained
simultaneously the areas of cooperation with both the communist giants. Nixon-
Kissinger thought that the China lever could be usefully utilised against Moscow just
as the US-Soviet détente would impel Peking to try to minimise its terms on the
negotiations with Washington. In his inimitable comment, Kissinger observed: ‘With
conscientious attention to both capitals (Peking and Moscow) we should be able to
continue to have our maotai and our vodka too.’
To sum up, the honourable end of Vietnam war, the rapprochement with
China, the thawing of relationship with Moscow, the SALT-I Agreement between

the Superpowers, the beginning of the Middle East peace process (culminating in Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
the Camp David Peace Accord in 1978) are some of the notable achievements of
the Nixon era. Undoubtedly, during his regime tension all over the world was at its
minimum. According to Henry Kissinger, his boss (Nixon) was ‘a brilliant geopolitical
thinker who shaped a new international order.’ NOTES
But with all these achievements, Nixon could not complete his second term,
which was abruptly cut short because of the Watergate Scandal. To his misfortune,
the Watergate became his Waterloo and he was made to resign in 1974. Although,
under the shadow of the Watergate Scandal Nixon had to make an exit which
earned him the dubious distinction of being the sole President to be ejected between
the elections, yet in Kissinger’s assessment: ‘Future will judge him (Nixon) less
harshly than his contemporaries,’and it is historians who have the last word.
Ford period (August 1974 to January 1977)
After Nixon’s exit from the White House, the Vice-President Gerald Ford. made his
entry as the 38th President of America. Himself a creature of Nixon, Ford promised
to continue the policy of his immediate predecessor. President Ford, therefore,
retained the services of Henry Kissinger as Secretary of State. Following Nixon,
Ford reiterated that America would give up policies of isolation and international
policing and the efforts of his country would be directed towards building up a world
order which would no more be dominated by power blocs and traditional game of
power balance. In a speech on October 28 1974, at New Delhi, Kissinger declared:
‘We have rejected the old extremes of world policeman and isolation. But we
recognise that American principles, strength and resources impose upon us a particular
responsibility. Our goal is to move towards a world where power blocs and balance
are not dominant and where countries considered cooperation in the global interest
to be in their national interest.’
Ford administration and the Soviet Union
With a view to promote détente with the Soviet Union, President Ford made his first
trip to Soviet Union in November 1974 and met Brezhnev at Vladivostok. The two
exchanged views on the problems of arms control and chalked out the outline of
SALT-II. The Vladivostok guidelines, which were expected to merge in SALT-II,
called for a ceiling on the number of strategic delivery vehicles at 2400 and on
MIRVed ICBMs and SLBMs at 1320 upto 1985.
President Ford also took steps to strengthen the NATO alliance and to forge
unity among the NATO partners. He personally attended the NATO Summit
Conference in May 1975 and reassured the allies of the US obligations and
commitments to Western Europe.
Ford administration and South-east Asia
To honour the commitment of Nixon, President Ford resumed the work of withdrawal
of American troops from Vietnam and faithfully completed it. In April 1975, the
communist-supported Khmer Rouge won the civil war in Cambodia and ousted the
pro-American Lon Nol regime.
Foreign Policies of Taking advantage of the total withdrawal of the US forces—the main prop of
Various Countries
South Vietnamese regime—North Vietnam and the National Liberation Front forced
the South Vietnamese forces to throw in their towel. Thus, the existence of South
Vietnam as political entity came to an end in 1975. The surrender of the government
NOTES at Saigon partially vindicated the much maligned ‘domino theory’. In 1975, the
communist- supported Pathet Lao replaced the Neutralist government in Laos. The
same year, Cambodia also came under the Red regime, headed by Pol Pot. Thus the
whole of Indo-China was freed of American influence and thereby the utter failure
of American policy was established beyond any shadow of doubt. Obviously, the
prestige of America as a protector received a body blow.
Following the defeat of America in Vietnam, even Thailand, a SEATO partner,
was encouraged to demand the withdrawal of US troops from Thai territory and
America had to oblige. On the whole, the American adventure in South-East Asia
proved to be a total fiasco.
Ford administration and West Asia
The peace making attempts initiated by Nixon were continued by the Ford
Administration. President Ford met the Egyptian President, Anwar Sadaat, and the
Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. As a result, on June 2 1975, Israel announced
its decision to withdraw about 30 kms from the occupied Suez Canal. On, June 5
1975 Egypt also agreed to open the Canal for navigation after a gap of eight years.
Israel in return agreed to withdraw from Sinai in favour of Egypt under certain
conditions.
In his brief stay at the White House, Gerald Ford (the only President in US
history who was non-elected) is not to be credited with any spectacular achievement.
The negotiation of SALT-II framework is taken to be the singular achievement of
his Administration. One may also add that it was President Ford who stopped the
CIA to engage in or conspire to engage in political assassination.
Carter period (1977–81)
After a gap of eight years, the White House was again occupied by a Democratic
Administration, when Jimmy Carter took over as the 39th President of the United
States. Carter appeared as inspiring as Kennedy, when he assumed office, though
without the latter’s rhetoric. His greatest asset was his many splendoured-
personality—all unblemished public record, a scandal-free political career, and, above
all, a disarming smile and a charisma that had few parallels.
In his inaugural address, he pledged to create a stable, just and peaceful
world order. He proclaimed: ‘We will not seek to dominate nor dictate to others.’
Speaking about disarmament, he expressed his determination to limit the world’s
armament to a level necessary for one’s domestic safety, on the lines of former
President Wilson. He promised five to seven billion dollars cut in defence spending
of America. While emphasising on international cooperation, he also warned that
American idealism should not be taken for granted. He declared: ‘Because we are
free, we cannot be indifferent to the fate of freedom elsewhere. We have the highest

regard for individual human rights. We don’t seek to dominate but others doing so is Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
a threat to the well-being of all people. We are sufficiently strong and need not be
tested in a combat, but we want to base our greatness not on the size of an arsenal
but the nobility of ideas. Our commitment to ‘human rights is absolute’. Thus, he
was committed to human rights, non-proliferation and the Third World defence. NOTES
Carter administration and the Soviet Union
In pursuance of his declaration about disarmament, Carter initiated a series of parleys
between his foreign Secretary and the opposite number in the Soviet Union to negotiate
the SALT-II. These efforts after a good deal of bargaining and delaying tactics
ultimately culminated in the signing of SALT-II in 1979 at Vienna by Carter and
Brezhnev. But it could not be ratified, as it was linked with the withdrawal of Soviet
forces from Afghanistan, which was invaded in December 1979.
Carter and West Asia
Even before Carter, the preceding regime had brought Egypt and Israel to a
conference table from the battlefield. But any ingratiation of Egypt by the new
regime does not mean ignoring the interest of Israel. For Carter, Israel was an
‘unshakable partner’. Carter once remarked: ‘The survival of Israel is not a political
issue; it is a moral imperative.’ The year 1977 was marked by some dramatic
developments in so far as West Asian problem was concerned. Having already met
the Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, and President Carter, Anwar Sadaat paid a
spectacular visit to Jerusalem on 19 November 1977. He recognised the existence
of Israel but demanded in return a separate Palestinian State in the course of this
visit. Essentially, it was a mission of peace that Sadaat undertook by going to
Jerusalem. Subsequently, on 17 September 1978 President Sadaat and Prime Minister
Menachem Begin reached an Accord at the Camp David Summit, where Carter
played a mediatory role. The Camp David Accord consisted of two documents—
one provided that Israel will completely withdraw from the Sinai (occupied since
1967) and a Peace Treaty with Egypt will be signed within three months and normal
relations, including diplomatic, will be established between Egypt and Israel; and the
second document outlined a framework for peace elsewhere on the basis of
Resolutions No.242 and 338 of the Security Council. Ultimately, on 26 March 1979,
Israel and Egypt signed a Peace Treaty after so many dead-locks and dilly-dallying
in between Israel, accordingly, withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula and diplomatic
relations were established. But other connected issues like the creation of Palestinian
State on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the claims over Jerusalem are still elusive
and are not easily amenable to solution.
Carter and the Persian Gulf doctrine
In the wake of Soviet intervention in Afghanistan (December 1979), the anti-
American stance adopted by the post-Shah regime in Iran after the deposition of
Shah of Iran in the early months of 1979, America was impelled to proclaim a new
policy for the Gulf region, which was termed as ‘arc of crisis’ by Brezezinski. This
new policy is called the Carter Doctrine. In a State of the Union message in 1980,

Foreign Policies of Carter proclaimed: ‘An attempt by an outside force to gain control of the Persian
Various Countries
Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interest of United States and
it will be repelled by use of any means necessary, including military force.’ No
doubt, the Soviet drive in Afghanistan brought, within easy strategic distance of oil
NOTES rich Persian Gulf, which is vital to the US security. The Persian Gulf Doctrine,
however amounted to the declaration of the Second Cold War.
Carter administration and Latin America
Immediately after taking over the American Administration, Mrs. Rosalyn Carter
paid a visit to Latin America to further improve relations with South American
countries. In spite of tremendous success achieved by the Carter regime in far off
areas—SALT-II Agreement, Camp David Accord, it had lost its grip over America’s
own backyard—Latin America. Not only the Soviet combat troops were discovered
in Cuba, Carter’s crusade for human rights antagonised Brazil, which treated any
comment on the part of America on non-observance of human rights as an
interference in its internal affairs. Following the repudiation of the Military Assistance
Treaty by Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay also rejected the US aid in protest against
making it conditional on observance of human rights. However, Carter could
legitimately take the credit of solving the pending Panama Canal dispute by concluding
an agreement with Panama on 11 August 1977, which provided that the US would
withdraw her troops gradually and by the end of this century, she would hand overfull
control of the Canal Zone to Panama.
Carter and India
Ever since the Bangladesh crisis of 1971, the Indo-US relations remained cool and
strained. Even Kissinger’s visit (October 1974) could not make much headway in
improving it. The Emergency regime of Indira Gandhi since 25 June 1975, gave
further jolt to the Indo-US relations. The American government was so much annoyed
with the growing authoritarianism and political persecution in India that President
Ford had refused to visit India as long as Emergency continued. But the restoration
of democracy with the advent of the Janata regime was highly appreciated by Jimmy
Carter, and he paid a personal visit to India in January 1978 to usher in a new phase
in Indo-US relations. Welcoming Carter and appreciating his gesture, the India
President, Sanjeeva Reddy rightly commented: ‘Carter has brought the nobility of
moral imperatives to international politics.’ With his visit, the bilateral aid, suspended
since 1971, was resumed by America and a 60 million dollar aid was sanctioned by
the US Congress for India.
But this euphoria over the visit proved shortlived. Differences soon cropped
up between the two countries over the supply of enriched uranium fuel for Tarapur
Nuclear Power Plant. The foot-dragging by the Congress on the supply of uranium,
as provided in the Contract of 1963, caused great resentment in India. As a matter
of fact, in view of the Non-Proliferation Act passed by the Congress in 1978, the
Carter administration began to back out from its commitment to supply uranium and
started insisting for a fresh agreement which would provide for international inspection
of all the nuclear energy plants in India. But India was by no means agreeable to full

scope safeguards, as the said Act demanded. Anyway, Carter did his best to help Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
India in getting clearance of two pending applications for uranium before leaving the
White House.
Carter and China NOTES
In continuation of the policy of normalisation with China, the US Secretary of State,
Mr. Cyrus Vance, visited China in August 1977. But due to disagreement on the
Taiwan problem, relations between the two countries could not improve for some
time. However, Carter ultimately agreed to derecognise Taiwan and thereby buried
the Two-China thesis. This led to the abrogation of the US-Taiwan Treaty of 1955.
This gesture on the part of America was very much appreciated by the Beijing
regime and in order to reciprocate this gesture, Deng Xio-ping paid a goodwill visit
to America by the end of 1979. Thus, to quote Alan Wolfe, ‘if Nixon made the
opening bet, Carter played out the hand.’By January 1979, both the countries
established full diplomatic relations and their closeness never looked back, despite
the fact that Beijing has some grouse against Washington’s unabated arms assistance
to Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979.
Carter and human rights
Human rights was the cornerstone of Carter’s foreign policy. In fact, Carter started
a sort of crusade for human rights. He believed that human rights everywhere were
indivisible and therefore declared: ‘No nation can claim mistreatment of its own
citizens as its sole concern.’ In the earlier part of his term it appeared that Carter’s
commitment to human rights was absolute, but subsequently he had to modify his
stand in the light of resentment expressed against his obsession with human rights
policy by several countries. The Soviet Union in particular rapped Carter for his
stand on human rights. Brezhnev conveyed to Carter that constructive development
of relations was impossible without observance of the principle of non-interference
in internal affairs. Poland also showed her resentment when Carter harped on human
rights while he was on a visit to Poland. Brazil was so much annoyed that she
repudiated 25-year old Military Assistance Treaty with the USA. Argentina and
Uruguay too rejected America’s conditional aid.
Appraisal of Carter’s foreign policy
To be sure, Carter’s foreign policy was imbued with idealism and he sincerely tried
to base his public policy on human values and morality. He is on record to have said
that ‘ends never justify evil means. Nations, like individuals, are morally responsible
for their actions.’ Speaking on one occasion, he described American involvement in
Vietnam as ‘the best example of intellectual and moral poverty.’ His idealism was
amply revealed in his keenness on SALT-II Agreement, in his effort to maintain
détente with China, and in his persistence in bringing about complete peace in West
Asia. He stated categorically that the US has ‘no intention, nor ability, nor desire to
interfere in the internal affairs.’ And he proved true to his words. He refrained from
taking any military action in the Iranian turmoil to influence the outcome of events
there. He argued: ‘We tried this once in Vietnam and it did not work and found our
fingers burnt.’ Similarly, when Kampuchaea was invaded by Vietnamese forces in
Foreign Policies of late 1979, his Administration maintained a remarkable restraint. Thus, he moved
Various Countries
very cautiously in the conduct of his foreign policy.
But by the end of his term he had to face a very challenging situation, and he
failed miserably, and soon became very unpopular, which was reflected in his
NOTES humiliating defeat at the hustings in November 1980. The capture of US diplomatic
mission members (52) in Teheran and the fiasco of ‘Rescue Operation’ on April 25,
1980 was the final nail in the coffin of his political standing in the eyes of American
people. Similarly, he failed miserably in his attempt to get the vacation of Soviet
aggression in Afghanistan. Besides, he was also the victim of two-digit inflation. As
a result of all this, his image as a leader took a nose-dive and eventually his popularity
dipped so low that when he fought the second term elections he lost lamentably. On
the other hand, his opponent, Ronald Reagan, fully exploited this demoralising mood
of American people, who were suffering from a loss of geopolitical machismo in
view of a chain of developments, such as the Soviet advancement in Angola, Ethiopia,
South Yemen and Afghanistan, climaxed by the hostage crisis in Iran. The American
self-image was at its nadir, and the situation demanded a change of guard.
Perhaps Jimmy Carter was too good for the job of a Superpower leadership.
Being a great moralist, he had no feel for power. Perhaps the lack of geopolitical
perspective was his greatest drawback. Little wonder, onto this dismal scene, Reagan
rode like a knight in shining armour on a white charger. Nevertheless, Carter left the
White House not without some tributes. The Panama Canal Treaty and the Camp
David Accord will be known as his most solid and notable achievements.
Reagan Period (1981–89)
Ronald Reagan entered the White House as the 40th President of the United States
on 20 January 1981. Before the assumption of office, Reagan had been a former
Hollywood star, sports caster, trade unionist and columnist and besides, he had also
enjoyed two terms of California’s governorship. By combining the technique of
Hollywood with that of Madison Avenue, he established himself as a great
communicator. And above all, he was gifted with a telegenic personality. Even in his
seventies Reagan was fit like a fiddle. He was a lively and colourful figure and was
regarded as the most charismatic and cheerful of all the US Presidents. He moved
into the White House on the strength of a rightist conservative wave in America. He
came to power on the crest of an emotional wave. He began with a promise to pull
a beleaguered giant (USA) up by its boot straps and to make Americans feel proud
to be partriotic again. Because of his good Samaritan role in films, he had acquired
the image of a cowboy with an irresistible itch to shoot from the hip. His election
platform was that America will no more be pushed around. The central theme of
Reagan’s inaugural speech, therefore, was the restoration of American self-pride
and confidence. His new slogan was an ‘era of renewal in American politics.’ The
magic of free market and global anti-Sovietism were his two ideological platforms.
But to begin with, he had to be preoccupied with the task of getting the US sluggish
and slackening economy moving again. He found the American economy plagued
by persisting inflation, sluggish growth, dwindling energy resources, galloping
unemployment and fierce competition for world market. The spelt out strategy of
the Reagan administration was: (1) To regain military strategic superiority over the Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
Soviet Union by stockpiling newer and more sophisticated weapons, (2) To roll back
Soviet influence in the Third World, (3) To dismember the Warsaw Treaty
Organisation, and (4) To impose free market economy and to promote supply side of
economics—a policy ridiculed by his opponents as ‘Reaganomics’. In other words, NOTES
Reagan wanted America to reassert its military power and reaffirm its leadership of
the world. But he came to feet that America had lost her overwhelming superiority
in strategic weapons to the Soviet Union. She also had lost its technological edge to
Japan and West Germany. The Achilles’ heel of her economy had been fully exposed.
With the result, the American power to influence the Third World had become marginal.
Her humiliation in Vietnam, Angola, Iran and Afghanistan was too difficult to be
wiped off by Reagan’s rhetoric and his much-touted toughness. In the light of these
developments, Reagan’s hardline anti-Sovietism, his subscription to ‘domino theory’
in central America, and his belief that the Soviet Union, which he called the Empire
of Evil, was the focus of all troubles in the world was nothing but a throwback to the
Dullesian era.
Reagan and the Soviet Union
Reagan thought that he could deal with the Soviet Union with firmness only when he
put the American economy in proper shape and combined it by adding more teeth to
American defence potential and regain strategic superiority over the rival superpower.
His leadership propounded a forward defence strategy requiring a structure of
overseas bases, and in this attempt no area of the world was beyond the scope of
American interest.
Reagan and disarmament/arms control
Reagan’s declared strategy was for open-ended arms race dashing all prospects of
arms control. Reagan believed that SALT-II, signed by his predecessor, was fatally
flawed and locked America into a long-term strategic inferiority. To him, it was a
sell-out treaty tilting the balance in favour of the Soviet Union. Reagan also disapproved
the inter-adversary parity model and insisted on the US supremacy. Hence all talks
towards arms control were suspended for the time being, as Reagan was bent upon
regaining America’s strategic superiority. In 1983, he launched his Star War
programme to produce what he called the BMD system.
Reagan and Asia-pacific region
During his regime, a sort of military axis emerged among the USA, China, Japan
and Pakistan, the aim of which was nothing but to check the growing presence of
the Soviet Union in Asia and the Pacific region. China was made the linchpin of this
unwritten alliance. Pakistan again became a hot favourite of the US policy in South
Asia and was rewarded with massive induction of modern armaments and economic
aid. She became a frontline state in the American calculation insofar as the Afghan
Crisis was concerned. No wonder, the Reagan Administration offered an aid package
of 3.5 billion dollars in 1981 and again another aid package of 4.02 billion dollars in
1986 to Pakistan.

Foreign Policies of Reagan and India
Various Countries
The Indo-American relations got further strained during the Reagan’s incumbency.
Fresh frictions appeared on issues like the Indian Ocean, Afghanistan etc. There
was a serious disjunction in the perception and viewpoints of Washington and New
NOTES
Delhi. India’s muted criticism of the Soviet military interventions in Afghanistan
made her suspect in the eyes of the Reagan administration. In fact, Reagan never
regarded India’s Non-alignment as genuine.
Reagan and Latin America
The Reagan Administration was determined to roll back communism and called
Latin America a battleground against communism. He was alarmed by the rising
leftist threat in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Grenade. In fact,
he was haunted by a replay of domino theory in Central America. But unlike Carter,
Reagan refused to bully countries like Brazil and Argentina for violating human
rights. But, for all his possessiveness about Latin America, Reagan antagonised
several Latin American countries by showing solidarity with an extra-continental
power (Britain) vis-a-vis an OAS ally (Argentina) during the Falklands crisis of
1982. Altogether, Reagan achieved great success in this region. As was his desire,
no more Cuba could be born there.
In the first term, Reagan laid down the groundwork for radical departures
from the policy of his predecessor. This reversal from Carterism was of a piece
with Reagan’s global policy, which projected an expanded military role for the US
across the board. He had already rejected the illusion of détente, and SALT-II
agreement. Paradoxically, he believed that only a stepped up arms race could lead
ultimately to arms reduction. In other words, he wanted peace through strength.
Accordingly, Carter’s concern for human rights, the North-South dialogue and nuclear
non- proliferation were replaced by concentrated efforts to shore up the right wing
regional partners in strategic rivalry with Moscow. The foreign policy adopted by
Carter vis-a-vis Africa was also abandoned. Reagan revived the East-West disputes
in Africa. He treated, South Africa as a bulwark against Soviet communism. His
policy of ‘constructive engagement’ with South Africa was nothing short of an unholy
alliance between Washington and Pretoria. To be sure, Reagan brought America on
the wrong side of history on the African continent.
Reagan and West Asia
Similar reversal from Carterism can be discerned in Reagan’s approach towards
West Asia. In the Middle-East, Carter had tried to strike a balance between the
Arab and Israel interest. But Reagan repeatedly proclaimed that American support
for Israel springs not primarily from a historic special relationship or a moral obligation
inherited from the ‘holocaust’ but rested fundamentally on the calculation that in the
global struggle with the Soviet Union, Israel was a strategic ally that helps secure a
vital geographic region. ‘He made a departure from the well-established American
policy by endorsing Israel’s policy of settlements, and creeping colonialism in West
Bank and its integration of Jerusalem as its undivided capital.’ On the issue of

Palestine, the Reagan Plan (1982) was never sincerely pursued. Moreover, it clearly Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
tilted in favour of Israel.
Taking stock of Reagan’s first term, one cannot but be impressed by the
report card of Reaganomics: (1) the country showed the strongest economic growth
of all industrial nations; (2) it was marked by one of the lowest inflation rates—it NOTES
went down from 12 per cent to 4 per cent; (3) it showed the fastest rate of job
creation—unemployment fell from 11 per cent to 7.5 per cent. About sixteen million
new jobs were created; (4) American people enjoyed the largest increase in real
income since the Second World War because of tax cut. No doubt, during this term,
America had a booming economy and her dollar was super strong.
The litany of American success in the foreign field ‘Was equally impressive:
(1) The Soviet diplomacy was sabotaged in Afghanistan, Angola and Nicaragua; (2)
The rival Superpower was marginalised in the Middle East; (3) The invasion of
Granada (October 1983) greatly raised Reagan’s popularity; (4) Successful
deployment of Cruise and Pershing-II missiles in Europe (1983). In the light of these
achievements both in economic and foreign fields, Reagan acquired a sort of teflon
image. No wonder, all this led to his landslide victory in the second term elections.
But at the same time, there is no gainsaying the fact that his administration was
aggressively assertive and excessively combative. During his first term, the US-
Soviet relations had reached the lowest point since the Cuban Crisis (1961-62).
Reagan’s second innings
Reagan’s platform in the second term elections (1984) reaffirmed his resolve to
seek peace through strength. ‘Prevailing with pride’ was still the principal ingredient
of his security policy. His economic goal was to expand and to continue recovery
leading to full employment sans inflation. The second term agenda continued with
the policy of cuts in spending and tax reforms. But now the Reagan administration
began to realise that military road to economic security leads to a dead end. Having
already recovered America’s strategic supremacy, Reagan began to show interest
in arms control talks. But the main reason for a change in the Reagan’s stance can
be attributed to the policy initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev, who for the first time
among Soviet leaders came to realise that his country was no longer capable of
maintaining a Superpower status or parity with the US. Hence he was willing to
accept all concessions and conditions demanded by Reagan. Gorbachev even took
some unilateral steps to bring Reagan to negotiating table for arms control talks.
Having restored America’s self-confidence and strategic superiority and having
seen America stand tall, Reagan began to give priority to promoting peace. Now his
new ambition was to go down in history as a man of peace. A devout hardliner thus
turned out to be a peace-maker by the middle of eighties. Nothing highlights more
the change in tone and tenor of Reagan’s foreign policy than four significant summits
between Reagan and Gorbachev.
Reagan’s foreign policy achievements
Amongst the most significant achievements of Reagan’s foreign policy are: the
Intermediate Nuclear Force Treaty (1987), the Afghan Accord (1988), the Accord
Foreign Policies of for Peace in Central America (1987), the Accord in South Africa (1988), leading to
Various Countries
the withdrawal of fifty-five thousand Cuban troops from Angola in exchange for
South Africa’s disengangement from Namibia. These accords and agreements
symbolised the end of the Second Cold War.
NOTES
Review of Reagan’s foreign policy
In an article, ‘How Reagan Changed America’, George F. Will observed: ‘The
cheerfulness that has defined Reagan’s era of good feelings has been a narcotic,
numbing the nation’s senses about hazards on the horizon. He was the master of
illusions and deceptions. Reagan gave America a new sense of self-importance and
seld-pride but his economic policy and massive deficits may have mortgaged the
country’s vitality.’ G.F. Will also suggests that ‘historians will place Reagan in the
front rank of the second rank of American presidency.’ No doubt, Reagan restored
American millitary superiority, thanks to heavy expenditure on a military build-up.
But before he left the White House, America had acquired the dubious distinction of
being the largest debtor ($ 4 tn) in the world with highest budget deficit ($ 350 bn)
and highest trade deficit ($ 150 bn). On balance, one may say with the departure of
Reagan, though America was left a paramount power in military/strategic terms, it
was a crippled giant in economic terms. Nevertheless, no other president’s honeymoon
with the American people was as enduring as that of President Reagan since 1945.
His popularity remained undiminished and unaffected till the end of his regime, despite
the ‘Iran-Contra’ Scandal (‘arms for hostage’), a Sordid deal, indeed.
Bush period (1989-93)
On 20 January 1989 George Herbert Walker Bush took over charge from Reagan
as the 41st President of the United States of America. Bush came to power on the
crest of popularity wave left behind by the Reagan regime. But to enter the White
House, he had other qualifications as well. His career report card for claim to the
office of American presidency has been quite noteworthy and impressive. Apart
from having enjoyed two terms of Vice-Presidentship under Reagan, he had been a
US representative at the UN (1971-72), Head of unofficial embassy in Beijing (1974),
Director of Central Intelligence Agency (1976-77). However, Bush was unreflective
by nature; he was an incrementalist, more reactive than assertive. A creature of old
foreign policy establishment, he was better cast as a creature than a creator. The
‘vision thing’ has never been his forte. His new slogan was a ‘gentler and kinder’
America. Bush remained true to Reaganism throughout. On the economic front, he
followed Reaganomics (and he described it as ‘Voodoo economics’), which implied
no new taxes and cuts in spending on welfare. On international front, Bush extended
the rollback policy designed by his boss—to reverse and contain revolutionary regimes.
In short, his policy can be better described as ‘more of the same’—Reaganism.
The finest hour of his presidency came during the Second Gulf War (1990-
91). In August 1990, Iraq annexed its neighbouring country—Kuwait, and began to
treat it as one of its provinces. America, on the other side, decided to liberate Kuwait.
The action taken by Bush in the Gulf War is known as ‘Operation Desert Storm’
(1991). Speaking on the spectacular success of his ‘Operation Desert Storm’, he

remarked: ‘The spectre of Vietnam has been buried forever in the sand of Arabia. Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
Finally we have kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all.’ No doubt, he brought
cheer and glory to his nation in the Gulf War. In fact, after the Gulf victory, Bush
was at the peak of his presidency and had acquired the halo of a hero. The victory
turned a supposed wimp into a confirmed warrior. NOTES
Bush and the new world order
Justifying the Gulf War, Bush on 16 January 1991, exclaimed: ‘Hostilities with Iraq
described the opportunity for building a new world order. Where the rule of law
governs the conduct of nations and in which a credible UN can use peace-keeping
role to fulfil the promise and the vision of the UN founders. Bush’s New World
Order contains the following points: (1) the objective of building A New World Order
is to achieve peace, security, freedom and the rule of law in the world, (2) America’s
leadership is indispensable and cannot be substituted, (3) it is necessary to form a
partnership with allied countries to equally share both cost and commitments to
deter aggression and to achieve stability, prosperity and peace, (4) the UN to be
given a role in it, (5) the NWO must be based on American values and ideals, (6) the
NWO pays more attention to the role of big and developed nations, and (7) it aims to
maintain American domination.
Bush and arms control—disarmament
With the Cold War being over by 1989, the competitive build-up of East and West
interventionist forces was taken as belonging to a buried bipolar past. That is why
Bush gave a new slogan known as ‘beyond containment’. Like Reagan, Bush
continued the momentum of summit diplomacy. At his first meeting with Gorbachev
at Malta (December 1989), the two leaders formally announced the demise of the
Cold War. In their next meeting at Washington, (30 May 1990), a number of proposals
towards arms control were mooted, covering START, TTB, Chemical Weapons,
Open Skies, Conventional Force in Europe. At the historical Paris Summit (November
19 1990), thirty-four nations signed a landmark treaty, slashing the conventional war
arsenals in Europe. It was the most comprehensive and far-reaching conventional
arms reduction accord. After meeting at Helsinki in February 1991, Gorbachev and
Bush met again in Moscow on 31 July 1991, and Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty
(START-I) was signed. The Moscow Summit was the first true post-Cold War
summit. START-I is the culmination of nine years of chequered negotiation. Although
the critics dismissed it as irrelevant, and inadequate, as the two powers would still
retain armageddon arsenals that far exceeded any rational need, its historic
significance cannot be underplayed. It called for 30 per cent reduction in the then
nuclear arsenals of both the countries. Indeed, it was a historic treaty—the first that
significantly reduced the most dangerous and devastating nuclear forces, despite
the fact that the remainder had the potential to devastate the planet many times
over. The Treaty limited the strategic nuclear delivery vehicles to 1,600 each. But it
did not cover SLBMs. Further, the Treaty provided for complex verification procedures
and for this both agreed to set up a joint commission on verification and inspection.
The Treaty was made valid for 15 years and could be extended for successive 5-

Foreign Policies of year periods. Under this Treaty the two sides were allowed to have 4,900 ballistic
Various Countries
missiles each. The Soviet cut in warheads was 35 per cent from 11,000 to 7,000 and
the US cut was 25 per cent (from 12,000 to 9,000).
Again, on 3 January 1993, Bush signed START-II along with Yeltsin, which
NOTES reduced the 10,000 nuclear warheads of Russia and US to about 3,000 over a ten-
year period. The agreement required the destruction of all land-based multiple warhead
missiles. It was a far-reaching disarmament agreement ever concluded. It proposed
to cut their nuclear weapons by two-thirds by 2003 AD. It was the third major arms
control agreement and the last great achievement of his presidency.
Review of the Bush administration
To conclude, the presidential tenure of George Bush was marked by a remarkable
run of success in international arena. But on the domestic front, he could earn very
few kudos. Despite some spectacular achievements in the foreign front, Bush began
to lose ground on the domestic front, particularly economic front at the close of his
term. This was made clear on 3 November 1992, when Bush lost overwhelmingly to
Bill Clinton, ending thereby 12-year Republican rule. Ironically enough, only twenty
months earlier, Bush was basking in the glow of the Gulf War victory, enjoying the
highest approval rating ever recorded. But he got the order of the boot, because the
economy was flat on the floor. What eventually cooked his goose was his failure to
steer clear the American economy out of trouble and the broken promise—‘read
my lips’—no more taxes.
Bill Clinton period (1993–2001)
On 20 January 1993, William Jefferson Clinton was sworn in as the 42nd President
of the USA. He was the youngest (46) President since J.F. Kennedy, signifying a
historic generational change. Moreover, he was the first post-Cold War Head of the
state. A product of George Town University, Oxford University and Yale University,
he has been the longest surviving Governor in the US. A combination of luck, tenacity,
hardwork and a brilliant mind enabled the Governor of one of the smallest and
poorest states of United States (Arakansas) to hold the highest office on earth.
Casting himself as candidate of change and a new generation, Clinton vowed
to create more jobs, rein in the federal deficit and help restart the stalled economy.
Being a true democrat, he was in favour of an activist government instead of the
minimalist government of the past two regimes. He adopted a welfarist approach.
Accordingly, higher taxes on rich classes and public investment in health care,
education and infrastructure were some of the highlights of his economic agenda.
In his first term, the giant problems staring his administration in the face
were: America’s economic competitiveness was eroding slowly but steadily, her
growth rate of GNP was petering out, aggregate productivity had grown by only one
per cent annually for over a decade, the number of unemployed was mounting. The
country was running the world’s largest trade deficit — there was colossal adverse
balance of payment, totalling one trillian dollars over the past decade. Much of the
economic growth whatsoever during the last decade was financed by borrowing

from America’s own future. America has entered the 1980s as the world’s largest Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
creditor nation but exited the decade as the world’s largest debtor nation (4 tn).
Regarding foreign policy, Clinton stressed that there would be essential
continuity, for ‘even as American administrations change, America’s fundamental
interest do not.’ But at the same time that conformity had to be altered in a fluid NOTES
world context. In his book, ‘Putting People First’ (Co-authored with Al Gore, 1992)
Clinton wrote: ‘We will pursue three clear objectives: to establish America’s economic
leadership at home and abroad, to prepare out military force for a new era, and to
encourage the spread and consolidation of democracy abroad.’ On another occasion,
Clinton specifically mentioned as his foreign policy goals: ‘Continuing the US
sponsored West Asia Peace talks, making progress towards agreement on World
trade talks, bolstering Russia’s fledgling democracy, bringing about peace in former
Yugoslavia without direct involvement and assisting famina victims in Somalia. Besides,
he also favoured a stronger human rights approach in dealing with Beijing and other
communist states. Essentially, he focused on three clear objectives— economic,
military and political — ideological. At the economic level the objective was to
reactivise the US economy in the global context. His regime was aware of the fact
that though a military giant, America was crippled by economic weaknesses. It
needed to regain economic strength to meet global leadership. At the military level,
the aim was to restructure the US defence and security structure. At the political
level, the goal was to engage the American foreign policy for the promotion and
preservation of the democracy abroad.
However, Clinton’s Presidency in the first term had gone sour, because he
was found back-tracking on almost all his populist promises— reduction of the budget
deficit, job creation, health care programme, on the domestic front and military action
in Bosnia, not to allow MFN status to China, no asylum to Haitian boat people, on
the external front. As a matter of fact, his domestic agenda was rendered dead on
Capitol Hill. Not surprisingly, his public approval rating was the lowest (36 per cent)
by the end of the first year of his regime. However, with the signing of West Asia
Peace agreement between Arafat and Rabin at Washington on September 12, 1993
and with the passing of the NAFTA Bill in December 1993, his popularity rating
went on soaring.
Clinton’s second term
Although in his first innings Clinton had stumbled badly, in his second term Clinton
was an effective President. In fact, Clinton had won the Presidency for the first
term on the domestic agenda. But he won the second term on a solid platform of
foreign policy triumphs, such as Peace Accord between the PLO and Israel and
help in making the Irish Peace Accord (1994).
On the economic front, Clinton managed to balance the budget, cut taxes,
reform welfare, introduce new legislation on gun control to cut crime, expanded the
coverage of health insurance and energised Wall Street great Bull run. The social
security system having been overhauled, there was a steady improvement in social
indicators.

Foreign Policies of On the international front, his administration could claim credit for signing the
Various Countries
CTBT, though he failed to secure its ratification by the Senate. His other
achievements were the ratification of North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) in 1994, the Uruguay Round Agreement, leading to the formation of World
NOTES Trade Organisation (1995), the strengthening of Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation
Forum and the consolidation of Group-7.
Clinton and West Asia
Prioritywise, West Asia was certainly at the top of Clinton’s foreign agenda. His
policy objectives in West Asia were: ensuring uninterrupted supply of oil to the
Western industrial wants, maintaining the security of Israel– the so-called Island of
democracy in the region, promoting the well-being and safety of the pro-West Arab
countries, particularly Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, and preventing Islamic
expansionism in the region. Regarding Iran and Iraq, his policy was characterised as
‘strategic dual containment’. The raison détre behind the new policy was that both
the countries remained hostile to US aims in the region. If one was expansionist, the
other was de-establishing. Hence the need to contain both. The administration
therefore wanted to check both Iraq’s and Iran’s drive to become a dominant power
in West Asia.
Clinton and Russia
Regarding Russia, the Clinton administration replaced the former policy of
containment with a policy of ‘engagement and enlargement’. Clinton also paid a
visit to Russia in June 2000 to meet his new counterpart, Vladimir Putin and talked
about START III with the Russian President.
Clinton and China
Clinton visited China in June 1998. Regarding China, he adopted a policy of
engagement and containment vis-a-vis the nearest challenger and geopolitical military
rival. He therefore allowed China the status of Permanent Normal Trade Relation
(PNTR) and also favoured its membership of WTO, for Clinton believed that an
extended hand will give the US greater influence over China than a clinched fist.
Clinton and India
In this first term in office there was a distinct pro-Pakistan tilt, as Robin Rafael with
a pro-Pakistan bias was still ruling the roost. To substantiate, Islamabad was allowed
to purchase hundreds of millions of dollars worth hightech arms under the Hank-
Brown amendment, and India was grouped with North Korea and Pakistan in Clinton’s
state of the Union message. But in his second term there was a decided warmth in
the atmospherics. After Clinton’s visit to India in March 2000 the Indo-US ties has
undergone a perceptible change. Indeed, his visit was the high watermark of the
new management between India and the United States.
Estimates of Clinton’s presidency
Measured against his background beginnings and the obstacles along the way,
Clinton’s rise to national prominence bespeaks his remarkable talents. His astounding
success as a President in teams of hardwork, a brilliant mind and an unmistakable Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
spirit and the ability to convey a sense of caring about ordinary people. Besides, he
was full of energy and optimism. No wonder, he became the first Democratic President
to win and enjoy a full second term since Frank D. Roosevelt, as well as the second
President in American history to be impeached and survived. In economic terms, NOTES
Clinton has been the most successful Democratic President in American history.
His two-terms spanned America’s longest peace-time economic boom. He succeeded
in pulling the US economy out of recession into surplus for the first time since 1969.
In his period, the economy had moved from a record deficit of 290 billion dollars to
the largest surplus record of 167 billion dollars, in the year 2000. Besides, inflation
was brought down to 1.9 per cent in 1999 (the lowest point since 1965), unemployment
at 3.9 per cent (the lowest in three decades), with 22 million new jobs.
No doubt, Clinton was anxious to end his presidency on a blaze of foreign
policy triumphs. But in none of the trouble spots where he intervened, he could claim
to have brought peace, be it Somalia, Haiti, Rwanda, North Ireland or West Asia.
His efforts to establish a peace making legacy lies in tatters. Despite his hectic
efforts for six months, until his last minute in office, he failed to sew up a peace deal
between Israel and the PLO.
On the negative side, his presidency was deeply tainted with the murky web
of scandals, allegations about illicit sex, deceit and several other controversies
(midnight pardon of 140 felons), and had to face impeachment by the House. A
certain amount of indiscipline and self-indulgence found in the psyche of Clinton
cast a shadow on his presidency. Nevertheless, Clinton defied the law of gravity on
the eve of his retirement, for polls showed his approval rating (73 per cent) jumping
to a all time high.
George W Bush period (2001–2009)
On January 20, 2001, George Walker Bush took office as the 43rd President of the
United States. He comes from a rich political stock. His father, George Herbert
Walker Bush, the 41st President of the America (1989-1993), is known as the patriarch
of a US political dynasty. Though a former Governor of Taxas, George Bush-II
lacks his father’s political resume and experience. Yet he is greatly influenced by his
father’s ideas and mannerisms. No wonder, in his team of advisors, Bush has opted
for his father’s men. After an idyllic childhood, Bush studied at Yale University. He
also holds an MBA degree from Harvard.
By emerging from a month-long fog of litigation as a victor, he had to face a
fractured political landscape, to start with. Moreover, with the US House and the
Senate also split down the middle, the bitter partisanship and legislative deadlocks
are likely to intensify this divisive atmosphere in the country. Since the election had
left doubt on the legitimacy of the outcome, it did seriously undermine the new
President’s moral authority for some time after taking over. But by and by his regime
came to acquire its legitimacy.
The inaugural address of Bush shows that his primary concerns are purely
domestic — tax cuts, education and the like. Among his main priorities is preempting
an expected slowdown in the economy after a boom.
Foreign Policies of Like Truman, Bush has little foreign experience. His Foreign policy might be
Various Countries
called more traditionalist or realist in its orientation. Bush believes in what he calls
‘compassionate conservatism’. He is sceptical of Clinton’s brand of internationalism.
He is likely to be less interested in pursuing international environmental issues or
NOTES humanitarian military operations like his predecessor. In his inaugural address, he
was at pains to say ‘America remains engaged in the world’. He would not allow
military forces to engage what he called nation-building or converting countries to
stable democracy. His campaign rhetoric talked of a stronger US military, a tougher
line on Russia and China, a scaled down peacekeeping role and a Missile Defence
System to protect America. Bush has no greater faith in the efficacy of NPT and
CTBT. As President, he is not going to sign the CTBT. Thus, this treaty, which is
already an oxymoron, may be junked. Similarly, his administration is less worried
about the UN, IMF and the World Bank. It is more worried about Islamic terrorism.
Prioritywise, Bush administration wants to focus on long-term allies like Britain,
Canada, Japan and Mexico, with special attention to Latin America and less active
involvement in West Asia.
Bush and West Asia
As against the Clinton approach in the Middle East, the Bush administration has
signalled its intention to leave much of the initiatives for the resolution of the Middle
East conflict to the Israelies and Palestinians themselves. It seems that the Bush
administration has said goodbye to Mr. Clinton’s Middle East initiatives. This means
that he is not going to help the Palestinian cause in the Arab-Israel dispute. The
recent joint US-British air strikes against Iraq on 17 February 2001 has already
alienated the Arab World.
Bush and China
Regarding China, the Bush administration is going to take a tough stance. Two
issues dominate the US-China relations: Taiwan and NMD. The Secretary of State,
Colin Powell said on 26 January 2001: ‘The US, while continuing the one China
policy, will defend Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act (1978) and will speak on
human rights issues frankly’. The Bush administration considers China as a strategic
competitor not strategic partner. Perhaps it was keeping in mind China that the Bush
administration has reiterated its commitment to go ahead with the NMD Programme.
In fact, the US wants to degrade China’s deterrent capacity. In fact, Bush wants to
elevate the role of Japan as the principal ally in Asia. Any way, it is not yet clear
whether the new administration will follow a policy of engagement or that of
containment with China. Perhaps it is going to be a mix of both (what RAND calls
‘congagement’).
Bush and India
Though not a priority area of interest, the new administration is not going to neglect
South Asia, particularly India. His foreign policy managers, however, see India more
in geopolitical terms, a political regional policemen and a country whose security
interests conflate with that of the US. It thinks that India will provide a strategic

counterbalance in Asia. The Powell Doctrine favours more engagement with India. Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
It stands for total removal of sanctions against India. The upturn in bilateral relations
heralded by Clinton’s hugely successful visit in March 2000 will persist and acquire
depth under the new regime. The path of post-Cold War Indo-US relations is almost
sure to follow the trail already blazed by Clinton. Moreover, since the new NOTES
administration is no longer interested in CTBT, India will not have to face any pressure
on that account.
Estimate of Bush presidency
To conclude, Bush has been in office for less than a year and he has still three years
more to go before the curtain falls on his first term. Therefore, it would be premature
and even presumptuous to say anything with finality about his presidency at this
stage. At best we can only identify the trends and directions of his policy on the
basis of his election platform and inaugural address. Anyway, the Bush Presidency
will be far removed from the Clinton’s approach and style, for if Clinton was a ‘wily
showman’ and knew the art of playing to the public gallery, Bush, in contrast, is a
‘methodical planner’ and ‘tenacious plodder’, whose policies will be founded on
clear principles and strategies. However, the recent evidence of his administration’s
conduct is not a hopeful indication. Its hawkish postures are directed not only towards
China (rubbing China the wrong way over Taiwan, flying spy plane, which was
grounded after its collision with a Chinese interceptor in 1 April 2001 with a disturbing
connotation) but seems to inform its entire foreign policy. It has managed to unsettle
even America’s Western allies with its missile defence programme and secuttling
Kyoto Protocol of 1997. Besides, Washington has undermined South Korea’s policy
of improving its tries with Pyongyang, and accused Russia of being a proliferator of
nuclear weapons.
Now, before he could firm up his leadership, Bush had to face one of the
worst crises in the American history, dubbed as Pearl Harbour II. Certainly, America
at the moment is in the grip of a terrible turmoil following the brutal and barbarous
suicide air attacks (11 September 2001) on some key targets like World Trade Centre
and Pentagon. In the wake of this development, the Bush Jr’s leadership is virtually
put on trial, for only in such catastrophes that the calibre of a leader is truly tested.
Now to meet this challenge thrown to the US by terrorist forces, Bush is putting a
formidable combination of countries for launching a global war against international
terrorism. To be sure, it is a big challenge to his leadership, and it is to be seen how
far Bush rises to the occasion. Will he be able to repeat the 1991 performance of his
father, George Bush Sr.?
Barack Obama period (2009 till 2016)
The foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration is the foreign policy of the
United States from 20 January 2009 onwards under the administration of President
Barack Obama. Some of his major foreign policy advisors include Secretary of
State Hillary Rodham Clinton, National Security Advisor Tom Donilon and United
Nations Ambassador Susan Rice. Obama’s overall foreign policy philosophy has
been postulated as The Obama Doctrine by Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne

Foreign Policies of as ‘a form of realism unafraid to deploy American power but mindful that its use
Various Countries
must be tempered by practical limits and a dose of self-awareness.’
From the year 2017, Donald Trump is new president of the United States of
America and it will be interesting to observe what kind of changes comes with the
NOTES Trump administration, due to the controversial promises he had should during the
election campaign.
Review of the American foreign policy
Ever since the Second World War the United States, which emerged as a Superpower,
has tried to don the mantle of a planetary policeman. This was definitely an evangelical
role. No wonder, in the process America had to pay a heavy price. The inordinate
fear of communication led her to embrace any dictator or despot. From Baltics to
Beijing and from Sarajeva to South Africa, America sided with the status quo. She
propped, projected and promoted a good number of execrable tyrannies round the
globe. Perhaps no other country has destabilished as many duly constituted
governments and bolstered up barbarous dictators as the US. She tolerated and
supported military juntas, corrupt oligarchies, repressive regimes and dictatorial
dispensations. Some of these were Ayub Khan and Yahya Khan of Pakistan, Augusto
Pinochet of Chile, Syngman Rhee of South Korea, Shah of Iran, Dulaviers of Haiti,
Ferdinent Marcos of Philippines, General Mobutu sese Sako of Congo (Zaire),
General Suharto of Indonesia, etc. Successive Presidents from Eisenhower to
Johnson, despite changing rhetoric, had the Dullesian objective of Stemming the tide
of communism. This entailed direct or indirect involvement on the side of client
regimes, howsoever unpopular. In short, to borrow from Barnett, ‘America has
been on the wrong side in former colonial world’. To substantiate, because of her
crusade against communism, she got herself sucked deeper and deeper in the
quagmire of Vietnam. It was this obsession with ‘containment’ which impaired
American ability to understand the modern Third World revolutions in China, Vietnam
and Nicaragua. It was this kind of involvement in Vietnam which President Carter
described ‘as the best example of intellectual and moral poverty.’
Ultimately, it fell to President Nixon and Carter to give effect to a new sense
of realism and to recognise that communism in Asia was not without its nationalist
moorings. They also realised that the communist bogey has been the bane of American
policy-makers for decades. No doubt, American policy in Asia has been littered with
failures—Vietnam most spectacularly, Iran most damagingly, Afghanistan through
neglect and default, and India through arrogance during Nixon-Kissinger period.
However, this wide panorama of setbacks had a sobering affect on the American
foreign policy by the end of seventies.
Buffeted by Vietnam and Watergate experience, the US foreign policy has
undergone a crisis of confidence since the mid-1970s, and since then, she has rejected
the old extreme of World policeman and isolationism. As a result, containment of
communism is no longer the linchpin of her policy. That is why, following the collapse
of communism, George Bush gave a new slogan — ‘beyond containment’.
Prof. Rasheeduddin Khan has identified five flaws in the US foreign policy—
(1) faulty premises and erroneous assumptions; (2) baltant, pompous and unsuitable
style of diplomacy; (3) irrational perception of communism, nationalism and liberation Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
movements of China, Asia and Africa; (4) subordination of foreign policy to pulls
and pressures of commercial-industrial lobbies and pseudo theoreticians as advisors,
like Dulles, McNamara, and others.
But notwithstanding these critical comments on the American foreign policy, NOTES
the fact remains that the policies initiated in 1947-48 ultimately achieved their
fundamental objectives — containment and collapse of communism and the rival
superpower — the Soviet Union, and thereby vindicated the victory of American
ideology — liberal democracy and market economy. Now in the post-Cold War era
America has emerged as the sole surviving superpower. Militarily, it remains the
mightiest nation on earth, economically, it is the locomotive of world economy and
diplomatically, it wields the greatest clout in world politics. Ironically speaking, contrary
to Marx’s prophesy the spectre of anti-communism, and not communism is stalking
all over the world.
Myth of pax Americana
While few will deny that the twentieth century was the American century many will
doubt that the 21st century will also belong to the United States of America. No
doubt, for about twenty-five years since 1945 America enjoyed a global position
without any rival. Europe lay prostrate and Japan was exhausted and even the
Soviet Union was far behind. America alone was left a paramount power. She alone
had both carrot and stick, because its economic health was as sound as its physical
health. But since 1970s the power of America went through a phase of steady
decline, which continued till the end of 1980s. This relative decline as a global power
resulted from technological challenge from Japan and Western Europe and military
challenge from the Soviet Union.
Till the 1980s, Americans saw themselves as being in steady decline. America’s
economic growth was replaced by recession and stagflation, its dollar was found
slumping. Its share of the global GNP had come down from 40 per cent (1995) to 20
per cent in 1993. Consequently, from a creditor country America became the largest
debtor nation, with biggest budget and trade deficit in the world. For some time it
seemed that the days of Pax Americana were over for ever.
But America did recoup some of the losses of the seventies and eighties by
launching diplomatic and military counter offensives, and succeeded in leaving her
rival superpower (the Soviet Union) far behind in geopolitical terms. The ‘Operation
Desert Storm’ (1991) did give the signal of the return of American political and
military hegemony on a global scale. From a certain measure of US restraints to
strong armed bravado, from a degree of internal self-doubt to international
adventurism, from a balance of terror to the America—directed new World order
did characterise the year of 1991. Consequently, it did replace the Vietnam syndrome
by the Iraq Syndrome. To quote Pran Chopra, ‘with the crumpling of the bipolar
system by 1991, the US emerged as an uncontested supreme global power, which
found itself in the commanding heights, issuing prescription all over the world on the
modalities of economic and political developments in conformity with its own brand
of composite democratic pluralism as well as individualistic capitalism’.
Foreign Policies of In the 1990s, even in economic terms America surged forward as a leading
Various Countries
economic power and now for the last several years it has enjoyed a continuous
economic boom. No wonder, since the mid-1990s the US economy came to be
called the ‘goldilocks economy’. Thus, all the present indicators suggest the American
NOTES edge over its possible rivals. Germany and Japan are still geopolitical pygmies and
China and Russia are yet without economic clout. As a matter of fact, America
today is the mover and shaker of world economy. According to Charles
Krauthammer’s prediction : ‘For at least a generation the US will continue to remain
preeminent by virtue of its overarching military, diplomatic, political and economic
assets.’ In a similar vein, Samel Huntington has described the US as the ‘sole state
with prominence in every domain of power — economic, military diplomatic,
ideological, technological and cultural and with the reach capabilities to promote its
interests in virtually every part of the world.’ Significantly, America’s power continues
to grow unabated. It is enjoying its longest economic boom in history even as the
Information Age continually increases its global, political and cultural reach and the
revolution in military affairs makes it military supreme. Surely, these are heady
times for Americans and have prompted the former US Secretary of State Madelains
Albright to call America ‘the indispensable nation ... because we stand tall and
hence see farther than other nations.’
It is undeniable that the US is the sole surviving superpower in the post-Cold
War era. Militarily, it remains the mightiest nation on earth. Its lead in nuclear and
conventional weaponry remains unsurpassable. Economically, it has become the
locomotive of world economic growth. It is feared that if the US economic sneezes
the world may catch pneumonia. Diplomatically too, it has the greatest clout. It is
the US writ that resulted in finding answer to the chronic Arab-Israel conflict in
1993. Its writ also worked in managing the Bosnian feud and it was under the US
auspices that the Dayton Accords were concluded in 1995. In short, America today
happens to be the common denominator in every high profile peace process. Moreover,
it is at the US initiative that the Uruguay Round Agreement could be negotiated,
leading to the formation of the World Trade Organisation. It was the US initiative
that became instrumental in firming up the NPT in 1995 in its unconditional and
indefinite extension as well as the MTC Regime. Even in relation to ‘soft power’, all
indicators favour the US. The cultural appeal of America — the temptation of the
American way of life, the global reach of Hollywood, the US dominance of World
Computers and Commerce has helped English language primalist. In addition, now
all the nations are trying to come to terms with the idea of liberal democracy and
free markets, whose champion is none other than the US.
Thus, Pax Americana seems to be firmed up, for any change whatsoever in
political and economic domain has to be made within the confines of the US
conformism.
Nevertheless, there are some writers who express their dissenting voice about
the US supremacy. While agreeing with the view that the America is definitely the
greatest of great powers and will remain the most dominant factor in world politics
for some time to come, they point out that in terms of technological capacity, access
of natural resources, population strength and economic determinant of investment
opportunities and markets, the world is bound to be multipolar, with other power Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
centres being European Union, Russian Federation, China, Japan, India and some
regional arrangements. Similarly, an eminent social thinker, Samir Amin has also
raised the question whether the US hegemony has entered its decline or has it begun
a renewal that would make the 21st century also America’s, and he has stated NOTES
conclusively that the 21st century will not be America’s century. It will be one of
vast conflicts and the rise of social struggles that question the disproportionate
ambitions of Washington and of capital.’ In the same vein, G.F. Kennan, the father
of ‘Containment’ theory of Truman times, while in one of his introspective and
prophetic moods, has observed: ‘I don’t think that the US civilisation of the last
fourty to fifty years is a successful civilisation. I think this country is destined to
succumb to failures which cannot be other than tragic and enormous in their scope’.
Paradox of power
America was supposed to be the mightiest power on earth. But the recent massive
air attacks on the US itself on 11 September 2001 shook the world to its core. The
stunned world stood suspended in disbelief at the vulnerability of what was thought
of Ramboesque super power. For some time the terrorists brought the Big America
to a halt. After this incident, the myth of fortress America lies demolished.
China in this day and age can be called a potential or emerging super power.
Intrinsically, it has all the attributes to make a country great and powerful—an immense
population skilled and disciplined and brimming with national pride and dedication,
vast land and natural resources, the largest army, the third largest economy, a home
grown civilisation and identity. Its territory is of imperial dimension (second largest
country) reaching from Central Asia to the Pacific and its great population (1.2 bn)
is being mobilised with authoritarian efficiency for economic development. Its economy
is vibrant and reasonably strong, averaging 9 per cent annual growth for the past
two decades. Today China’s is the fastest growing economy in the world. Moreover,
China is a nuclear weapon power and a veto wielding member of the UN Security
Council. Besides, China is ethnically almost homogeneous and, therefore, free from
ethnic unrest, constituting only of 6 per cent.
Though for a long time, China has been a slumbering giant due to degenerate
dynasties, corrupt administration, famines and floods, and lack of communication,
she has always regarded herself as the centre of the world. She has the middle
kingdom, complex and Sino-centric obsession, apart from ethno-centric pride. She
sees herself as the hub of civilisation.
Chinese people and their character
Traditionally, the Chinese are patient, sober and reasonable people. They are proud
but sweet they have been a great people by a unique blend of culture, common
sense and self-discipline. A unitarily administered, highly populous country is
governable largely because of the self-restraint exercised by the people and the
general respect for the law of the land. The Chinese society is strikingly orderly.
Foreign Policies of Laws command general obedience. In fact, obedience to legal authorities is in the
Various Countries
blood of the Chinese people. One observes a high level of order and discipline in all
walks of life. China’s underlying stability is based on ruthless control wielded by iron
hands, a homogeneous Confucian culture, and xenophobic nationalism. The Chinese
NOTES are simple in life style. Basically, they are hard working; and they have inherited
Confucian ethic of hard work. Though they are normally a patient people but once
aroused or provoked, they go berserk. Perhaps, Napoleon had this apprehension
when he remarked: ‘In China there lies a sleeping giant. Let him sleep, for when he
awakens, he will shake the world.’ He proved remarkably prophetic. Now the all
devouring ‘red dragon’ is awakened. China has now stood up, and the once sleeping
giant, now seems poised to be a world power. Finally, like Russians, the Chinese are
aggressive, subversive and expansionist, as the following history will show.
Political Background of the Communist Revolution in China
China has the longest continuous history in the world. For thousand of years, China
has been the most advanced country in the field of science and literature, painting,
gun powder and statecraft. Moreover, China has a very long history, of imperialist
rule. The Ming dynasty was the last Chinese imperial line. After overthrowing the
Ming rulers in 1642, the Manchu dynasty ruled the ‘Middle Kingdom’ until 1911.
The Manchu rule was corrupt, weak and incapable of ruling a vast country like
China. This paved the way for the intrusion of Western imperialism. Though China
had never a colonial status like other Asian nations, the Chinese emperors had to
grant a number of trade concessions to foreign powers since 1840. The European
powers maintained a network of concessions, extra-territorial rights, control of
customs, leases of railways and ports. To cut short, China experienced more than
hundred years of foreign intervention in her internal affairs. During this period, its
territory was carved and plundered by outside powers whose ruthlessness and
rapaciousness enervated its people. Nonetheless, China, according to Henry Kissinger,
‘was able to preserve a margin of autonomy by playing off competing greeds of
foreign powers against each other.’
Several uprisings, beginning with the Boxer Uprising (1910) culminated in the
Chinese Republican Revolution of 1911 under the able and charismatic leadership of
Dr. Sun Yat Sen. Dr. Sen is called the spiritual father of modern China. He is also
known as the father of the nation. In 1911, the Kuomintang, organised and led by Dr.
Sen, succeeded in overthrowing the last ruler of the Manchu dynasty and established
a Republic in China. The national and political rebirth of China, thus, dates back
from the proclamation of Dr. Sen’s three principles—nationalism, democracy and
People’s livelihood. Thus, Han nationalism began to assert for the first time after the
overthrow of the Manchu dynasty.
But the nationalist regime failed to weld the Chinese nation. Dr. Sun Yat Sen
proved a great visionary but not an able administrator. Most of China went under the
control of military chieftains and petty warlords. Dr. Sen died in 1925 and was
succeeded by Chiang Kai-shek. Chiang gave a crushing defeat to the warlords, who
had been hampering the efforts of national unification and succeeded in uniting
China to a large extent. However, with a view to have his complete control over the
administration, he purged the leftwing coalition of the Kuomintang in 1927, for he Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
was more alarmed by the rise of communists, led by Mao Tse-tung, than the Japanese
aggression launched since 1931. He accordingly organised a ruthless campaign against
the pockets of communists, which compelled them to move to the north in 1934,
known as the Long March. NOTES
In the meanwhile, people were becoming resentful at the passivity of Marshall
Chiang Kai-shek to fight the fresh Japanese aggression, launched in 1937. This
again compelled Chiang to form an alliance with the communists so as to jointly face
the Japanese aggression. In the course of war against Japan, the communists got
the opportunity of their lifetime. With their discipline, mass support and a revolutionary
(Marxist) ideology, they consolidated their position. And when the Second World
War ended (1945), the communists got hold of arms and ammunitions surrendered
by the Japanese forces with the connivance of Russia. The end of the War was
followed by a civil war in China which lasted for more than three years, in which the
communists under the able leadership of Mao Tse-tung came out victorious. As a
consequence, Chiang Kai-shek and his handful followers were forced to flee to
Formosa, a territory surrendered by Japan in 1945, and on 1 October 1949 the
Chinese People’s Republic was proclaimed.
The Communist Revolution in China derived its strength from nationalism,
economic discontent and resentment of the foreigners. It also satisfied a widespread
desire for orderly government, which the Kuomintang under Chiang Kai-shek had
failed to provide. The Marxist-Leninist ideology gave it a new drive and opened new
directions. Within years, Mao Tsetung, the god-father of the communist revolution,
resurrected China from its centuries of slumber and poverty to a great nation with a
will and vision. Thus, after being pushed around for more than a century, China had
finally stood up.
Impact of the Chinese revolution on world politics
‘The emergence of Communist China was an epoch making event’, as Friedman
characterised it. It fundamentally altered the geo-strategic equation in East Asia.
Indeed, it was a world shattering event. In China, it was the fulfilment of centuries
of aspirations. In Asia, it was a part of national upsurge. In the world, it inaugurated
a major centre of power. It placed enormous human and material resources on the
side of the Eastern Camp and tilted the balance of power in favour of the Soviet
Union. It also led to a new rift in the Western Camp on the question of recognition of
the new regime in China—Britain recognised the Peking regime in 1949, France did
so in 1964 and Canada in 1970, but the USA did so only in 1971.
The communist take over in China also led to the extension of the doctrine of
containment from Europe to Asia, to widening of system of alliances and military
pacts and to acceleration of the race of armament. It contributed to material change
in the US policy towards India and Japan. By 1949 America placed Japan and India
in the forefront in place of ‘nationalist China’ as a counter-weight against Mao’s
China. With the same end in view, America was also obliged to shore up reactionary
regimes in South Korea, Philippines, Thailand, Taiwan, and also to give assistance to

Foreign Policies of under -developed areas as the latter provided a fertile ground for the growth of
Various Countries
communism.
But, being hailed as a new revolutionary model, it also posed a challenge to
the leadership of the communist world. The monolithic solidarity of the communist
NOTES commonwealth was crumbled. The Soviet Union no longer remained the sole leader
of the communist world. In Peking a second Rome was born. In effect, Mao’s
Peking proved a more serious challenge to Moscow than Tito’s Belgrade.
Guiding principles of the Chinese foreign policy
Like that of the Soviet Union, the foreign policy of the communist China was also
oriented to the basic tenets of Marxist-Leninist theories, particularly in its earlier
phase. But the characteristically Chinese ego-centric view of the world and of their
superiority gave Marxism-Leninism a typically Chinese cast. In other words, at the
hands of Mao, Marxism was Sinicised and became a Chinese edition of Marxism-
Leninism. According to Scalapino, the three influences on the Chinese foreign policy
were: traditionalism, nationalism and Marxism. Essentially, the foreign policy of Mao’s
China has been a mixture of Han-imperialism, Chinese nationalism, revolutionary
strategy of Mao Tse-tung and Marxism-Leninism, although Marxism-Leninism was
the basic conceptual framework of China’s foreign policy. The Chinese leaders
during the Mao’s period claimed that their foreign policy was based on ‘scientific
socialism’. For them, it was an instrument in the worldwide struggle of communism
against capitalism. For a long time, they professed that the struggle between socialism
and imperialism (the last phase of capitalism) was inevitable and eternal. It was not
possible to sit on the fence while the struggle goes on. There was no third road.
Neutrality or non-alignment, according to them, was a camouflage. Communism
had to make a commoncause with the nationalist upsurge in the colonies fighting for
liberation.
In the post-Mao period, however, Marxism-Leninism was so watered down
that it became socialism in name only. The slogan of ‘socialism with Chinese
characteristics’ was nothing but ‘market-friendly socialism’—almost a meaningless
term. The new leadership of Deng Xiao-ping abandoned class struggle, people’s
communes, struggle against revisionism, and has adopted commodity production,
market mechanism, private ownership of the means of production and heresy of
heresies—stock exchange. Deng claimed ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics’
to be an alternative both to Leninism and Western style of democracy. Robert A.
Scalapino, an American Sinologist, has described it as a system of ‘authoritarian
pluralism’.
Determinants of the Chinese foreign policy
Shorn of its Marxists garb, the Chinese foreign policy would appear to be simple.
Her foreign policy is largely determined by competing purposes and pressures
generated in a semi-colonial economy and, at the same time, conditioned by the
fixed facts of geography as well as fluid facts of power relationship—the changing
context of the world balance of power. For every nation must adapt its policies,
whatever may be its professed ideology, to the objective realities of immediate
international structure.’ In the sixties and seventies, her foreign policy was torn Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
between the imperatives of real-politik and the dictates of ideology.’ ‘But in the
eighties, the foreign policy roles, which the Chinese leaders see themselves fulfilling,
concerned the strengthening of the regime’s international security, status and influence,
the acquisition of external resources for its modernisation and the spread of its own NOTES
ideology.’ The role of ideology in the post-Mao period went on diminishing and is
now confined to a camouflage.
Objectives of the Chinese foreign policy
In the earliest phase, the Chinese leaders were guided by the following objectives:
(1) A firm alliance with the Soviet Union, (2) a deep suspicion of the West, (3) a
special sensitivity about imperialist encroachment on their borders, (4) an aspiration
to recover lost territories regarded as Chinese. The means adopted to realise these
objectives were: (a) Building up of Chinese Military power—Mao believed that,
‘Political power comes out of the barrel of a gun.’ No wonder, China has conducted
more than 40 nuclear tests, (b) Effective use of diplomacy. Luckily, in Chou En-lai,
China found an accomplished negotiator. China tried to exploit the anti-Western
feeling in the Third World. Hence the slogan was: ‘East Wind vs. West Wind’, until
the seventies, followed by ‘Rich North vs. Poor South (c) War and aggression to be
employed to wrest lost territories. Hence the attack on Tibet (1950) and on India
(1962), claiming about 90,000 sq miles in the Eastern sector of the India-China
border, (d) Plan for long struggle to achieve world revolution. The plan included
armed struggle, subversion, political penetration and support to war of national
liberation, (e) Military assistance and economic aid to friendly countries, like Pakistan,
Tanzania, Zambia, etc.
Apparently, the track of the Chinese foreign policy objectives has been
changing with the passage of time. The Twelfth Congress (1982) of the Communist
Party of China set up goals for the eighties. It pledged China to oppose international
hegemonism, neo-colonialism and racialism and to work for world peace. In substance,
the new line moved China to the Middle (almost equidistant) position between the
two superpowers. But when one of the superpowers (the Soviet Union) went out of
existence, China herself began to aspire for a superpower status.
All told, notwithstanding several ideological somersaults and many turns and
twists in her external behaviour, China’s main foreign policy objective has remained
unchanged—to affirm her place in the world in the name of support for world
revolution or in the garb of anti-imperialism or anti-hegemonism.
Different Phases of the Chinese Foreign Policy Since 1949
Anybody who examines the evolution of Chinese foreign policy is bound to be struck
by the mercurial course of her foreign policy. There have been a series of somersaults
in her foreign policy during the last five decades. It is full of about turns and volte
faces. For the sake of convenience, the history of Chinese foreign policy may be
divided into six phases corresponding to shifts and departures.
• First phase (1949–53): The first phase of the Chinese foreign policy can
be described as a period of consolidation and angry isolation. It was marked
Foreign Policies of by aggressive stance and hawkish posture. This belligerent attitude on the
Various Countries
part of China was quite natural. ‘To a country smarting from the indignities of
a century of abuse and reawakened to a sense of its own pride and strength,
the only logical response left was a belligerent and defiant attitude. The depth
NOTES of humiliation to which a proud, ancient and civilised people are driven can be
understood by those who have been through the hell.’ Thus, the dynamics of
its foreign policy in this phase stemmed from carefully nurtured memories of
a century of shame and humiliation. China’s past glory and its modern
humiliation stood in awful contrast.
Moreover, in this era, China was a pawn of bloc politics. Being a leading
member of the Soviet bloc, it was natural on her part to be anti-West. Again,
only few Western nations gave recognition to her and they also put obstacles
to her entry to the United Nations. A partner of the Soviet Union, she made
efforts to expand communism in Afro-Asian countries in cooperation with
Russia. She gave full support to wars of liberation and organised a united
front against Western imperialism.
In the direction of national reorganisation, China made two demands: (1) To
end the existing foreign influence in the Chinese society. Accordingly, she
demanded the cancellation of all foreign concession and privileges. All
foreigners were asked to leave China forthwith, (2) To get back all those
Chinese territories which were snatched by the imperialists during the semi-
colonial days. Another notable instance of hostile attitude was reflected in the
‘rape of Tibet’. China attacked Tibet and captured it in 1950. To be sure, it
was a case of naked aggression against a country which had been enjoying
virtual sovereignty since times immemorial. She also intervened in the Korean
war (1950–53), when the UN forces under the American command crossed
the 38th Parallel, while driving out North Korean invaders. She rejected all
talks of truce until she saw no chance of victory, and accepted the ceasefire
only in 1953. But after the Korean war, she had to abandon the aggressive
stance, as her mentor (the Soviet Union) stood for ‘peaceful coexistence , in
the post-Stalin period. Apart from this, the economic consequences of the
Korean war also compelled her to opt for the Soviet approach. Besides, to
make the five-year plan for economic development successful she had to
enter into trade agreements with a number of countries.
• Second phase (1954–56): The second phase of the Chinese foreign policy
can be described as a period of partial peaceful coexistence. It marked the
end of ‘angry isolation’. In this period, there was a partial thaw in China’s
relationship with the rest of the world. The year 1954 was indicative of her
efforts to break the self-imposed isolation. China now began to appreciate
the Indian policy of non-alignment. Both Mao and Chou paid tributes to Nehru
for his neutrality in the Korean war. In 1954, Chou En-lai paid a visit to New
Delhi and signed an agreement with Nehru on Tibet, and endorsed the
Panchsheel Doctrine. Since 1954 China began to play an active role in world
affairs. She got invitation to attend the Geneva Conference of 1954, convened

to resolve the Indo-China problem. It was at this Conference where China Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
made her international debut. By these conciliatory moves, she reaped a rich
dividend in diplomacy and earned the goodwill of several Afro-Asian countries.
At the Bandung Conference of Afro-Asian countries (1955) China emerged
as the most notable invitee. Her representative, Chou En-lai, because of his NOTES
suave and polished diplomacy, became the star attraction of this conference.
In fact, it was a sort of premiere for him on the international stage. In order to
gain more popularity and credibility, China sent about thirty-five diplomatic
missions to Afro-Asian countries. Besides, she established friendly relations
with Pakistan, Indonesia and Japan.
• Third phase (1957–69): The third phase of Chinese foreign policy is known
for new militancy in China’s external behaviour. She reverted to aggressive
posture once again. She not only moved towards greater militancy but also
moved away from close collaboration with the Soviet Union. Perhaps, Soviet
Union’s spectacular achievements in technological field, such as launching of
Sputnik and first manned satellite and intercontinental rocket, had an electrifying
effect on the Chinese morale and leadership. While attending the fortieth
anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution in Moscow (November 1957), Mao
gave candid expression to China’s new militancy. He declared: ‘If the East
Wind fails to dominate the West Wind, the West Wind will dominate the East
Wind.’ Mao felt that the momentum of history was in favour of the East Wind
and advocated ceaseless struggle against Western imperialism without any
relaxation. But Khrushchev remained unimpressed and unconvinced with
Mao’s call for confrontation. This difference of opinion marked the beginning
of the rift between the two communist giants.
In any case, Mao went ahead with his plan of aggrandisement all alone, and
launched his aggressive adventures. For instance, China bombarded off-shore
islands—Matsu and Quemoy (1958), forcibly annexed Tibet and destroyed
her autonomy (1959), displayed an inflexible attitude in the Lebanese crisis
(1958) and Laotian crisis (1959). She also did not relish the Camp David
meeting between Khrushchev and Eisenhower (1959). Finally, in 1962, she
launched a full scale attack on India and occupied about 15,000 sq miles in
Ladakh, thereby flouting all understandings reached in the past between Chou
and Nehru. To top it all, she gatecrashed the exclusive nuclear club in 1964.
She also started diplomatic offensive towards African countries. Moreover,
she attempted economic diplomacy on a significant scale in the sixties, and
the Tanzanian railway was its most prestigious effort. Chou En-lai visited ten
African countries in 1963-64. During the visit, he tried to enlist the African
support on the Sino-1ndian border dispute, besides countering the Soviet
influence on the African continent. However, his efforts ultimately came to
naught. Chou-En-lai, instead, antagonised this part of the world by his
overblown rhetoric and his undiplomatic, though inadvertent, remark at Dares
Salam. ‘Africa is on the verge of revolution and revolutionary prospects are
excellent throughout Africa.’ Thus, his African safari ultimately turned out to
be a diplomatic disaster. As regards Asia, Chou visited Burma, Pakistan and
Foreign Policies of Sri Lanka and established diplomatic relations with eighteen new countries in
Various Countries
1965. Incidently, she openly sided with Pakistan in the Indo-Pak war of 1965.
After the failure of Sino-Soviet talks of 1963-64, China began to move
away openly from the Soviet Camp. Mao did not share Khrushchev’s
NOTES assessment of Western strength. For Mao, America was just a ‘paper tiger’,
but to Khrushchev, she was a ‘tiger with nuclear teeth’. By the middle of
1965, China’s debacle became distinct and it was clear that her foreign policy
had gone awry .She had antagonised both the superpowers. Africa was lost
to her and in Asia, too, she was more feared than respected after the India-
China war.
The ruthless persecution of the communist party of Indonesia and the
subsequent ouster of President Soekarno (1965) caused a serious damage to
Chinese image among the Afro-Asian countries. That is why her efforts to
convene a Bandung like conference in 1965 did not get a favourable response.
These diplomatic debacles alongwith the failure of ‘Great Leap Forward’
programme at home, made China inward-looking for some time to come. She
was isolated and withdrawn. This mood was followed by a decade of what is
called ‘Cultural Revolution’ .The Cultural Revolution (1966-76) in fact was
an eruption of ideological fervour, mass hysteria and, ultimately, outright
brutality (about 20 million people were dead and 100 million were uprooted
and ruined because of gory bloodbath of collectivisation). In essence, the
Cultural Revolution was a power-cum-ideological struggle between Liu Shao-
qui and Mao Zedong as the former tried to side step the latter after the failure
of ‘great leap forward’ experiment.
• Fourth phase (1969–76): The fourth phase was marked by a serious
domestic upheaval. The Ninth Congress of the Communist Party of China
(1969) constituted a water-shed in China’s foreign policy. The line adopted at
this Congress meant a full break with the general line of 1956. It gave a call
to fight unitedly against both Western imperialism and ‘Social imperialism’. In
1970, this call was converted into cohesion of all small and medium states
against the superpowers. This rethinking was hastened by clashes on the
border (1969) between the armed forces of the two communist giants. During
this period the Chinese policy was marked by a desire to improve relations
with all countries not aligned or friendly with the Soviet Union, including the
United States. Fortunately, many developments in the field of international
politics facilitated the application of the new policy adopted by China after
1969.
The most dramatic developments was the desire on the part of
Washington for rapprochement with Beijing. In 1970-71, several factors made
Sino-American reconciliation easy. If Ussuri border clash frightened China
and forced her to mend her fences with the US, a graceful withdrawal from
Vietnam compelled America to improve her relations with China. Washington
realised that war in Vietnam could hardly be wound up without China’s support.
Hence, President Nixon gave top priority to normalisation of relations with

China. In the meantime, the Bangladesh issue and the Indo-Pak war of 1971 Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
as its sequel, hastened the process of reconciliation between China and the
United States. This reconciliation was sealed with the visit of President Nixon
to Beijing in February 1972. China also succeeded in getting entry to the
United Nations in October 1971 with the US support. In January 1973, China NOTES
agreed to sign the Paris Ceasefire Agreement on Vietnam.
In 1973, the Tenth Congress of the Communist Party of China made
another Somersault by showing total indifference to interests of national
liberation movements, and by concentrating its struggle against the Soviet
Union as the only enemy. Now Mao divided the political world into three
parts: (1) Two Superpowers, (2) Developed countries—both socialist and
non-socialist and (3) Underdeveloped and newly independent states. China
claimed that she was the leader of the Third group of states. In other words,
the Third World became China’s natural constituency.
In the Fourth National People’s Congress (January 1975), China
reaffirmed to set up a United Front against the enemies of world socialism.
She began to treat the EEC and the NATO as Second Front against the
Soviet Union. Interestingly, the EEC soon became China’s second largest
trading partner after Japan.
• Fifth phase post-Mao period (1976–1978): The year 1976 snatched in
quick succession both Chou En-lai and Mao Zedong on 8 January and
9 September, respectively from the Chinese scene. Mao was succeeded by
his own nominee, Hua Guofeng as the Chairman of the Communist Party of
China. Hua also held the post of Prime Ministership until he was replaced by
Zhao Ziyang (September 10, 1980). Hua declared to follow Mao’s policy
both in domestic as well as foreign field and repeated the call for launching
the broadest possible united front against the hegemonism of superpowers,
and strengthen the proletarian internationalism. In 1976, the Beijing Government
agreed to resume diplomatic relations (suspended since 1962) with India.
• Sixth phase-Deng period (1978–1997): In another domestic development,
the eleventh Congress (1977) of the Communist Party of China restored
Deng Xiaoping to all the posts held by him earlier. By 1978, Deng emerged as
the most powerful leader in Chinese politics. It is notable that in, subsequent
years, even without holding any official position, Deng could maintain his
controlling authority by putting his own men on key-posts.
Deng was known as a ‘Capitalist Reader’ since the days of Mao. He
unveiled a liberal phase in 1979, and reemphasised socialism as an ideology
of modernisation. He set post-Mao China on the path of reform and
modernisation, thereby opening a cloistered society to the outside world. His
new line was summed up as four modernisations — agriculture, industry,
science and technology and defence. In short, development became China’s
new ideology, Pragmatism and rational method of economic development
became a substitute of ideology. In Deng’s famous aphorism, ‘It does not
matter what the colour of cat is so long it catches a mice. He gave preference
Foreign Policies of to market over Marx. He became the architect of market socialism, which he
Various Countries
called ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics’. Later on, at the 14th Congress,
Deng inaugurated what may be called his double-edged weapon by which he
wanted to unshackle the Chinese economy from Marxian dogma, but without
NOTES disturbing the supremacy of the Communist Party. As such, his new description
for the development of China was: authoritarian politics and liberal economics.
A writer has likened this system to ‘driving a car with one foot on the
accelerator for economic reforms and another foot on the break for political
control’.
The leadership of the Chinese Communist Party is still in no mood to
entertain political pluralism. This was clearly demonstrated in the Tiananmen
Square episode of June 1989. Deng’s crash modernisation programme was
immensely successful. It quadrupled China’s economy by 1993. It is remarkable
that when most of the world’s leading economies are showing down trend,
the Chinese economy is in robust health.
Apart from the sustained economic growth, Deng’s China also acquired
a large deterrent of nuclear arsenel and a growing sphere of influence. As
regards the foreign policy framework of Deng’s period, it becomes manifest
only after the 12th Congress (September 1982). Since then it has been
characterised by pragmatism and flexibility. The revolutionary rhetoric of the
Maoist has been replaced by a more conventional approach to diplomacy.
Estimate of Deng’s regime
If Mao Zedong liberated China from feudalism, Deng liberated it from the
shackles of command economy. In comparison, Deng has out-shown,
outclassed and outlived Mao as a leader. Deng’s period is assured as a
watershed, both as constituting a sharp break with the previous Maoist era on
the one hand, and on the other, signaling China’s intention to bring to an end
its global islolation and thereby become an active player in world affairs.
Undeniably, Deng played an exemplary role in turning China from an in-
world-looking command economy to an outward-looking market-oriented
economy. Although there may not be any fundamental departure in the Chinese
foreign policy in the post-Mao period, yet there is a marked change in emphasis
and style. Now China has come still closer to America and its differences
with Russia are resolved. Besides, it has succeeded in improving its relations
with all big and small nations all over the world.
• Seventh phase post-Deng period (1997): With the death of Deng Xiaoping
in February 1997, the third generation of Chinese leadership with Jiang Zemin
as President and Zhu Ronji as the Prime Minister of China has taken over.
The new leadership is functioning under the guidance of Dengism. It is believed
that China will continue the modernisation drive. Presently, China is working
on a new Five Year Plan for national economic and social development.
According to this plan, as claimed by Li Peng on his visit to India (January 13,
2001), ‘China’s GDP by 2010 will double that of the year 2000.’ Li Peng the
second most powerful leader in China, also declared that China will continue
to implement the policy of peaceful reunifaction with Taiwan—‘one country, Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
two systems’, and that it will be opposed to hegemonism and will never seek
hegemony itself. ‘ Jiag Zemin is following Deng’s latest dictum: ‘Loosen up
on the outside, tighten up on the inside.’ Significantly, China is enjoying both
political stability as well as economic prosperity in complete contrast to its NOTES
erstwhile red rival.
Sino-Soviet relations
The changing course of Sino-Soviet relations provides a fascinating case study. The
former Soviet Union and China has been the two great giants of the communist
world. Their relations as socialist nations started in 1949 with a note of goodwill and
friendship. An alliance was made between the two countries in 1950 under the
Treaty of Friendship, Alliance and Mutual Assistance for a period of thirty years. In
1957, Mao had declared: ‘There is no force on earth which can separate us.’ Similarly,
in 1961, Cheu En-Iai had also reiterated: ‘The great solidarity and friendship between
us will live forever even as the Yangtze and the Volga will flow eternally.’ But
ironically enough, within a short span their relationship got ruptured and ruined without
repair until the end of eighties.
Contrary to popular perception, ‘the Sino-Soviet dispute did not originate in
the after-math of the 20th Congress of the CPSU (1956). It could be traced to the
relations between the communist parties of the two countries even during 1920-50.’
Nevertheless, the Sino-Soviet dispute gained fresh impetus in the late fifties. As a
matter of fact, it was their contrasting historical experience which sowed the seeds
of conflict. The Soviet design to keep China a junior partner in the socialist bloc and
its efforts to seek détente with the West even at the expense of China, was an
additional factor that led to a rift in the Sino-Soviet relations. The Euro-centric policies
of Stalin’s successors invalidated the Treaty of Security Guarantee (1950). With
détente as a cornerstone of the Soviet policy and its refusal to build up China’s
military strength beyond a modest level forced China to delink itself from the Soviet
Camp and build up an independent centre of power.
Beginning in 1956, the relationship underwent a series of shocks—
Khrushchev’s attack on Stalin, unrest in Eastern Europe, belated support on Taiwan
straits, refusal to share nuclear technology, withdrawal of Soviet technicians, support
to India on Sino-Indian border dispute, rivalry over leadership of the communist
movement worldwide and Moscow’s appeasement of Washington. However, the
final break was symbolised by open clash on the Sino-Soviet border in 1969.
Brief History of the Sino-Soviet Schism
Although the study of Sino-Soviet dispute has lost its topical importance in view of
the prevalent correct relations between the two countries, a brief survey of this
dispute is desirable to understand the present and future of their relationship. After
all, the past is too fresh to be ignored by them in their approach to each other.
The major issues between the two countries were: (1) Leadership of the
communist world, (2) Path of socialist development, (3) Different perceptions over
the relative strength of the capitalist and the socialist world, and (4) The boundary
Foreign Policies of dispute. For the sake of convenience, the study of Sino-Soviet dispute has been
Various Countries
divided into four periods as follows:
• First period: The era of friendship and cooperation (1949–59): This
period may be called as a period of honeymoon or an era of détente. It is a
NOTES well known fact that the Soviet Union was the first country to give recognition
to the People’s Republic of China at its birth. In February 1950, Mao went to
Moscow to seek the Soviet blessings. On 24 February 1950 three treaties
were signed between the two countries. (1) Treaty of Friendship, (2) Treaty
to return the Chinese territory of Chang Chun Railway, Port Arthur and Dorian,
(3) Treaty to provide massive aid to China. Apart from this, the Soviet Union
made ceaseless attempts to get China a seat in the United Nations. The Sino-
Soviet friendship in this period was natural, as both needed each other’s
support and cooperation. If for China, it was a period of preparation for great
power status for which the Soviet help was a must, for the Soviet Union, it
was the period of Cold War at its zenith and hence she required material and
moral support of China against the Western Camp, which was far superior in
weapon technology at that time. Undoubtedly, the two greats put together,
bound by common ideology and common boundaries formed a monolithic
giant. Hence, the underlying tension between the two countries was kept
under leash until 1956. In short, the period was marked by China leaning on
one side.
• Second period the era of conflict and competition (1960–69): After
Stalin’s second death in 1956, China began to claim equal status with the
Soviet Union by virtue of Mao’s seniority to Khrushchev—the new leader of
the Soviet Union. Moreover, Mao was opposed to the policy of de-Stalinisation
which Khrushchev inaugurated in the 20th Party Congress (1956), as Mao
himself was a seeker of personality cult in China. Further, Mao looked to
Khrushchev’s road to the summit of Camp David and Paris with suspicion.
Yet not until 1959, the quarrel became acute. In 1959, the Soviet Union ridiculed
China’s Great Leap Forward policy and People’s Communes Schemes,
launched by Mao in 1958. The nuclear accord with China was also torn up by
the Soviet Union by June 1959. In 1960, the Soviet technicians and advisers
(ten thousand) attached to China’s development projects were unilaterally
withdrawn. Moreover, the foreign aid was suspended and the trade turnover
was also reduced.
But ‘the quarrel flared up in the fall of 1961 and became fully apparent at the
22nd Congress of the CPSU (1961). Later on, the Cuban crisis, the Sino-
Indian war, the struggle for supremacy within the socialist bloc added to the
sharpness of the conflict, turning hitherto supposed partners into arch rivals.’
The disastrous dip in the Sino-Soviet relations occurred in 1962, when the
Soviet Union sided with India on the Sino-Indian border question. The final
divorce, however, took place in 1963 after China’s refusal to sign the Nuclear
Test Ban Treaty (1963). The year of 1963 signalled the beginning of the cold
war between the two communist giants. In 1969, the cold war developed into

hot war when their force clashed on the Ussuri border. With this clash their Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
relationship touched its nadir.
Nature of dispute between China and the Soviet Union
The differences between the two communist giants went on multiplying over NOTES
the years and acquired a manifold character—ideological, political and
territorial.
ο Ideological differences: Some of the theoretical differences between
the two communist giants were as follows:
– Inevitability of war—China at that time stood for revolutionary line
and war. Mao contended that if the First World War gave the
Bolshevik Revolution and the Second World War gave the Chinese
Revolution, the Third World War would give world victory to
communism
– Export of Revolution—China championed the revolutionary line of
action and strongly rejected the capitalist road to socialism
– Disarmament—China was opposed to all efforts at disarmament
until she herself achieved parity with the superpowers in terms of
weapon technology. Incidentally, she signed the NPT only in 1992
– Peaceful Coexistence—China branded the Soviet Union as
revisionist and instead stood for militant coexistence, as peaceful
coexistence was anti-revolutionary to China. On the other hand,
Khrushchev and his successors stood for peaceful coexistence.
These theoretical differences led to open polemics between the
two sides after the failure of 1963-dialogues.
ο Political differences: After China acquired sufficient muscle power,
the Sino-Soviet conflict became more geopolitical than ideological. It
became actually a contest for leadership in the communist world and
the Third World and also for power status. The present and future Sino-
Soviet relations, therefore, should be assessed in the context of the
calculus of power obtaining in the contemporary world, as lately
geopolitics has taken precedence over ideology.
ο Territorial dispute: Besides ideological and political differences, the
territorial dispute added a new dimension to the Sino-Soviet conflict.
China has the longest border (5,813 miles) with the Soviet Union. As
early as 1953, China had put forward claims of vast territories in Siberia
and Soviet Central Asia which were formerly under the hegemony of
Chinese emperors, but were annexed by the Czar dynasty either by
force or by fraud under the unequal treaties. China had claimed 1.5
million sq kms of territory from the Soviet Union. However, the main
issue was over the boundary line in the two rivers—Ussuri and Amur.
In 1969, the border dispute developed into an armed conflict between
the forces of the two countries on the question of Chenpao island near
Ussuri river. After this clash about one million troops were kept on each
side of the border by both the countries. It is significant that China
Foreign Policies of under Deng renounced the claims over unequal treaties and toned down
Various Countries
her demand to few square miles and the division of the boundary rivers
as per the midstream (Thalweg) principle, since conceded by the Soviet
Union under the regime of Gorbachev. As a matter of fact, the border
NOTES dispute was more a symptom rather than a substantial issue.
• Third period: The decade of Divore (1969–79): During this period, the
two communist giants fought the cold war with full fury. Ironically the ‘first
love’ became the ‘first hate’ during this period. The period also witnessed
China’s leaning to the other side—the Western Camp. This volte face on the
part of China brought about a geopolitical revolution and greatly undermined
the strength of the Soviet bloc. This phase of the Sino-Soviet relations remained
frozen for about a decade. But by the fall of 1979, the ice was broken and
both the countries started normalisation parleys, rectifying the excesses and
distortions. But the talks had to be broken off after the Afghan crisis and
could not be resumed until 1982, although President Brezhnev had announced
at the 26th Congress of the CPSU (1981) the Soviet readiness to negotiate
around improvement in relationship between the two red leviathans.
• Fourth period: The era of reconciliation and restitution (1982
onwards): Since March 1982, Moscow again started sending feelers to
resurrect the suspended dialogue, which Beijing equally reciprocated. As the
process gathered momentum after several rounds of talk, the adversarial
perceptions that had characterised their relations for over two decades began
to give way and thereafter started what can be called as Operation De-
freeze. But certain issues like Vietnamese intervention in Kampuchea and
Soviet intervention in Afghanistan stood as stubborn obstacles. The post-
Brezhnev leadership continued the process of repair and reconciliation but
the pace was quickened further with the arrival of Gorbachev and his ‘new
thinking’. China demanded withdrawal of Soviet 65,000 troops from Mongolia
and from Afghanistan and Vietnamese troops from Kampuchea. Gorbachev
vigorously addressed himself to all these obstacles. His policy of disengagement
and withdrawal of troops removed these hurdles by the end of eighties.
Gorbachev also visited Beijing in May 1989 and accelerated the process of
state and party level relationship. During this visit the two countries committed
themselves on the non-use of force to resolve their differences on the border
dispute, accepting the Thalweg Principle and also agreed to reduce their
forces on the Sino-Soviet border. By the end of 1999, China and Russia
settled all their border disputes except some small island territories.
Undoubtedly, since the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet
Union, the development of Sino-Russian relations has been quite smooth. Both the
great powers have resolved many historical disputes and irritants with an objective
of building and strengthening further ‘constructive partnership to strategic cooperative
partnership’. The recent Sino-Russian Treaty for twenty years on 16 July 2001
marks the permanent burial of Sino-Russian rift.

But it would be wrong to expect any dramatic change which may lead to Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
realignment of the two powers. Perhaps, the Sino-Soviet (Russian) relations may
never be the same as in early fifties, because close bonds, once broken, are hard to
weld. Restitution never means renewal of old relationship. Nevertheless, it can be
reasonably anticipated that they may come closer, as ideological hurdles or personality NOTES
clashes no longer stand in the way. But none can ignore the fact that the elementary
fact of geography necessarily imposes limits on the degree of Sino-Russian detente.
The geopolitical contest is likely to persist between China and Russia—the legal
successor of the Soviet Union. All told, it would be unrealistic to foresee a radical
improvement in the relationship between China and Russia over the next few years.
‘No significant Sino-Soviet (Russian) detente is likely to occur, because both are
likely to compete for influence in the Asian region’, despite the fact that both have
repeatedly declared their intention to forge a strategic partnership to pose a challenge
to the US hegemony.
Review of the Chinese foreign policy
Looking at the mercurial course of the China’s foreign policy one is bound to be
intrigued by her external behaviour like a ‘notorious prostitute’ or ‘perfidious Albion’.
Perhaps no other foreign policy has seen so many voltefaces, ideological somersaults
and postural turnabouts. In other words, the foreign policy of China has been marked
by radical reversals and dramatic departures. Hence it has been quite puzzling and
unpredictable. Just in three decades, her foreign policy has taken three U-turns—
from alliance to cultivation of a middle power bloc to an unwritten alignment with
the US. China has literally observed the dictum that ‘in international affairs there
are no permanent friends or enemies.’ No wonder, her eternal ally (the Soviet Union)
became her implacable enemy and the arch enemy (the USA) became the best
friend not long back.
Nevertheless, China’s foreign policy cannot be described as devoid of principles
and objectives. Correctly speaking, it could be described as one of ‘principled
flexibility’. In fact, there was never any compromise on fundamental objectives. At
the root of so many somersaults there has been cold, often cynical, calculation of
China’s strategic interest. She has always put national interest above ideology. As a
matter of fact, she has been pursuing in the last thirty years the single goal of
restoring China. She believes passionately that she has a right to be in the centre of
things in international affairs. She wants to be treated at par with other great powers
of the world. Thus, behind the pronounced ideological smoke-screen, China has
been seeking a power status commensurate with her overall strength. The ideological
mask of Marxism-Leninism has been nothing but an exercise in myth making.
‘Marxism, with all its pseudo left revolutionary phraseology, has only sought to provide
an ideological cover to great power designs of the Peking rulers.’ She, therefore,
concealed her real aim under radical-looking catch phrases with terrific mass appeal,
such as East Wind Versus West Wind, the World Village versus the World Town,
proletarian Internationalism , United Front etc.’
But lately, after three long decades China’s policies are assuming a new
nationalistic and pragmatic outlook. Her current international stance is marked by
Foreign Policies of the quest for balance in her foreign relations. At the 12th Congress the Chinese
Various Countries
Communist Party (1982) Deng had declared: ‘Independence and self-reliance have
always been and will forever be our basic stand.’ Commenting on this new posture,
V. V. Pranjpe observed: ‘At long last China is changing in favour of an independent
NOTES nationalistic policy and in the process hopefully reverting to the old Chinese way of
doing things modestly, moderately, reasonably and realistically, prudently and patiently.’
To sum up, the central aim of China today is to modernise her economy and
emerge as a superpower by the middle of the next century. Already in a recent
report, the World Bank has said that the ‘Chinese Economic Area’—China, Hong
Kong and Taiwan taken as a single economic entity—was arguably becoming the
fourth or the third (as per IMF calculation its GDP is 2.35 trillion dollars) growth pole
of the global economy and that this area will rank far ahead of both Germany and
Japan in GDP by 2002. Some current optimists predict that within a generation or so,
a country once dismissed as the Sick Man of Asia could have the largest economy
in the world.’ Already, China is the largest recipient of FDI ($45 bn) and leads the
world in exports ($250 bn). It is unarguably the dominant power in the region and
one of the major global powers in the world.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

13. What are the factors that impart essentially a dynamic character to the
international milieu within which a state has to formulate its external policy?
14. State the keystone of Government of India’s policy towards the ethnic
conflict in Sri Lanka.
15. Which American policy was the first step in the direction of containment
of communism- in fact, of the Soviet Union?
16. Who is known as the god-father of the Chinese communist revolution?
17. Which principle has become the third arrow to Britain’s bow in international
relations?
2.7 SUMMARY
• The foreign policy of a country, often referred to as the foreign relations

policy, comprises self-interest strategies adopted by the state to protect its
national interests and achieve its goals in the international scenario.
• The five main objectives of a foreign policy are protecting territorial integrity
of the country, maintenance of links with other member of international
community, promotion and furtherance of national interests, promotion of
economic interests of the country and the enhacing of the influence of the
state either by expansion or reduction of influence of other states.

• The various factors involved in the shaping the foreign policy are: historical Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
factors, population factor, economic development, type of government, natural
resources, industrial development, ideological factor, military strength,
geographical factor and public opinion etc.
• National power is the strength of the state to do what it likes internally and NOTES
externally. National power is the power or the capacity of a state with the
domestic and foreign policy as effectively as possible to realize its national
objectives.
• There are various elements of national power: moral, technology, ideology,
leadership, military strength etc.
• National interest is the most crucial concept in international relations. It is the
key concept in foreign policy as it provides the material on the basis of which
foreign policy is made.
• Among the varied techniques that are used by the state to interact with its
citizen and as a part of foreign policy is the instrument of propaganda. Simply
defined, propaganda can be explained as the communication instrument that
involves the psychological manipulation, command and domination through
which the authority of a State exercises control over its citizen and other
states.
• Although the term diplomacy is not easy to define, it is generally considered
an art and practice of conducting negotiations among state representatives. It
is, hence, mostly referred to as an instrument of foreign policy implemented
to achieve specific goals of countries and organizations.
• Various researches have come up with various different conceptualization of
diplomacy for example Harold Nicholson, A.L. Kennedy among others.
• The Indian foreign policy has some distinctive character of its own. Its
uniqueness lies in the fact that after achieving independence (1947), it chose
to follow an independent (non-aligned) foreign policy in a world surcharged
with Cold War alignment. Apart from refreshing originality, it has shown a
rare consistency and a remarkable continuity.
• The major objectives guiding the British foreign policy since 1945 are: (1) to
enrich and strengthen her economy; (2) to keep her military strength in
proportion to her resources; (3) to have political influence in her ex-colonies,
by large scale investment; (4) to support democracy and democratic institutions
all over the world; (5) to stand for stability and order in world’s situation; and
(6) to play a leading role on the Continent (Europe) and a prominent role in
the European Community or EU. The last one has undergone a change with
the Brexit in the year 2016.
• In terms of industry, agriculture, finance, commerce, gross national product,
per capita income, scientific discoveries, technological inventions, techno-
scientific manpower, defence outfit and, above all, nuclear capability, the

Foreign Policies of USA is a pre-eminent world power. In short, today the United States of
Various Countries
America has become ‘hyperpower’, a ‘unipolar globocop, dollar dictator and
world’s ‘only indispensable nation’. No wonder, Washington happens to be
the common denominator in almost every high-profile peace process.
NOTES • The foreign policy of the country has undergone several changes under the
leadership of different presidents like Kenndey, Nixon, Johnson, Ford, Carter,
Reagan, Clinton, Bush and Obama.
• China has been a slumbering giant due to degenerate dynasties, corrupt
administration, famines and floods, and lack of communication, she has always
regarded herself as the centre of the world. She has the middle kingdom,
complex and Sino-centric obsession, apart from ethno-centric pride. She sees
herself as the hub of civilisation.There have been varied changes in its foreign
policy in both pre and post-Mao period.
2.8 KEY TERMS
• Foreign Policy: It is the policy of a country in pursuit of its national interests

in global affairs.
• Geostrategy: It is a type of foreign policy guided principally by geographical
factors as they constrain or affect political and military planning.
• Morale: It is the physical and mental powers of individuals to perform a
particular act.
• Ideology: It is a body of ideas and beliefs concerning certain values and
usually suggesting a certain political and economic order in order to accomplish
these values.
1. India’s foreign policy primarily focusses on having cordial relations, equality

of all the states, emphasis on the principles of non-alignment and conducting
international relations with equality.
2. National interest and power are the two most important components of a
foreign policy.
3. Possession goals are goals which a foreign policy seeks to achieve in order to
preserve its possessions, while milieu goals are goals which nations pursue in
order to shape favourable conditions beyond their national boundaries.
4. The cultural and historical tradition of a country deeply influences the foreign
policy. People generally possessing a unified common culture and historical
experience can pursue an effective foreign policy because of the support of
all sections of society who share the same values and memories. On the
other hand, a country which is culturally and historically fragmented cannot
pursue an equally effective foreign policy.
5. The basic facts that must be considered by nations for formulating their foreign Foreign Policies of
Various Countries
policy are geo-strategic situations, population potential, economic endowments
and ideological environment.
6. The degree of social integration, adequacy of political control and extent of
industrialization, characterize the power of a country. NOTES
7. American isolationism was made possible due to its location between the
Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
8. Diplomacy, balance of power, collective security and war along with sound
economy are the different instruments which can help a nation succeed in the
pursuit of its different stakes or goals.
9. The application of technology implies better products, cheaper products and
more abundant products.
10. The three main types of ideologies as per Morgenthau are Ideologies of status
quo, ideology of imperialism and ambiguous ideologies.
11. Diplomacy of the 21st century is defined as being more proactive,
multidirectional, and innovative than ever before.
12. Moral influence is founded on seven specific diplomatic features: truthfulness,
precision, calmness, modesty, good temper, patience and loyalty.
13. The growth of international law and organization, the mutational impact of
technological advance on international relations and the political evolution of
the nation-state are some of the major factors that impart essentially dynamic
character to the international milieu within which a state has to formulate its
external policy.
14. The keystone of the Government of India’s policy towards the ethnic conflict
in Sri Lanka is a firm commitment to the unity, sovereignity and territorial
integrity of Sri Lanka and to the restoration of a lasting peace through a
peaceful, negotiated settlement that meets the just aspirations of all elements
of Sri Lankan society.
15. The Truman Doctrine is the American policy which was the first step in the
direction of containment of communism- in fact, of the Soviet Union.
16. Mao Tsetung is known as the god-father of the Chinese communist revolution.
17. The Commonwealth of Nations is the second area of interest for Britain,
though lately it has become the third arrow to her bow in international
relations—next to the American and European dimension of policy.
1. What are the five main objectives of a foreign policy of any country?
2. Explain the categorization of core value, middle range and universal long
range objectives of foreign policy.
Foreign Policies of 3. State the various factors which affect the foreign policy of a country.
Various Countries
4. What are the determinants of the American foreign policy?
5. Write a short note on India’s nuclear policy.
NOTES 6. What is the relevance of national interest in International relations?
1. Discuss the phases of the Chinese foreign policy since 1949.
2. Describe the political military grouping known as NATO.
3. Write an essay on India’s foreign policies with regards to the regional dynamics.
4. What is the significance of the Indian Ocean Region?
5. Discuss the dimensions of diplomacy.
6. Describe the change in UK’s foreign policies over the years.
2.11 FURTHER READING
Little, Richard. 2007. Balance of Power in International Relations: Metaphors,

Myths and Models, London: Cambridge University Press.
Bell, Duncan. 2009. Political Thought and International Relations. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Friedman. 1965. An Introduction to World Politics. New York: Macmillan.
Dutt, V. P. 1984. India’s Foreign Policy. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.
Alan P. Dobson and Steve Marsh. 2006. US Foreign Policy since 1945. New
York: Routledge.
Laurence Martin and John Garnett. 1997. British Foreign Policy: Challenges
and Choices for the 21st Century, London: Cassell.

Neocolonialism
UNIT 3 NEOCOLONIALISM
Structure NOTES
3.0 Introduction
3.1 Unit Objectives
3.2 Post-Cold War Politics
3.2.2 Emergence of the Third-World Problems of the Third World Countries
3.2.4 International Economic Imbalance and Structural Adjustment
3.3 Non-Alignment Movement
3.4 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
3.5 Summary
3.6 Key Terms
3.9 Further Reading
3.0 INTRODUCTION
By the end of the twentieth century, most of the countries in the world had gained
independence from the colonial powers. But the end of the colonial era, did not
essentially mean the end of the effect these countries still had on the functioning of
these former colonies. Even after the Cold War, it has been observed that the colonial
powers who had amassed resources both material and financial were now in a very
powerful position to influence the policies adopted by the newly indepdent countries.
This has been termed as neo-colonialism. This has given a rise to the Third World
nations and with them come the issues which have been characterized as Third
World problems. In this unit, you will learn about the post-Cold War politics,
Neocolonialism, Emergence of the Third World problems, Non-Alignment Movement
and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
3.1 UNIT OBJECTIVES

• Discuss post-cold war politics
• Describe the concept of Neocolonialism
• Explain the emergence of third world problems of third world countries
• Discuss the non-alignment movement
• Interpret the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Neocolonialism
3.2 POST-COLD WAR POLITICS
The dissolution of the Soviet Union (USSR) in December 1991 saw the United
NOTES States of America standing as the reigning super power. This period also witnessed
political scientists and thinkers proposing and rewriting theories on world power. In
1993, Samuel P. Huntington proposed that the future fault line will centre on culture
and religion. His theory of the clash of civilizations in the post-Cold War era predicts
alignments and wars among various civilizations — Western, Islamic, Chinese,
Japanese, Orthodox/Russian, Hindu, African, and Latin.
It was Bernard Lewis who first used the term clash of civilization. In his
article in the September 1990, Lewis had forecast war would break out among
major civilization in 2020. His theory states that American troops would have left
South Korea, which would lead to reunification of Korean and lessen the presence
for US troops in Japan. Also, Taiwan and mainland China will reach an accommodation
in which Taiwan continues to have most of its de facto independence but explicitly
acknowledges Beijing’s suzerainty, and with China’s sponsorship be admitted to the
United Nations on the model of Ukraine and Belorussia in 1946. He further predicted
the oil issue in the South China Sea will lead to an attack on Vietnam by the Chinese
troops, wherein the latter would avenge its humiliation in 1979. The US will also get
involved in the war due to its economic interest in the oil fields, helped by Japan. In
response, China will launch a military strike against the American task force.
Negotiations for a ceasefire, led by the UN and Japan, would fail, resulting in Japanese
neutrality and the latter denying the US to use its land as bases for the war. Despite
the quarantine, the US uses the Japanese territory and is inflicted with serious
damages to its naval facilities in east Asia. China continues the war from the mainland
as well as Taiwan and occupies a major portion of Vietnam, including Hanoi.
To this theory, Huntington’s hypothesis claimed the US will avoid escalating
the war due to domestic pressure wherein the public would view it as American
hegemony in Southeast Asia or control of the South China Sea. While China would
be engaged in war, India would attack Pakistan, which would be joined by Iran on
Pakistan’s side. China’s initial success will stimulate major anti-Western movements
in Muslim societies, and pro-Western regimes in Arab nations and the Muslim youth
bulge (males between the age group of sixteen and thirty) would oust Turkey. The
anti-Westernism surge, prompted by the US’ weakness will lead to a massive Arab
attack on Israel, which the much-reduced US Sixth Fleet will be unable to stop.
China’s military success will prompt Japan to change its stand from being
neutral to pro-China and occupy American bases on its territory. Hence, the US will
be forced to evacuate and declare a blockade on Japan. This in turn will lead to
sporadic naval wars between the US and Japan. At the start of the conflict, China
will offer a mutual security pact to Russia (vaguely reminiscent of the Hitler-Stalin
pact), which the latter would reject. Fearing dominance of East Asia by China,
Russia would take an anti-China stand and reinforce its troops in Siberia. This would
lead to revolts by the Chinese settlers there, resulting in China occupying Vladivostok
city, the Amur River valley, and other important regions of eastern Siberia. As the
war between China and Russia spread to central Siberia, uprisings broke out in Neocolonialism
Mongolia, which China had earlier placed under a ‘protectorate’.
Huntington’s hypothetical hostilities, thus, far have been limited to east Asia
and the Indian subcontinent. To expand Huntington’s theory of hostility in a wider
global context, we should look at his hypothesis that further states that China and NOTES
Iran would, through a secret mission, deploy intermediate-range nuclear-capable
missiles in Bosnia and Algeria to intimidate US’ European allies from joining it.
This would have the opposite effect because before NATO can mobilize
Serbia, which seeks to reclaim its historic role as the defender of Christianity against
the Turks, would invade Bosnia. Croatia too would join her, and the two countries
partition Bosnia, take control of the missiles and carry on with their ‘task’ of ethnic
cleansing, which they were forced to stop in the 1990s. While Albania and Turkey
try to rescue the Bosnians, Greece and Bulgaria invade Turkey. Meanwhile, a missile
with a nuclear warhead, launched from Algeria, explodes outside Marseilles, and
NATO retaliates with devastating air attacks on North African targets.
Huntington’s hypothesis divides the global powers between two groups —
the US, Europe, Russia, and India on one side, and China, Japan, and most of Islamic
countries on the other. In case of another world war, the destruction would be
substantial since both sides have nuclear capabilities. But if mutual deterrence is
effective, mutual exhaustion might lead to a negotiated armistice. The West can
defeat China by diverting its attention and supporting insurrections in Tibet, Mongolia,
and by the Uighurs. Simultaneously, the Western forces along with Russia can move
eastward into Siberia for a final assault on Beijing, Manchuria, and the Han heartland.
Huntington further postulates that the warring nations would eventually become
economically, militarily and demographically weak due and the center of world politics
would move southward to countries, such as, Latin American nations, New Zealand,
Mynamar, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Indonesia, and also India in case it survives major
destructions despite its role in the war.
Some political thinkers agree to Huntington’s war theory following the 9/11
attack on the World Trade Center in the US and subsequent American military
action on Afghanistan and Iraq. But as we know, it was to protect its oil fields in Iraq
and the interest of the Israel lobby that the US attacked Iraq in 2003, and not because
of civilizational fault lines. In fact, there has not been any conflict on the lines of
civilizational fault lines for the last century. It is economic greed more than any other
factors that creates and maintains fault lines among nations and peoples and that
drive wars.
It is to be noticed, there is no unifying cord among civilizations apart from
Islam. In Islam, too, there is a great divide between the Shias and the Sunnis. Saudi
Arabia, which is ruled by the Sunnis, has collaborated with its bitter enemy Israel to
fight Iran, a Shia-dominated country. Although Muslims in Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia,
North Africa, and the rest of the Arab world are Sunnis, they have diverse viewpoints,
and many are fighting internal conflicts and secessionists within their country; for
example, the Kurds in Turkey, the Baluchs and Pashtuns in Pakistan, and the Aceh
in Indonesia. These factors are unlikely to unify the Islamic countries.
Neocolonialism Huntington’s hypothesis of a bloody, cataclysmic clash between the Sinic and
Western civilizations is, in fact, quite improbable. The Cold War and in particular the
Nixon government’s theory of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) vis-à-vis the
Soviet Union are testimonies that countries with nuclear power would not indulge in
NOTES war leading to mass destruction. In the post-Cold War world, flags as well as other
symbols of cultural identity, including crosses, crescents, and head gears reflect
cultural acquaintance, which is of great importance to people. People discovered
new but often old identities and marched under new but often old flags which lead to
wars with new but often old enemies.
Religion as the sole cause of the conflicts
While Huntington’s theory of clash of civilizations gives a compelling argument for
the events that took place in the former Yugoslavia, the main argument that was set
forth by him using religion as the sole cause of the conflicts in the region–in what he
regards as ‘fault line’ wars–is erroneous. He did not regard nationalism as a legitimate
cause. But the fact is, nationalism was one of the most important causes of the
unrest in Yugoslavia, which finally led to its disintegration. The mechanisms of
nationalism enabled political elites to mobilize ideology for conflict (Bieber, 1999).
For Huntington, a civilization is the foremost cultural grouping of people and
the level in which people relate themselves with each other and which distinguishes
human species from other species. (Huntington, 1993). Religion is the dominant
factor bonding groups in a civilization. But to understand his argument of a civilization
clash, one cannot do a generalization of people and nations. That is because in his
groupings of civilizations, no civilization is entirely and exclusively homogeneous. No
civilization is monolithic and he has failed to recognize this; nation-states in civilizations
may have similar cultures and customs but they might have different political
ideologies and governmental structures as well as different social structures.
In the former Yugoslavia, Huntington concluded, a cultural fault line existed
within the republic, which separated the Christian Croats and Slovenes (Huntington,
1993) from the rest of Yugoslavia, which were Orthodox Christians, and Muslims.
He goes on to say that religious fundamentalism has more sway over ideology
and fault line wars, which are based on religion, has been the most extended and
violent ones. However, religion did have, in part, a role in the rise of nationalism.
Hence, classifying wars on the basis of ‘fault line’ is fallible. Numerous conflicts
occur between states, but the most influencing instrument is usually ethnic nationalism.
Similarly, religion cannot be regarded as the sole basis of civilizations in the Yugoslav
conflict. Although Huntington grouped civilizations by religion, the cultural
characteristics the people of Yugoslavia shared did not figure in his theory. Religion,
however, divided the region into separate entities, which led to differences in language,
territory and the questioning of ancestry (Bieber, 1999), but that was not the main
cause. Political elites used factors, such as, ethnicity and religion to mobilize nationalist
ideas.
Huntington thesis was that ‘civilization consciousness’ would amplify cultural
differences and that is one of the causes of fault line wars. Unrestricted movement
of people (along with capital) allows economic and political unity which in turn
prevents wars. In the case of Yugoslavia, religion was the dividing factor as the Neocolonialism
people shared a common historical past, language and customs. Intermarriage was
prevalent, the rate was, especially high in Bosnia. Also, people were referred to as
Yugoslav.
Huntington defined a civilization as a group of people having ‘common objective NOTES
elements, such as language, history, religion, customs, institutions, and by the subjective
self-identification of people’ (Huntington, 1993). Hence, his emphasis on the role of
religion in establishing civilizations cannot be held accurate. The Yugoslavian example
highlights that awareness of differences does not necessarily lead to conflict. Their
fight was to assert political and economic independence in Europe, and create a
South Slavic state. The Yugoslav idea of a united state did not mature due to rise of
nationalism, which was rooted in ethnicity, and not because of ‘cultural fault lines’ as
stated by Huntington.
The ruling class put in use a combination of factors, such as, ethnicity, religion
and nationalism in the form of ethnic nationalism to mould local sentiments in their
fight. The frequent changes in border, territory and governance in former Yugoslavia
created a cloudy political atmosphere that was key for the nationalist agenda to spread.
This was one of the reason, in the period leading up to the dissolution of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia, Serbia did not wish for Yugoslavia to break up. Serbia wanted
all Serbs to unit in a single state. This idea gave birth to a new type of conflict between
the Bosnian Muslims and the Bosnian Serbs; the latter controlling about half of the
territory in Bosnia (Republika Srpska). Moreover, civil nationalism could not grow
since the Yugoslav model subverted political unity in states as it grew weak. This led to
the rise of ethnic nationalism as propagated by the leaders of individual states.
Huntington’s theory of fault line wars escalating into major world wars is
based on, what he calls, the ‘kin-country syndrome’. According to this, a country in
war with another country, but of a different civilization, will gather support from
within its own civilization. (Huntington, 1993). However, kin rallying did not happen
in the former Yugoslavia during the 1992 Bosnian war, and there was no clear
defined support for Kosovo when it seceded in 2008.
Most Albanian Kosovars are Muslim, yet not all countries in Huntington’s
Islamic civilization support Kosovo’s independence. States support causes which
are favourable to the nation, such as national interest, and, hence, kin support in a
political atmosphere is not a natural move.
Taking the Bosnian case as an example, Huntington says the Islamic civilization
is inherently faulty and can break into conflicts at the slightest touch. This is so due
to a lack of any centralized authority. He, however, does not explain the role of
America and NATO is bringing the war to an end.
Huntington’s theory, seemingly, could be applied to the events and the eventual
incidents that would happen to the Yugoslav state, but his classifications, criteria and
reasoning in attempting to answer and predict future wars is simply too broad to be
applied to Yugoslavia. Also, such rigid classification on the basis of civilizations cannot
exist, especially, in a situation where free movement of people and capital is taking
place.
Neocolonialism In spite of all the arguments against Huntington’s thesis above, he does have
legitimate points throughout his thesis. While most of his ideas, on the surface, could
be applied to the events and the eventual incidents that would happen to the Yugoslav
state, his classifications, criteria and reasoning in attempting to answer and predict
NOTES future wars is simply too broad to be applied to Yugoslavia. Again, such rigid
civilizations simply cannot exist in Huntington’s terms especially when the movement
of people and capital started to pick up.
His assessment of Yugoslavia as the point in Europe where the cultural fault
lines between three civilizations — Western, Slavic Orthodox and Islam — passes
through and will create conflict is justifiable to an extent. But he has not factored in
a crucial aspect — nationalism — as one of the reasons of the numerous conflicts in
the region and accused Islam of being prone to conflicts and destabilizing. In this
case, because of numerous fallacies in Huntington’s clash of civilizations when
examined in depth, it cannot be used to explain the events that happened in Yugoslavia.
Unipolar and Multipolar World System
For about four decades since the end of World War II, the world was bi-polar—
divided between the control and influence of the USA and the USSR. Collapse of
the USSR saw the USA emerge as the only superpower. The question then emerged,
will the world go back to the days of multi-polarity?
A unipolar world is a situation where a single country acts unilaterally with
little or no assistance from other countries and manoeuvres international issues;
other states or even a combination of states lack the power to prevent it from doing
so. A multipolar world, on the other hand, is one where alliances are formed among
states to tackle international issues. A powerful coalition can resist as well as override
stances taken by smaller groups or states.
A ‘uni-multipolar world’, is one in which resolution of important international
issues call for action by a single superpower in coalition with other major state
powers. However, the superpower holds the right to veto decision and actions taken
by the remaining coalition partners.
The uni-multipolar world we have today has four principal levels. At the top is
the US dominating the global powers economically, militarily, diplomatically,
technologically and culturally. The next level comprises major regional powers whose
extent of dominance is not as wide as the US. These countries have varied degree
of dominance in different spheres; for example, the German-French condominium
in Europe, India in South Asia, and Brazil in Latin America. The following level
consist of regional powers who are less powerful and often compete with the major
regional powers, such as Britain in relation to the German-French combination,
Pakistan in relation to India, and Argentina in relation to Brazil. At the bottom exists
the remaining countries, some of whom might have some regional importance but
cannot be brought along in the existing power structure.
A key thread to this system is the relationship between the top level of the
power structure and the next level, i.e, the superpower and the major regional powers.
There is a constant conflict between the two as the superpower would prefer to
have a unipolar world order, which is resisted by the major regional powers and the
latter would like to believe that global politics was moving towards a multipolar Neocolonialism
world system. A uni-multipolar world, however, would find stability only if these
conflicting pulls can be balanced. However, that may not be possible in the long term
because increasingly it is evident that a unipolar world is not favoured by states in
general and global politics is evolving towards a multipolar system. NOTES
A multipolar, multicivilizational world
A multipolar, multicivilizational world came into existence only after the Cold War
period. Prior to this, contacts between civilizations were intermittent or nonexistent.
In the modern era, beginning from AD 1500, global politics assumed two dimensions.
For more than four hundred years, the nation states of Britain, France, Spain, Austria,
Prussia, Germany, the United States, and others constituted a multipolar international
system within Western civilization where they competed, traded and fought wars
with each other. At the same time, Western nations also expanded, conquered,
colonized, or decisively influenced every other civilization.
During the Cold War, international politics was bipolar and countries were
divided into three sections. There were two power camps divided on the lines of
ideologies. The group led by the US, comprising the wealthy nations in a democratic
social set up, was engaged in political, economic and military competition with a
group of somewhat poorer communist societies associated with and led by the Soviet
Union. The real conflict between these two groups took place in the ‘Third World’
countries, which were the resource points of the former. These ‘Third World countries
were usually poor, lacked political stability, attained independence recently, and claimed
to be nonaligned.
The collapse of the USSR, brought to an end the political order of the Cold
War era. In the new atmosphere people looked for cultural identity. People started
defining themselves through their religion, language history, values, customs, and
institutions. They identify with cultural groups: tribes, ethnic groups, religious
communities, nations, and, at the broadest level, civilizations. Politics became
instrumental not only in advancing people’s interests but also in defining their identity.
Interestingly, nation states retain the position as the principal actors in global
affairs. They are driven not only by the desire of gaining power and wealth, but also
cultural preferences, commonalities, and differences. Today, international politics
witnesses the play of seven to eight major civilizations, mostly from the non-Western
societies. The East Asian societies, for example, are developing their economic
wealth and creating the basis for enhanced military power and political influence. In
the process of asserting their cultural values, these societies tend to overthrow the
Western influence.
The ‘international system of the twenty-first century,’ Henry Kissinger noted,
‘. . . will contain at least six major powers—the United States, Europe, China,
Japan, Russia, and probably India—as well as a multiplicity of medium-sized and
smaller countries.’ Six of these major powers belong to five very different civilizations.
Also, there are important Islamic states whose strategic locations, populations, and
oil resources make them important players in world affairs. In this new world order,
local politics deals with ethnicity while global politics is the politics of civilizations.
Neocolonialism Hence, we can say that the clash of the superpowers is now replaced by clash of
civilizations. The conflicts between the social classes, rich and poor and other
economically defined groups is a story of the past; now people will fight for their
cultural identity. Within civilizations, there would be more tribal wars and ethnic
NOTES conflicts. States would wage wars against each other as would groups from different
civilizations. There is potential threat of escalation of the civilization wars as groups
would rally according to the ‘kin-country syndrome’.
The clashes in Somalia among clans do not possess any threat of expansion.
Similarly, clash of tribes in Rwanda will have limited consequences, till Uganda,
Zaire, and Burundi but not beyond that. However, the clashes of civilizations in
Bosnia, the Caucasus, Central Asia, or Kashmir would have a greater impact. In the
Yugoslav conflicts, Russia gave diplomatic support to the Serbs, and Saudi Arabia,
Turkey, Iran, and Libya provided funds and arms to the Bosnians, not on ideological
ground or economic interests, but due to cultural kinship.
‘Cultural conflicts,’ Vaclav Havel has observed, ‘are increasing and are more
dangerous today than at any time in history.’Agreeing to that, Jacques Delors says,
‘Future conflicts will be sparked by cultural factors rather than economics or ideology.’
And the most dangerous cultural conflicts are those along the fault lines between
civilizations.
What we have seen is that post-Cold War, culture has been a divisive as well
as a unifying force. Despite ideological differences, people united on cultural ground,
as did the two Germanys. Societies united by ideology or historical circumstance but
divided by civilization either come apart, as did the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and
Bosnia, or are subjected to intense strain, as is the case with Ukraine, Nigeria,
Sudan, India, Sri Lanka, and many others. Cooperation among countries sharing a
common culture is both economical and political. International organizations based
on states with cultural commonality, such as the European Union, have witnessed
greater success rates than those that attempt to transcend cultures. If the Iron
Curtain was the central dividing line in Europe for forty-five years, today, the line
has shifted towards the east. It is now the line separating the people of Western
Christianity on the one hand, from the Muslim and Orthodox people on the other.
Civilizations differ on philosophical assumptions, underlying values, social
relations, customs, and overall outlooks on life. And the revival of religion throughout
much of the world is reinforcing these cultural differences. Culture had and has an
impact on politics as well as economics, yet different civilizations have reacted
differently on the development aspect.
East Asian economic success has its source in its culture, as do the difficulties
these societies have had in achieving a stable democratic political systems. If we
take the example of Islamic civilization, we see most of the Muslim countries have
failed to achieve a democratic political system. Developments in the post-Communist
societies of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union are shaped by their
civilizational identities. Countries whose heritage lies in Western Christian have
witnessed democratic polity and more economic development, while for countries
with orthodox values, the development process is uncertain. The prospects in the
Muslim republics are bleak.
The Western civilization is a powerful one which is now on a southward Neocolonialism
slope. It is confronted by non-Western societies, such as Confucian and Islamic
societies, as it tries to assert itself and protect its interests, although some of the non-
Western societies try to emulate or join the West. Hence, it can be said that the
conflict is between the Western civilization against the non-Western ones. The NOTES
predominant patterns of political and economic development differ from civilization
to civilization. Cultural commonalities and differences shape the interests, antagonisms,
and associations of states. International politics has become multipolar and
multicivilizational.
Response to American hegemony
America’s superpowerdom has had different levels of response, mostly negative.
At one level, which is relatively low, there is resentment, envy and fear. At a little
higher level, the resentment may turn into dissent, with other countries refusing to
cooperate with it. There have been instances where resentment has turned into
opposition, with countries attempting to defeat the US policies. The highest level of
response would be collective counteraction, the formation of an anti-hegemonic
coalition of major powers.
In an unipolar world, an anti-hegemonic coalition is not possible, because the
remaining states are too weak to counter it. Similar is the case with multipolar world
because no state is strong enough to provoke it. It is, however, a natural and predicted
development in a uni-multipolar world.
The most important move toward an anti-hegemonic coalition antedates the
end of the Cold War: the formation of the European Union and the creation of a
common European currency. But why has there not been a more broad-based,
active and formal anti-American hegemony coalition?
States may reject and resent US power and wealth but no doubt they benefit
from it.
The international relations theory that predicts balancing under the current
circumstances is a theory developed in the context of the Westphalian system
established in 1648. The member countries in this system recognized the existence
of a common cultural bond starkly different from the Ottoman Turks and others.
The tendency of a superpower to intervene to limit, counter, or shape the
actions of the major regional powers in its region of influence is a major point of
contention. While regional powers do not see it lightly, the secondary regional powers
take the opportunity to unite against the threat they see coming from their region’s
major power.
Implications for the US
So, what does a uni-multipolar world mean to the United States? Americans should
stop acting and talking as if this was a unipolar world. It is unnecessary for the US
to expend effort and resources to achieve that goal. Since the US cannot create a
unipolar world, it is in America’s interest to maintain, for as long as possible, its
position as the only superpower in a uni-multipolar world. In a multipolar system, the
appropriate replacement for the global sheriff is community policing: devolving to
Neocolonialism the major regional powers primary responsibility for the maintenance of international
order in their regions.
In the multipolar order of the 21st century, the major powers would compete,
conflict, and coalesce with each other in various permutations and combinations.
NOTES But this system would be devoid of the tension and conflicts between the superpower
and the major regional powers, a defining feature of a uni-multipolar world. And for
that reason the US could find life as a major power in a multipolar world less
demanding, less contentious, and more rewarding than it has been as the world’s
only superpower.
This picture of the post-Cold War world politics shaped by cultural factors
and involving interactions among states and groups from different civilizations is
highly simplified. It omits many things, distorts some things, and obscures others. Yet
if we are to think seriously about the world, and act effectively in it, some sort of
simplified map of reality, some theory, concept, model, paradigm, is necessary. Without
such intellectual constructs, there is, as William James said, only ‘a blooming buzzing
confusion’.
Intellectual and scientific advance, Thomas Kuhn showed in his classic The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions, consists of the displacement of one paradigm,
which has become increasingly incapable of explaining new or newly discovered
facts, by a new paradigm, which does account for those facts in a more satisfactory
fashion. ‘To be accepted as a paradigm,’ Kuhn wrote, ‘a theory must seem better
than its competitors, but it need not, and in fact never does, explain all the facts with
which it can be confronted.’
‘Finding one’s way through unfamiliar terrain,’ John Lewis Gaddis observed,
‘generally requires a map of some sort. Cartography, like cognition itself, is a necessary
simplification that allows us to see where we are, and where we may be going.’ The
Cold War image of superpower competition was, as he points out, such a model,
articulated first by Harry Truman, as ‘an exercise in geopolitical cartography that
depicted the international landscape in terms everyone could understand, and so
doing prepared the way for the sophisticated strategy of containment that was soon
to follow.’ World views and causal theories are indispensable guides to international
politics.
For fourty years students and practitioners of international relations thought
and acted according to a Cold War paradigm of world affairs. This paradigm could
not account for everything that went on in world politics. There were many anomalies,
to use Kuhn’s term, and at times the paradigm blinded scholars and statesmen to
major developments, such as the Sino-Soviet split. Yet as a simple model of global
politics, it accounted for more important phenomena than any of its rivals, it was an
essential starting point for thinking about international affairs, it came to be almost
universally accepted, and it shaped thinking about world politics for two generations.
Criticism of Unipolar and Multipolar World Orders
It was tradition to call the world bi-polar during the Cold War period. But since the
disintegration of the USSR (on 26 December 1991), according to Derek Kelly, the
world had a unipolar order. Former French President Jacques Chirac gave a
framework of the multipolar world order in his speech in November 1999 in Paris. Neocolonialism
According to him, a unipolar world is essentially unbalanced and the world must be
re-balanced by a multipolar world order where a variety of powers balance or offset
the power of the US.
On the other hand, in ‘The National Security Strategy of the United States of NOTES
America’ report of 17 September 2002, the US argued that unipolarity is a good
thing and should be maintained, though not forever.
What we understand as a unipolar world is basically a pyramid where one
country heads the power structure. In a multi-polar world, the existence of several
major power balance out the concentration of power by a single state.
The debate on unipolar versus multipolar is still on. For obvious reasons, the
US and some of its minor allies, like Britain, argue in favor of a unipolar world. This
is opposed by the rest of the world arguing in favor of multi-polarity. Led by Chirac
(France), powers such as Russia, China, India, Brazil, and a host of lesser powers
are working towards a multipolar world. Even Charles Krauthammer, the cheerleader
for the unipolar concept, says ‘no doubt, multipolarity will come in time’. (An American
Foreign Policy for a Unipolar World, 12 February 2004).
On a more theoretical level, the constitutional foundation of the USA, and
years of discussion by its founding fathers led to the formation of the new country.
It was based on the realization that absolute power is misused and, if unchecked can
lead to gross corruption.
Some thinkers perceive unipolarity as a form of narcissism. It is quite evident
that the US is in the grips of a collective narcissistic disorder, led by a man with
malignant narcissism – grandiose in claims, manipulating others for its own purposes,
and believing its own press releases. Listen to Krauthammer, the leading apologist
for the unipolar world:
This is now, he says, ‘a unipolar world dominated by a single superpower
unchecked by any rival and with decisive reach in every corner of the globe...This is
a staggering new development in history, not seen since the fall of Rome...Even
Rome is no model for what America is today,...because we do not have the imperial
culture of Rome. We are an Athenian republic, even more republican and infinitely
more democratic than Athens....[W]e are unlike Rome, unlike Britain and France
and Spain and the other classical empires of modern times, in that we do not hunger
for territory...We’ve got everything. And if that’s not enough, we’ve got Vegas –
which is a facsimile of everything. What could we possibly need anywhere else?
That’s because we are not an imperial power. We are a commercial republic. We
don’t take food; we trade for it. Which makes us something unique in history, an
anomaly, a hybrid: a commercial republic with overwhelming global power? A
commercial republic that, by pure accident of history, has been designated custodian
of the international system.’
So, is there any power which can match the US? That may be difficult to
answer. Marcel H. van Herpen argues that Chirac’s argument in favor of multipolarity,
for example, is based the assumption that France is a great power, but not as great
as the US. France has nuclear weapons, so does North Korea, Pakistan, India, and
Neocolonialism Iran. France does not have the population or the acreage to be considered a world
power. Others could speak in favor of Russia (or Eurasia) as a viable pole in a
multipolar world. This, too, is an improbable proposition. With a declining population
of 143 million people and a GDP of 1.3 trillion, Russia is inferior even to France.
NOTES So, is it India or Brazil or Nigeria or the Islamic states, over one billion strong,
or Europe as poles in a multipolar world order? With at least three times the population
and a 3 trillion dollar economy, India is not even close to competing on a level playing
field with the US. Brazil with 184 million people and a 1.4 trillion economy is, again,
not a competition. Neither is Nigeria with a population equal to Russia’s but an
economy less than Honk Kong’s, with 7 million people. The combined population of
the various Islamic states, of over a billion, and an economy based on oil cannot be
a true competitor. Japan, which has a population of 127 million, a bit less than Russia,
and a 3.5 trillion dollar economy, is basically a US puppet.
Can we then consider Europe, without England, with 456 million people and
an equivalent GDP of 11 trillion dollars? This is a Europe similar to a free trade
agreement with a hybrid English-like language as lingua franca, and twenty-five
current states at many different levels of development. After thousands of years of
wars, the warring European tribes emerged as nation states. But it would take
several decades for the Germans and French to shake off their egocentricisms and
truly unite as a union. In case Turkey is brought into the picture, it is highly unlikely
that a unified nation state will emerge from a merging of a secular Western civilization
and Islam. It is, hence, doubtful that Europe will at any time soon develop as a pole
in a multipolar world.
According to Huntington, China’s growing economy is many times the
economy of the USA is respect of buying power. China is the world’s largest
consumer country. It is also coping up with the USA in technology and defence
equipment. Huntington visualizes a mutually assured competition, instead of a mutually
assured destruction between a bloc comprising the US, Europe and Japan, and
another comprising China, India and Brazil to the benefit of the whole world.
National movement in the colonized states gained popular support with hope and
aspirations. It was expected that the demise of centuries’ old colonial rule will not
only bring political independence but also lead to self reliance, peace and prosperity.
However, consequences of the post-colonial period reflected a contrary picture.
Though states gained independence from foreign rule, they were far away from self
reliance as suffering continued in one form or the other. Newly independent states
remained a mere supplier of raw material.
Post-colonial critics have explained this situation with the phenomenon of
‘neo-colonialism’. Writings within the theoretical framework of neocolonialism argue
that existing or past international economic arrangements created by former colonial
powers and developed states hold control on economies and resources of their former
colonies and other weak states, thus, mere political independence is not enough to
prosper. The term neo-colonialism combines a critique of occurrence of classical
colonialism—where some states continue administrating foreign territories and their
populations; and a critique of the involvement of modern capitalist businesses in Neocolonialism
nations which were former colonies. Critics adherent to neo-colonialism contend
that transnational/multinational corporations (TNCs/MNCs) and transnational/
multinational banks (TNBs/MNBs) continue to exploit the resources of post-colonial
states, and that this economic control inherent to neo-colonialism is akin to the classical NOTES
European colonialism practised from 16th to 20th centuries. In broader usage, neo-
colonialism may simply refer to the involvement of powerful countries in the affairs
of less powerful countries; this is especially relevant in Africa and Latin America. In
this sense, neo-colonialism implies a form of contemporary, economic imperialism
in which powerful nations behave like colonial powers of imperialism, and this
behaviour is linked to colonialism in a post-colonial world.
Origin of the concept of neo-colonialism
In international relations, the term ‘neo-colonialism’ was popularized by Kwame
Nkrumah, first President of Ghana. He wrote a book entitled Neo-Colonialism:
The Last Stage of Imperialism. The work is self-defined as an extension
of Lenin’s Imperialism: The Last Stage of Capitalism, in which Lenin argues that
19th century imperialism is predicated on the needs of the capitalist system. Nkrumah
argues that, ‘in place of colonialism as the main instrument of imperialism we have
today neo-colonialism ... Neo-colonialism, like colonialism, is an attempt to export
the social conflicts of the capitalist countries’. In Latin America, Argentine
revolutionary Che Guevara provided theoretical support to this notion, and stated,
‘as long as imperialism exists it will, by definition, exert its domination over other
countries. Today that domination is called neocolonialism’.
Mechanisms of neo-colonialism
In his book, Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism, Nkrumah outlines
detailed mechanism of neo-colonialism. He believes that the methods of neo-
colonialists are subtle and varied. They operate not only in the economic field but
also in the political, religious, ideological and cultural spheres. Faced with the militant
peoples of the ex-colonial territories in Asia, Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America,
imperialism simply switches tactics. Without a qualm it dispenses with its flags certain
of its more hated expatriate officials. This means, so it claims, that it is ‘giving’
independence to its former subjects, to be followed by ‘aid’ for their development.
Under cover of such phrases, however, it devises innumerable ways to accomplish
objectives formerly achieved by naked colonialism. It is the sum total of these modern
attempts to perpetuate colonialism, while at the same time talking about ‘freedom’,
which has come to be known as ‘neo-colonialism’.
On the economic front, a strong factor that is favouring Western monopolies
and acting against the developing world is international capital’s control of the world
market as well as of the prices of commodities that are bought and sold there. He
elaborates this argument from substantial examples such as from 1951 to 1961,
without taking oil into consideration, the general level of prices for primary products
fell by 33.l per cent, while prices of manufactured goods rose by 3.5 per cent (within
which, machinery and equipment prices rose 31.3 per cent). In same decade, this
caused a loss to the Asian, African and Latin American countries, using 1951 prices
Neocolonialism as a basis, of some US $41,400 million. In the same period, while the volume of
exports from these countries rose, their earnings in foreign exchange from such
exports decreased.
Another technique of neo-colonialism is the use of high rates of interest.
NOTES Figures from the World Bank for 1962 showed that seventy-one Asian, African and
Latin American countries owed foreign debts of some $27,000 million, on which
they paid some $5,000 million as interest and service charges. Since then, such
foreign debts have been estimated as more than £30,000 million in these areas. In
1961, the interest rates on almost three-quarters of the loans offered by the major
imperialist powers amounted to more than five per cent, in some cases up to seven
or eight per cent, while the call-in periods of such loans have been burdensomely
short.
Another neo-colonialist trap on the economic front is the ‘multilateral aid’
through international organizations—the International Monetary Fund, the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (known as the World Bank),
the International Finance Corporation and the International Development Association.
All these organization have the US capital as their major backing. Some critics claim
that these agencies force their would-be borrowers to submit to various offensive
conditions, such as supplying information about their economies, submitting their
policy and plans to be reviewed by the World Bank and accepting agency supervision
regarding their use of loans.
Nkrumah argues that some of these methods used by neo-colonialists to slip
past our guard must now be examined. The first is retention by the departing
colonialists of various kinds of privileges which infringe our sovereignty: that of
setting up military bases or stationing troops in former colonies and the supplying of
‘advisers’ of one sort or the other. Sometimes a number of ‘rights’ are demanded:
land concessions, prospecting rights for minerals and/or oil; the ‘right’ to collect
customs, to carry out administration, to issue paper money; to be exempted from
customs duties and/or taxes for expatriate enterprises; and, above all, the ‘right’ to
provide ‘aid’. Demands such as Western information services be exclusive and that
those from socialist countries be excluded are also made and consequently granted.
After the detailed analysis of mechanism of the neo-colonialism, Nkrumah
argues that neocolonialism is not a sign of imperialism’s strength but of its last
hideous gasp. It can be defeated by unity among Third World states. He states, ‘It
testifies to its inability to rule any longer by old methods…all the methods of neo-
colonialists have pointed in one direction, the ancient, accepted one of all minority
ruling classes throughout history—divide and rule. Quite obviously,
therefore, unity is the first requisite for destroying neo-colonialism. Primary and
basic is the need for an all-union government on the much divided continent of
Africa. Along with that, a strengthening of the Afro-Asian Solidarity Organization
and the spirit of Bandung is already under way. To it, we must seek the adherence
on an increasingly formal basis of our Latin American brothers.’
An important category of states in the context of neo-colonialism is economic
dependency. Economic dependencies are those countries which are politically
independent. However, they are not in a position to conduct their economic affairs Neocolonialism
independently, as they are dependent upon a foreign state (often from the developed
world) for financial and technical assistance. By extending economic assistance in
the form of grant and loans, the developed countries control the economic policies of
these economic dependencies. This type of economic control has been described in NOTES
relation to the currency of the relevant developed country, such as Dollar Diplomacy,
Rouble Diplomacy and Yen Diplomacy signifying efforts of the United States, former
Soviet Union and Japan respectively, towards furthering their own economic interests
in the developing world.
As a matter of fact, dependency theory or dependencies theory emerged in
the 1970s whereby it was argued that there always took place a flow of resources
from ‘periphery’ nations (from the developing world) to ‘core’ nations (wealthy
developed nations). However, this interaction (or terms of trade) is not based on a
level-playing field but one which made the ‘core’ nations richer at the expense of
the ‘periphery’ nations which were left further impoverished.
Some of the leading dependency theorists include Andre Gunder Frank, Walter
Rodney, Keith Griffin, Enzo Faletto and others.
3.2.2 Emergence of the Third-World Problems of the Third
World Countries
During the Cold War of the twentieth century, the world was divided into three
parts. The First world referred to countries like the United States of America and its
European allies; on the other hand, the Second World referred to countries likle
Soviet Union, Cuba and their allies. The Third World was then a term used to represent
countries which stayed away from joining either of the two sides and thus were
known to be non-aligned to any of these strong groupings.
The Third World countries are not merely the countries involved in the non-
alignment movement, but also is used to denote the countries which had a colonial
history. These countries are also known to have a newly industrialized economy or
countries with a backward and poor economy. The term ‘third world’ countries is
also used sometimes to refer to the countries which newly gained their independence.
With the emergence of the Third World countries, there have been an
emergence of certain problems. These include the lack of finances, difficult access
to resources and technology as well as differences in the access to trade etc.
There has been a wide gap between the developed and the developing
countries. Of the estimated 4,000 million people inhabiting the world, 1,200 million
live in countries where the per capita GNP is less than $2,000 a year. At the other
end, a minority of around 600 million live in countries where the per capita GNP
ranges between $ 2,000 to 5,600.
Another 2,200 million live in countries where the per capita GNP level ranges
between $ 200 to 2,000. The enormity of the gap is further illustrated by the fact that
in South Asia alone, half of the population is below a stringently drawn poverty line.
The Less Developed Countries (LDCs) have been making persistent demands
for introducing fundamental reforms in the economic, commercial and financial
Neocolonialism relationships between themselves and the developed countries. The developing
countries raised the question of establishing NIEO and demanded restructuring of
international economic relations on fair democratic principles based on complete
equality.
NOTES Let us have a look at the theories related to the emergence of Third World
and its problems.
Dependency Theory
As an extention of the discussion in the previous section, we will look at how this
theory has relevance in understanding the problems of the Third World nations. This
theory was propounded by thinkers like Paul Baran, Andre Gunder Frank and Fernando
Henrique Cardoso. It is also known as the Dependencia theory; dependencia
being the Spanish word for ‘dependency’. The main contention of the dependency
theorists was that ‘developing countries were trapped in a cycle of dependence on
international capital in which there was little room to maneuver.’
The dependency theory emerged during the 1960s at a time when there was
hardly any economic progress in the poor and underdeveloped countries of the world.
The classical development model explained this situation as ‘a temporary stage en
route to industrialization and modernisation.’ However, the dependency theory put
the blame on the ‘colonial past and current external linkages.’ The countries of the
North exploited the poor countries of the South ‘during the days of colonialism’ and
continue to do so even now when ‘imperial control’ has ended.
Dependency theory stressed that the present situation was likely to continue
until the industrialized countries stopped exploiting the resources of the
underdeveloped countries. The capitalist countries enter several sectors of the
economy of underdeveloped countries, expand their presence there and sustain
themselves with the help of the local elites. The local elites align with the capitalist
powers and exploit their own people but benefit personally from profits.
According to dependency theory, the absence of capital, technology and
expertise in the Third World economies is not internal but rather ‘imposed on them
by an unequal international economic structure.’ The division of labour is such that
Third World countries produce cheap labour while the developed North produces
‘complex and ...high tech industrial products (such as automobiles and computers)
and services (such as banking, insurance and communication).’ The present situation
continues to remain unchanged because the underdeveloped countries are dependent,
both politically and economically on the developed countries as the former derive
their income mainly from the production and export of raw materials to the latter. By
the early 1970s, the dependency theory was widely accepted.
Centre-Periphery Theory
Immanuel Wallerstein propounded the centre-periphery theory, also known as the
metropolis-satellite theory. This theory initiated the idea of ‘world economy’. It argued
that in the world economy ‘movement within and between the centre and the periphery
was possible’ but the movement was ‘regulated by market forces’. The capitalist
and industrialized countries are the centre of the world economic system while the
poor and less-industrialized countries are the periphery. The Third World countries Neocolonialism
are poor not because of underdevelopment but because of overexploitation by the
developed countries.
The underdeveloped countries produce and provide raw materials to the
developed countries at cheap rates while they import manufactured products from NOTES
the developed countries at high rates. There is thus an ‘asymmetric’ centre-periphery
relationship between the two. The periphery countries do not have the capital, the
technology and the expertise which the developed countries possess. The condition
in the periphery countries is ‘deteriorating’ as now they are importing even food
items. For the periphery, the only way out of this subordination is ‘to dissociate itself
from the world market and strive for self-reliance.’
The Third World countries were dissatisfied with the ‘existing international economic
structure’ as it increased the gap between the rich and the poor. In 1974, they
demanded the creation of a New International Economic Order (NIEO) in the
Sixth Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly. The main
idea behind the NIEO was to restructure economic relations between the developed
and the developing countries ‘in favour of redistribution of wealth.’ As part of the
NIEO, the developing countries made several demands like undoing the trade
imbalance, removing the tariff barriers put by industrialized countries on products
from developing countries, stabilizing the prices of primary commodities like sugar,
preferential treatment for developing countries in all areas of economic cooperation,
debt relief for the poor countries, etc. The NIEO therefore ‘pursued a
counterhegemonic economic order against values and knowledge which permeate a
structure of liberal political economy.’
The Third World countries put up a united front by forming Group of 77 to
push for the NIEO. The NIEO, however, met with ‘modest success in a few limited
areas’ like commodity trade but the majority of its demands were left unattended.
Also the North-South dialogue that was undertaken as part of the NIEO ‘ended in a
deadlock’.
3.2.4 International Economic Imbalance and Structural
Adjustment
As per the classical and neoclassical economic theories, trade in goods and services
would lead to growth. Markets would be integrated to the global market and there
would be free movement in goods and services. However, in reality it did not happen
as envisaged. The trade benefits had been lopsided more in favour of the developed
rather than developing countries who are producers of raw materials.
The developed countries convert these raw materials efficiently into finished
goods as they have better technology. The prices of raw materials are susceptible to
fluctuations which result in losses for the developing countries. On the other hand,
the production and export of finished goods by developed countries gives them more
profit compared to the producers of raw materials. Thus, ‘the critics of free trade
Neocolonialism argue that international trade produces a value transfer from less developed countries
to more advanced ones. Such transfer shows up in the form of losses for less
industrialised societies through declining terms of trade for their products visa-vis
the processed goods they import. Trade imbalance in Third World countries is worsened
NOTES by the persisting need to import oil and machinery.’
When there is recession in the developed countries as was the case in the
early 1980s, the earnings from exports dwindle for the developing countries. In the
1980s, due to recession in the developed countries, the developing countries faced
‘protracted balance-of-payment problems’ and were unable to pay interest on the
foreign debt. This resulted in a financial crisis due to which the 1980s decade was
labelled as ‘lost decade for development’. To get out of this situation of economic
imbalance, the developing countries further borrowed credit (took new loans to pay
the interest on old loans), from international organizations like the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB). The IMF and WB proposed
structural adjustment to manage the debt situation of the poor countries. As part of
this adjustment, poor states of Africa and Latin America had to follow neoliberal
economic policies and programmes like economic liberalization, austerity measures,
‘cuts in public expenditure, and the development of a more efficient, transparent and
accountable state.’ Due to economic liberalization, several public enterprises were
privatized and workers were laid off. As part of the austerity measures, the prices
of essential commodities like food were increased and wages and social services
were cut down. These measures resulted ‘in large cuts in states’ size and functions
and little or no increase in accountability and transparency’ though the WB had
recommended that ‘an effective state – not a minimal one – is central to economic
and social development.’ The structural adjustment programmes impacted the poor
and ordinary people the most as their incomes suffered and their well-being was put
at risk. This gave rise to ‘political and social instability’.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

1. Mention the groups of global powers as per Huntington’s hypothesis.
2. State Huntington’s ‘kin-country syndrome’.
3. Name the economic factor which favours the Western monopolies and
acts against the developing world.
4. As per the dependency theory, when will the situation of slow economic
progress continue?
5. What is the argument of the critics of free trade against international trade?
3.3 NON-ALIGNMENT MOVEMENT
The word non-alignment defines the refusal of states to take sides with one or the
other of the two principal opposed groups of powers such as existed at the time of

the Cold War. Non-alignment can be defined as not entering into military alliances Neocolonialism
with any country, either of the Western bloc led by the US or the communist bloc led
by the USSR. It is an assertion of independence in foreign policy. Some Western
scholars have persistently confused non-alignment ‘with non-commitment, isolationism,
neutralism neutrality and non-involvement. Non-alignment is not neutrality. Non- NOTES
alignment can be defined in two conceptual ways either politically or legally.
George Schwarzenberger deals with the concepts which are often regarded
as synonymous with the concept of non-alignment. These are: isolationism,
noncommitment, neutrality, neutralization, unilateralism and non-involvement.
Isolationism stands for policies of aloofness varying from the splendid isolation of
the great powers to the postures of inoffensiveness in international affairs. This
pattern may be a result of geographical circumstances or technological development.
Non-commitment refers to policies of detachment from other powers in
triangular relationships. Neutrality describes the political and legal status of a country
not at war with either of the two belligerents. Neutralization on the other hand, is
different form neutrality, because a neutral state remains free to give up its status of
neutrality because a neutral state remains free to give up its status of neutrality and
assume that of a belligerent. But a neutralized state is permanently neutral and
cannot give up its neutralized status. It cannot resort to war without a breach of its
treaty obligations.
Unilateralism is identified with policies of calculated risks such as the
destruction of stockpiles of nuclear weapons irrespective of whether other nations
do the same or not. Non-involvement emphasizes the struggle between contending
ideologies. It signified the attitude of tolerant detachment from the tensions between
the world powers and a resolve not to be deflected from this attitude, though allowing
a certain degree of flexibility when absolutely unavoidable.
Schwarzenberger believes that non-alignment strikes a note of distinction
between its meaning and the meaning of the other six related concepts. Non-alignment
according to him is a policy of keeping out of alliances. Unlike neutrality, non-alignment
is not a law written into the Constitution of the state. Neutrality is a permanent
feature of state policy, while non-alignment is not. Further, unlike neutrality, non-
alignment is not negative, but is a positive concept. It stands for: (a) an active role in
world affairs and (b) friendship and co-operation with all countries. It consists of
taking an independent position based on the merits of each issue, and, on the
requirements of national interest. It is not directed against any ideology but seeks to
promote peace and friendship in the world, irrespective of ideological differences.
Non-aligned nations continuously opposed the politics of Cold War confrontations.
They underlined the necessity of building peace and ‘peace areas’ in a world clear
of bi-polarism. Non-alignment should not be seen as a policy based on opportunism
in which the nations tried to gain advantage by playing one power against another.
Origin and Phases of Non-Alignment
Non-alignment has been adopted as a foreign policy by all the developing and under
developed countries during the Cold War so that they can keep themselves away

Neocolonialism from the Camp Politics of the powerful nations. To be effective as a tool in foreign
policy, it is important to know how does any foreign policy have an impact on the
international and national politics. In this consideration the Kenneth Waltz definition
of foreign policy can be seen as appropriate, as he says that ‘the foreign policies of
NOTES nations are affected in important ways by the placement of countries in the international
political system or more simply by their relative power’. This definition therefore
makes our concept clearer as to why at the time of the Cold War there was a need
for the emergence and adoption for this tool of foreign policy. Formally, the Non-
Aligned Movement (NAM) came into existence during the first conference of Heads
of State or Government of non-aligned countries that took part in Belgrade in
September 1961. Non-alignment emerged within the context of two simultaneous
global developments—Afro-Asian resurgence and bipolar world politics. The
reawakening of the nations of Africa and Asia kindled in them the urge for freedom
from colonial rule and infused a determination to shape their destinies on their own.
This led to the development of a distinct idea of active and independent involvement
in world affairs based on one’s own perspectives of national and international interests.
There is evolved an independent stand on national and international issues amongst
the newly emergent nations.
After the Bandung summit in 1955, a preparatory meeting for the First NAM
Summit Conference was held in Cairo, from 5-12 June 1961. Unlike the case during
the Bandung conference where the invitations to the countries were on a regional
basis, the invitations for the first Summit were based on each invited country’s
commitment to a set of shared principles. During the preparatory meeting held at
Cairo, the principal aims and objectives of the policy of non-alignment were discussed
with great rigor by the participants. The outcomes of these discussions were adopted
as criteria for membership as well as for the invitations to the First Summit
Conference.
The following have been the criteria that were arrived at during the Cairo
preparatory meeting:
(i) The country should have adopted an independent policy based on the
coexistence of states with different political and social systems and on
nonalignment or should be showing a trend in favour of such a policy.
(ii) The country concerned should be consistently supporting the movements
for national independence.
(iii) The country should not be a member of a multilateral military alliance
concluded in the context of Great Power conflicts.
(iv) If a country has a bilateral military agreement with a Great Power, or is
a member of a regional defence pact, the agreement or pact should not
be one deliberately concluded in the context of Great Power conflicts.
(v) If it has conceded military bases to a Foreign Power, the concession
should not have been made in the context of Great Power conflicts.
These criteria and principles of NAM, adopted at the Cairo preparatory
meeting, were reaffirmed by the Heads of State or Government during the XI Summit
in Cartagena.
First NAM Summit, Belgrade (Yugoslavia), 1–6 September 1961 Neocolonialism
The Belgrade Conference marked the official beginning of NAM in international

affairs. It was attended by 25 participant states and three observer states. These
came from Latin America, from Africa and representatives of liberation movements,
NOTES
labour and socialist parties from Europe and Asia. The timing of the conference
coincided with nuclear tests in France and increased tensions between the two
superpowers over Berlin, Laos, Cuba and Congo.
From the platform of NAM, the participating countries voiced their concern
for a peaceful world order. They opposed the existence of military blocs as they
fundamentally lead to the escalation of tensions. They emphasized the need for
peaceful co-existence to mitigate the possibilities of nuclear confrontation. They
also voiced the rights of people to self-determination and independence. NAM
countries supported the UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to
Colonial Countries and Peoples. They condemned apartheid, the practice of racial
discrimination in South Africa, the foreign intervention in Tunisia and Congo and
supported the liberation struggles in Algeria and Angola. The NAM countries also
demanded the restoration of the rights of Arab people of Palestine.
Political Issues
Looking at the objectives and criteria of membership it can be said that since its
formation, which began as a movement, non-alignment attempted to create for its
members an independent path in world politics. This attempt reflected the intent that
the member states should not end up becoming pawns in the struggles between the
superpowers. They were resistant to adopting a bandwagoning role for themselves
in the international affairs. Also they were apprehensive of implications of their
alignment to any single power bloc with regard to their development. As a consequence
of this, a large part of the history of non-aligned countries was influenced by the
global tension of the Cold War between the two super powers. To make themselves
impervious to the bloc rivalry became a priority item on the agenda and work of the
Non-Aligned Movement. However, the Cold War was not the sole or only significant
issue on the agenda of the Non-Aligned Movement. A cursory glimpse at the history
of the NAM reveals three basic elements which influenced the approach of the
movement to international issues. These are the right of independent judgement, the
struggle against imperialism and neo-colonialism, and the use of moderation in relations
with all big powers. Throughout its history, till the present day context, the NAM
countries sought to focus on these crucial areas and also worked towards the
restructuring of the international economic order.
Economic Issues
Because of the rivalry between the two superpowers during the Cold War era many
economic projects were set up in developing countries as part of the policy of expansion
of sphere of influence by these powers. In due course of time, the focus of Non-
Aligned Summits also concentrated on the advocacy of solutions to global economic
and other problems apart from essentially politically issues. The Jakarta Summit in
1992 was a turning point in the history of NAM since this was the first Summit after
Neocolonialism the end of the Cold War. It emphasized that the movement should redefine itself so
as to shift its focus in a direction that also enabled it to work across groupings such
as the G-7 and the EU. South Africa assumed the position as the Chair at a time
when this transitional phase was still ongoing.
NOTES
Administration
The administrative style of NAM is unique. It administration is non-hierarchical,
rotational and inclusive, providing all member states, regardless of size and importance,
with an opportunity to participate in global decision-making and world politics. It
was recognized by the founders of the Non-Aligned Movement and their successors
that the movement would probably be functioning best if it operated without a formal
constitution and a permanent secretariat. This gave rise to the practice of a rotating
Chair which was vested at the same time with the responsibility of an administrative
structure on the country assuming the Chair. The Summit Conferences are the
occasions when the Chair is formally rotated and where it is given to the Head of
State or Government of the host country of the Summit. The Foreign Ministry and
Permanent Mission in New York of the Chair at the same time assume the
responsibility of the administrative management of the NAM. The entire structure
of NAM is illustrated in Figure 3.1.
Structure of NAM
Summit of heads of states
(every 3 years)
Ministers meeting
Senior officials
Foreign ministers Coordinating bureau of coordinating Non-aligned

meeting(mid term) the non-aligned bureau Regional group
(ministerial level) Non-aligned Functional Bodies
(appointed meetings
Senior officials group at summit expert groups)
at the UN Meeting Links with Committee of 77
Coordinating activities
with UN and its agencies
Fig. 3.1 Structure of NAM

Responsibilities of the NAM Chair Neocolonialism
The NAM Chair is given certain responsibilities for promoting the principles and
activities of the movement. Also a number of structures aimed at improving the
coordination and functioning of the existing mechanisms of the movement had been
NOTES
created to facilitate the responsibilities of the Chairs. These are mentioned in the
Cartagena Document under Methodology. Of these mechanisms the most important
is the Co-ordinating Bureau (CoB) at the United Nations in New York, which forms
the focal point for co-ordination. Since the non-aligned countries meet regularly at
the UN and conduct much of their work there, the Chairs’ Permanent Representative
to the United Nations in New York functions as the Chair of the CoB. The Bureau
reviews and facilitates the harmonization of the work of the NAM Working Groups,
Contact Groups, Task Forces and Committees.
The Coordinating Bureau is given the task by the Heads of State or Government
of gearing its action to further consolidate co-ordination and mutual co-operation
among non-aligned countries, including unified action in the United Nations and
other international fora, on issues of common concern. Another important mechanism
is the Troika of past, serving and future Chairs. This concept is contingent on the
discretion of the incumbent Chair and can act as a pivot for solutions of problems
and issues confronting developing countries on which the NAM is supposed to take
a position.
Growth of the Movement
The following Table 3.1 gives a cursory glance at the various summits of NAM held
till date:
Table 3.1 NAM Summits Held Till Date
PLACE YEAR
Bandung (Indonesia) 1955
Belgrade (Yugoslavia) 1961
Cairo (Egypt) 1964
Lusaka (Zambia) 1970
Algiers (Algeria) 1973
Colombo (Sri Lanka) 1976
Havana (Cuba) 1979
New Delhi (India) 1983
Harare (Zimbabwe) 1986
Belgrade (Yugoslavia) 1989
Jakarta (Indonesia) 1992
Cartagena (Colombia) 1995
Durban (South Africa) 1998
Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) 2003
Havana (Cuba) 2006
Sharm-el-Sheikh 2009

Neocolonialism The practice of decision making at NAM is by consensus. It is based on an
understanding that is respectful of divergences of viewpoints including disagreements.
Hence it is accommodating and perceives decisions as outcome of a democratic
process of adjustments where agreements are arrived at by following a sincere
NOTES procedure.
Non-Alignment in the New Millennium
After the end of the cold war the reason for the existence of NAM was questioned.
In modern international politics, the NAM has relatively lesser visibility and voice as
compared to other organizations, such as the United Nations, the European Union,
NATO and even ECOWAS. These have arguably been more effective, and NAM
has therefore developed something of an identity crisis as it struggles to find a
reason to exist. Nevertheless, it kept on making consistent efforts to redefine its role
and assert its presence in the international system.
The beginning of the new millennium witnessed the commitment of the NAM
countries to redefine and reiterate their role in the international system according to
the requirements of the changing times. It also witnessed an urge in the countries to
use this opportunity to make the international system more sensitive to the aspirations
of the till now excluded community of the developing nations of the South. The
Charter principle of sovereignty, territorial integrity, non-interference and
multilateralism were reiterated with a new rigor.
The Durban conference in 1998 elaborately delineated the role of NAM in
the new millennium. It explicitly mentioned the movement’s emergence from a history
of oppression and marginalization by the dominant forces in the international system.
It envisioned the role of NAM as the ‘power of the new millennium’ to lead the
‘invisible people of the world’ into ‘a new age of emerging nations’ an ‘age of the
South’ and ‘an age of hope’. The major evils that the movement sought to eradicate
were: use of force, aggression, racism, foreign occupation, unfair economic practices
and the twin forces of liberalization and globalization. The movement resolved to
fundamentally transform the nature of international relations.
The Kuala Lumpur summit in 2003 came up with a Declaration for the
Revitalization of the Non-Aligned Movement which warned against the forces of
unipolarity and called for the strengthening of the process of multilateralism as an
‘indispensible vehicle in safeguarding the interests of the member states of the
movement as well as of the United Nations’. During the summit, the member countries
sought to address ‘the crucial global issues affecting their peoples with a view to
agreeing to a set of actions in the promotion of peace, security, justice, equality,
democracy and development, conducive for a multilateral system of relations based
on principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of states,
the rights of people to self determination and non-intervention in matters which are
essentially within the jurisdiction of states, in accordance with the Charter of United
Nations and international law.’
However, this resoluteness of purpose in words does not transform into an
equally firm action at the practical levels because of a number of factors. The weak

institutional structures as a consequence of the colonial past constitute one of the Neocolonialism
significant reasons. Economic dependency as a natural outcome of the colonial
exploitation is also a major factor preventing hard decisions. These features make
the political independence and sovereignty in these countries more formal than real.
Also NAM faces a number of internal problems and conflicts which have NOTES
been making its functioning and acting resolutely more difficult. That is why the
structure has not been put to its declared use. There is heavy dependence on the
United States making them lesser non-aligned. Some other factors acting as
impediments are, differing ideologies and regional conflicts, as is the case in the
Middle East.
The response to the atomic tests carried out by North Korea is a recent
example of the problems NAM faces. North Korea is a NAM member. The
movement failed to arrive at an agreement on the issue and consequently no statements
were released, either of support or condemnation, referring to North Korea’s actions.
The UN Security Council and other international bodies did express their concern
about the actions in Pyongyang. Yet NAM observed complete silence over the
issue. The informal structure of NAM is often blamed for such inactions. The absence
of a statute or charter and also that of a permanent secretariat, it is said many a
times, leads to such vague responses.
This Afro-Asian resurgence occurred at a time when the world was divided
into two hostile camps, each representing two different ideologies and two
socioeconomic as well as political systems, and led by the US and erstwhile USSR
respectively. Each aspired for greater spheres of influence through military alliances
with other states. In this context, the independent position of the newly emergent
states came to be viewed as non-alignment, as they refused to be allied with either
bloc.
The stimulus for the non-aligned approach stemmed from many sources.
One of the foremost objectives of these states was economic development for which
they needed resources in the form of economic assistance as well as increased
trade. Non-alignment enabled them to have economic relations with all countries.
The second imperative was the need for peace without which there could not
be real development. A third source was their need to be secure from global threat
perceptions emanating from Cold War politics. Other domestic imperatives also
existed which varied from country to country. For example, in the case of India, its
internal political plurality, its political processes, its historical role and geographical
position were important contributing factors for the emergence of non-alignment.
The non-aligned movement evolved out of the promotional efforts of individual
non-aligned states to build a common front against the superpower and neo-imperialist
domination. Jawaharlal Nehru from India, Gamal Abdal Nassir from Egypt and
Josip Broz Tito from Yugoslavia took the first step in building this movement. Among
the first policy-makers, Nehru would be remembered as a strong pillar of this
movement. His early perception about the rise of neo-imperialism and the consequent
insecurity that would be faced by the smaller states, made a major contribution
towards building this movement. Nehru believed that the countries of Asia and Africa,
Neocolonialism should build up an alliance of solidarity to fight neo-imperialism. As a first step he
tried to organise the Asian countries in the forties. In 1947, he called an Asian
Relations Conference in New Delhi. In the fifties, as the states of Africa started
gaining independence from colonial rule it became necessary to expand the base of
NOTES this front. In April 1955, therefore, Nehru together with leaders of Indonesia, Burma,
Sri Lanka and Pakistan convened an Afro-Asian Conference at Bandung in Indonesia.
The two conferences highlighted the political and economic insecurity that
was threatening the newly independent states at that time. However, the Bandung
Conference failed to build a homogenous Asian and African front as a number of
these States did not agree to conduct their foreign relations under the banner of anti-
imperialism. They had either already joined the various Western military alliances or
had closely identified their interests with that of the Western Powers. The rift between
the two groups was visible at Bandung itself. In the post-Bandung years, thus, it
became necessary to build up an identity for the non-aligned states on the basis of
principles and not on the basis of region. The effort united these states with Yugoslavia
which was similarly looking for a political identity in international affairs. The embryo
of the later non-aligned conferences first came into being at Brioni, in Yugoslavia, in
June 1956, where Tito conferred with Nehru and Nassar on the possibility of making
real the unspoken alliance which bound them together. The efforts finally resulted in
the convening of the first non-aligned conference at Belgrade in 1961.
Five points were determined and applied, for countries to be members of the
Non-Aligned Movement. Only those countries which fulfilled these conditions were
actually invited to the conference. They were:
(a) Independent foreign policy, particularly in the context of Cold War politics
(b) Opposition to colonialism in all its forms and manifestations
(c) Should not be a member of any of the military blocs
(d) Should not have concluded any bilateral treaty with any of the two
superpowers
(e) Should not have allowed military bases on its territory to a superpower,
qualified for attendance at the Belgrade summit.
NAM as a platform has increased its members from time to time by organizing
frequent summits. The agenda for all the summits was always to be taken into
consideration as well as all those aspects that have direct or indirect impact on the
member nations. Here are some of the details of the summits which will give the
reader a brief view about their agenda. The NAM summit conferences from time to
time, have discussed several issues and problems. At the first summit (Belgrade,
1961) the twenty-five countries, who attended, discussed the situation in Berlin, the
question of representation of People’s Republic of China in the United Nations, the
Congo Crisis, imperialism as a potential threat to world peace, and Apartheid. The
Conference expressed full faith in the policy of peaceful co-existence. India was
represented by Nehru.
The Cairo summit, held in 1964 was attended by fourty-six countries. The
Indian delegation was led by La1Bahadur Shastri. The conference emphasized the
urgent need for disarmament, pleaded for the peaceful settlement of all international
disputes, urged member-governments not to recognize the white minority government Neocolonialism
in Rhodesia and reiterated the earlier stand of NAM against apartheid and colonialism.
The demand for representation of People’s China in the United Nations was
also reiterated Cold War period. The third summit at Lusaka in 1970 (attended by 52
countries) called for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Vietnam and urged the NOTES
member-states to boycott Israel which was under the occupation of certain
neighbouring Arab countries territories. It requested governments of member-nations
to intensify their struggle against Apartheid and as a part of the struggle, not to allow
the fly over facility to the South African aircrafts. The summit resolved to increase
economic cooperation. It rejected the proposal to establish a permanent secretariat
of the Movement. The Indian delegation was led by Indira Gandhi.
There were signs of detente in Cold War Politics by the time the next summit
met at Algiers (1973 attended by seventy-five countries). It welcomed the easing of
international tension, supported detente, and repeated NAM’s known stand against
imperialism and apartheid, and resolved to encourage economic, trade and technical
cooperation amongst member-states. The conference demanded a change in the
existing international economic order which violated the principle of equality and
justice.
In 1976, the Colombo summit was attended by 85 countries. The U.N General
Assembly had given a call for a New International Economic Order. In 1974, the
NAM at Colombo not only gave whole-hearted support to this demand, but asked
for a fundamental change in the world monetary system and form. It was proposed
that the Indian Ocean be declared a zone of peace. As there was a caretaker
government in India, the then Prime Minister Charan Singh decided to send his
foreign minister to represent the country at the sixth summit at Havana (1979). The
number of participants rose to 92. Pakistan was admitted to the Movement and
Burma (a former member) left the NAM. The Cuban President Fidel Castro described
the former USSR as a natural friend of the Movement. The summit reiterated the
well-known position against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism and apartheid.
The summit resolved to support the freedom struggle in South Africa and to
stop oil supply to that country. As Egypt had resolved her differences with Israel,
some of the anti-Israel countries sought suspension of Egypt. The summit merely
discussed the proposal. The Seventh Summit (due in 1982 at Baghdad) could not be
held in time due to the Iran- Iraq War. It was held at New Delhi in 1983 and attended
by 101countries. The New Delhi declaration sought to reiterate the known position
of NAM on various issues. It hoped for any early end to the Iran-Iraq War and for
the liberation of Namibia. However, the conference failed to take any stand on
Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. The Soviet occupation was openly supported by
Vietnam, S. Yemen, Syria and Ethiopia. It was strongly opposed by Singapore, Nepal,
Pakistan, Egypt and Zaire.
The Harare Conference (1986) adopted the Harare declaration and sought
greater economic co-operation among its members and North-South co-operation
for faster development in the South. The summit gave a call for the new International
Information and Communication Order to end the western monopoly over news
Neocolonialism disbursement. In view of a likely retaliation by the apartheid regime of South Africa
against Frontline countries who were applying sanctions, the NAM decided to set
up a fund called Action for Resistance against Imperialism, Colonialism and Apartheid.
In an abbreviated form it came to be known as the AFRICA Fund. The 1989
NOTES Belgrade Summit was the last one to be held before Yugoslavia disintegrated and at
a time when the Cold War was just ending. It gave a call against international
terrorism, smuggling and drug trafficking. The principle of self-determination was
reiterated particularly in the context of South Africa and her continued rule over
Namibia.
The tenth conference at Jakarta in 1992 was the first assembly of NAM
after the end of the Cold War. The summit was at pains to explain that even after
the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, there was utility of the
movement as a forum for developing countries struggling against neo-colonialism
and all forms of big-power interference. The main issue was the preservation of
NAM and strengthening its identity as an agency of rapid development for its
members in a tension-free world.
The eleventh NAM Summit was held at Cartagena (Colombia) in October,
1995. India was represented by a high-power delegation led by Prime Minister P.V.
Narasimha Rao. This summit took a decision for the establishment of nuclear weapon
free zones as a necessary first step towards attaining the objective of eliminating
weapons of mass destruction. In fact, NAM endorsed the regional approach to
nonproliferation. NAM leaders also gave a call for the reform of the World Bank
and IMF where a weighed voting system was currently making the voice of the
developing countries irrelevant.
The twelfth NAM Summit was held at Durban, South Africa, on September
1998. In this Summit 114 members attended. This meeting focused on the nuclear
issues, peace and conflict in the South Asian continent, a joint global response to
terrorism and the New Economic Order to help the developing nations ‘to successfully
enter, compete and benefit from the globalization’. Only with the help of a North-
South is a dialogue possible, which will promote the multilateral institutions to come
forward in this direction.
The thirteenth NAM Summit was held at Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) in February
2003 and was attended by 112 out of 114 members which included two new members,
East Timor and St. Vincent. While the increase in membership reflected the continued
faith in the NAM, the deliberations and the decisions revealed the struggle being
made by NAM to keep itself relevant, united and active. The Summit was totally
guided by the theme of continuing the re-vitalization of NAM. The non- aligned
leaders resolved to promote a multipolar world to strengthen the United Nations
and to continue the fight against international terrorism. A nine-pronged strategy
was outlined in the Summit Declaration for enhancing the unity of member states,
for promoting decentralization, for strengthening the process of securing a multipolar
world and for forging South-South co-operation in social, cultural, economic and
scientific spheres.

The fourteenth NAM Summit of the 118 member movement was held in Neocolonialism
Havana (Cuba) on 2006. In this Summit, the NAM members criticized the unilateralist
and hegmonistic approach of some states. They have also come forward on the
issues of UN Reforms,especially, the reforms in the UN Security Council, NAM
leaders expressed concern over the lack of progress in this direction. The NAM NOTES
Summit re-affirmed the inalienable right of developing countries to engage in research,
production and development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, without any
discrimination. The other issues were the same as had been taken up in the earlier
meetings of NAM.
The fifteenth NAM Summit was held in the Egyptian city of Sharm-el-Sheikh
on July 2009. The 118 member NAM demonstrated its continued relevance in
international relations. All the NAM leaders discussed the major issues and problems
of contemporary international relations and expressed their views on them. This
Summit has focused on the menace of terrorism, to keep a check on the global
economic recession and its impact on the developing countries, to initiate new steps
in the field of Climate Change by supporting the research in this direction, and to
encourage total nuclear disarmament by all nations.
The earlier and regular meetings and Summits of NAM have shown the
awareness of member countries on the current global problems and specifically the
grief of developing countries. Although, the ideas discussed at these meetings have
not yet been included in the national agendas of the concerned countries. This shows
the lack in the implementation strategy and using NAM just as a stage for the moral
talks for these wide problems.
Relevance
With the presence of only a single super-power, the USA, the world continued to be
univocal world in 1990s. It continued to face the threat from the forces of
unilateralism, hegemony and neo-colonialism. In the age of bipolarity, the two
superpowers and blocks used to maintain some mutual checks and balances which
acted as a blessing in disguise. These prevented attempts at unipolarism, unilateralism
and dominance. NAM also acted as a check on the power and policies of both the
superpowers. However, in a univocal world, the need for new checks and balances
was deemed more essential for the stability and development of the international
system. This could be provided by a large group of countries acting on the basis of
mutual understanding and consensus. NAM constituted the best platform for such
an exercise. It could enable the international community to exercise some checks on
unilateralism as well as to help the developing countries to pursue an independent
role in the era of globalization. Even under globalization, the rich, powerful and
developed countries and other members could dominate international economic
relations and decision- making. This gave rise to a stronger need for the protection
of the rights and interest of the poor and developing countries. This role could be
played by NAM. India considered NAM as a necessary and relevant moment in the
international relations of the post-Cold War period. The above logic and several
other positive factors helped the NAM leaders to successfully project the relevance
of NAM in international relations of 1990s. No NAM country abandoned NAM. On
Neocolonialism the contrary, several new members came to join NAM. The NAM membership
began increasing and soon it touched 114. (Now it stands at 118). The international
community has now fully accepted the continued relevance of NAM. The 15th
NAM summit held in Egypt in July 2009, has once again emphatically demonstrated
NOTES the continued relevance and strength of NAM in contemporary international relations.
NAM has been a movement against apartheid, the armament race, nuclear
weapons, international terrorism, cross- border terrorism and forces of totalitarianism,
authoritarianism and unilateralism. Though some progress in controlling these evils
has been achieved, the battle against these is yet to be won. NAM is needed for
securing united and strong global level efforts for meeting the menace of international
terrorism.
NAM continues to be the need of the 21th century. It has not only been a
movement against the Cold War and alliance politics, it has also been a positive
moment for the unity of the new (Third World) states for ending imperialism,
colonialism, neo-colonialism as well as for securing disarmament and arms control,
particularly nuclear disarmament. NAM is needed for securing economic and political
rights of the developing countries vis-a -vis the developed countries and for securing
a new world order based on equality, justice, freedom and development.
NAM continues to be very popular with the Third World countries of the
world. There has been a steady and continuous growth in the membership and
popularity of NAM. Over the years, NAM has emerged as a phenomenal international
movement with a membership of 118. While accepting the Jawaharlal Nehru Award
for international understanding, the then UN Security General, Perez de Cuellar in
his speech (27 February, 1990, New Delhi) went to the extent of listing the NAM as
‘one of the six big developments which has shaped the character of the age’. All the
states now accept the importance of the NAM in international relations. States, like
the USA and the UK, which all along have been the key bloc leaders and followers
of the Cold War and alliance politics, have also started taking an interest in the
activities of NAM. These have abandoned the policy of ridiculing or undervaluing
the role of non-aligned countries. The post-Cold War NAM Summits have received
a positive review from the Western Press. The European states are warm towards
the NAM. Many of them view the contemporary developments as vindication of the
NAM philosophy, principles and actions.
Along with other non-aligned countries, India also fully accepts the need to
make NAM move fast for adopting an economic agenda for securing rapid economic
development of the developing countries through increased South-South cooperation
and harmonizing of North-South difference over restructuring of international economy
in this era of globalization. NAM constitutes a global platform working for securing
the objective of peace, peaceful co-existence, sustainable development peaceful
conflict-resolution, and increased co-operation for securing human rights of all.
NAM has the potential to galvanize international efforts against the forces of
terrorism, war and violence.
In contemporary times, the major issues and problems being faced by the
international community have been: the need to fight terrorism in all its forms; the
need to fight the forces of unilateralism, unipolarism, hegemony and dominance; the Neocolonialism
need to ensure a strong and effective non-proliferation regime; the need to ensure
energy security for all, the need to protect the rights and interests of the developing
countries in the WTO; the need to meet the pressures resulting from globalization of
world economic relations; the need for the protection of human rights of all; the NOTES
need for the protection of environment and for this purpose the need for developing
alternative technologies; the need for sharing knowledge and technology among the
nations; the need for meeting the pressure from the presence of global level economic
recession; and the need for securing sustainable development. NAM constitutes the
single largest grouping of the countries (118). It can decidedly act for securing
increasing co-operation among the member states for securing all the above listed
needs. In particular, NAM constitutes the best platform for promoting South-South
co-operation which is now doubly needed in this era of globalization for preventing
all attempts at the domination of world economy and trade by the developed countries.
NAM continues to be fully relevant. It has been serving the needs of the
international community, particularly the needs of the developing countries of the
world. It continues to be the mainstay for the member nations in their commitment
to pursue independence in international relations and for co-operating for securing
their due rights and interests. NAM has the potential to help the nations to be active
and alert international actors. It can act as a guide and facilitator and help the
developing countries to secure their interests and needs. India fully accepts the
relevance of NAM in contemporary international relations.
The NAM Summits held till date fully exhibited the resolve of the member
countries to keep up and strengthen the NAM as a group of countries which stand
united to oppose the forces of terrorism, neo-colonialism, unilateralism, hegemony,
dominance and demonstrated its dominance to uphold its objective, i.e. to oppose
and struggle against injustice, inequality, terrorism and underdevelopment. It continues
to be a movement committed to work for the removal of economic inequalities
between the developed and the developing countries.
NAM And It’s Furture Action
The non-aligned movement should, however, watch very carefully the manner in
which the world power equation is getting realigned. ‘it should ensure that the
restructuring of global and military economic power is not for the purpose of
domination or hegemony’. Multilateralism under the aegis of the United Nations is
the framework in which complex baffling and critical problems of the present age,
namely nuclear weapons race, environmental pollution, economic inequality,
international terrorism, nuclear hegemony and several others, can be solved. One of
the principal tasks of the NAM should be to create a balanced, equitable, democratic
and universal power structure, which is predicted on peace, democratisation,
decentralisation, denuclearisation, depolarisation, polycentrism, disarmament, stable
international order, and sustainable development.
NAM basic guidelines to follow for their smooth functioning are:
• A new commitment to secure poly-centrism or multi-polarity in international
relations, in place of the existing unilateralism.
Neocolonialism • The commitment to work for the elimination of all forms of terrorism.
• Commitment to secure Human Rights of all.
• Independence in foreign relations, even while accepting the objective of
globalization
NOTES
• The commitment to secure the sustainable development for securing a
world characterized by democracy, development and security.
• To maintain, strengthen and work NAM as the single largest movement
of the world.
• To prepare an environment conducive for securing comprehensive nuclear
disarmament.
• To encourage coordinated and co-operative efforts for meeting the
challenge coming from climate change.
• Continued opposition to military alliance.
These are the tasks before the NAM. NAM must continue. It must continue
to act for securing these goals in the years to come. India has been continuously
pursuing an independent foreign policy. Indian foreign policy is now being guided by
the objective of promoting multiplicity in the international relations. It has been opposing
attempts at dominance and hegemony at international relations. India continues to
follow non-alignment in international relations and regards it as a fully relevant and
useful principal of Indian foreign policy. NAM needs to be invigorated and not
liquidated.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

6. How is neutralization different from neutrality?
7. Name the Indian leader who was considered as a strong pillar of the Non-
alignment movement.
8. What is the meaning of multilateralism under the aegis of United Nations?
3.4 UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN

RIGHTS
One of the earliest United Nations conferences was held at San Francisco, where a
large number of delegates were in favour of an International Bill of Rights. However,
the concept of the International Bill of Rights did not gain much ground, yet many
nations realized that it should be an obligation of the international community to
promote human rights. The conference resulted in the adoption of the United Nations
Charter containing some provisions; however, these were general in nature and
vague in the context of promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental
rights.

Drafting of Universal Declaration of Human Rights Neocolonialism
After the United Nations Charter came into force, the most important task before
the United Nations was the implementation of the principles of ‘the universal respect
for and the observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without
NOTES
distinction as to race, sex, language or religion’ as laid down under Article 55 of the
UN Charter. The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) recommended before
the General Assembly that the purpose of the UN with regard to the promotion and
observation of human rights could only be fulfilled if provision was made for an
International Bill of Rights and for its implementation, in the year 1946. The General
Assembly referred the matter to the ECOSOC for the preparation of the International
Bill of Rights. ECOSOC referred the matter to the Commission on Human Rights
with guidelines for the preparation of the document.
The Commission on Human Rights appointed a Drafting Committee for
preparing the International Bill of Rights. The Drafting Committee in its first Session
(9-25 January, 1947), prepared a preliminary draft of the International Bill of Rights
which was submitted before the Commission on Human Rights in the Second Session
(2-17 December, 1947). The Commission, due to the differences of opinion as to its
forms and contents, decided to apply the term ‘International Bill of Rights’ to a
series of documents. The Commission decided to create two sets of documents
simultaneously, i.e., a draft declaration of a declaration of general principles on
human rights, and a draft convention, which would be a convention on such specific
rights as would lend themselves to binding legal obligations. The Commission
established working groups to prepare the documents. After submission of reports
by the working groups, the Commission forwarded these reports to the governments
of the member countries for their comments. On receiving comments from the
governments, the Commission endorsed the matter to the Drafting Committee to re-
draft the documents (Declaration). The Committee re-drafted the entire Declaration.
The Commission in its Third Session (June, 1948) discussed the report and
finally adopted a draft of the Declaration for submission to the ECOSOC. The
ECOSOC submitted the draft before the General Assembly. The General Assembly
adopted the report through a resolution (Resolution 217 (iii) 10 December 1948)
known as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in Geneva. The
Declaration consisted of 30 Articles with a Preamble.
UDHR elucidated the UN Charter provisions and defined expressly certain
human rights and fundamental freedoms which needed to be protected. It may be
noted that ‘Human Rights Day’ is also celebrated all over the world on 10 December
marking the adoption of the Declaration.
Preamble of Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The preamble speaks of inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all
members of the human family as the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in
the world. Member states pledge to achieve, in co-operation with the UN, the
promotion of universal respect and observance of human rights and fundamental
freedoms. The Preamble states the following:

Neocolonialism Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and
inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation
of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
NOTES Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in
barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind,
and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom
of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been
proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have

recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression,
that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly

relations between nations,
Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter

reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity
and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and
women and have determined to promote social progress and better
standards of life in larger freedom,
Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in

co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal
respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental
freedoms,
Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is

of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
Now, therefore the GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims this

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a
common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to
the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping
this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and
education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by
progressive measures, national and international, to secure their
universal and effective recognition and observance, both among
the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples
of territories under their jurisdiction.
The Preamble proclaims the Declaration as a common standard of

achievement of all peoples and all nations. In case this proclamation is to be taken as
a reference or suggestion then it is important to understand to whom the reference
or suggestion is being made. It is not addressed either to the Members or to the
States or to the Governments. To ease the confusion, Hans Kelsen, jurist and legal
philosopher, says that the General Assembly recommends to every individual and Neocolonialism
every organ of the society to do something with respect to the human rights laid
down in the Declaration.
Human Rights and Provisions of Universal Declaration of Human Rights NOTES
The objective of UDHR is to endorse and protect various rights of human beings.
The UDHR with various provisions lists out the basic postulates and principles of
human rights in a most comprehensive manner. It deals not only with civil and political
rights, but also with social and economic rights.
General Provisions
Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed
with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of
brotherhood.
Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration,
without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political
or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore,
no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international
status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it is independent,
trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Civil and Political Rights
Article 3
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be
prohibited in all their forms.
Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment.
Article 6
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal
protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in
violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Neocolonialism Article 8
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for
acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
NOTES Article 9
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and
impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal
charge against him.
Article 11
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent
until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the
guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or
omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international
law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed
than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Article 12
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or
correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the
right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 13
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the
borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return
to his country.
Article 14
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from
persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising
from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles
of the United Nations.
Article 15
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to
change his nationality.

Article 16 Neocolonialism
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or
religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to
equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
NOTES
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the
intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled
to protection by society and the State.
Article 17
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with
others.
Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right
includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in
community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in
teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
This right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek,
receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of
frontiers.
Article 20
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 21
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly
or through freely chosen representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this
will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by
universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent
free voting procedures.
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Article 22
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to
realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance
Neocolonialism with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural
rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Article 23
NOTES (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and
favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal
work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring
for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and
supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of
his interests.
Article 24
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working
hours and periodic holidays with pay.
Article 25
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and
well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and
medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the
event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack
of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All
children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social
protection.
Article 26
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the
elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory.
Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and
higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality
and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations,
racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations
for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given
to their children.
Article 27
(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community,
to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests Neocolonialism
resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the
author.
Concluding Provision NOTES
Article 28
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms
set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.
Article 29
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full
development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to
such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing
due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of
meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare
in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the
purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 30
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or
person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction
of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
Significance of Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The UDHR is basically a proclamation of the all the inherent rights, which are
absolute and essential, and every individual is entitled to enjoy these rights. This
declaration is amongst the first all-inclusive agreement among Member States, which
describes rights and freedoms of every individual. The UDHR includes civil and
political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights. Examples of civil and
political rights include the right not to be subjected to torture, to equality before the
law, to a fair trial, to freedom of movement, to asylum and to freedom of thought,
conscience, religion, opinion, and expression. The right to food, clothing, housing,
and medical care, to social security, to work, to equal pay for equal work, to form
trade unions and to education are examples of economic, social and cultural rights.
The UDHR subsumes a comprehensive and common vision of inalienable human
rights and shared understanding of what constitutes the inalienable rights and freedoms
of all human beings in every corner of the globe.
The rights set forth in the UDHR have been reiterated and affirmed in
numerous international human rights treaties dealing with specific populations or
with specific rights and freedoms. The rights have also been incorporated into regional
human rights treaties and documents, such as the ‘European Convention of Human
Rights,’ the ‘European Social Charter,’ the ‘African Charter of Human and Peoples
Neocolonialism Rights,’ and the ‘Helsinki Accords.’ According to Henry Steiner, author, and Philip
Alston, human rights practitioner, to this day it retains its symbolism, rhetorical force,
and significance in human rights movement. It is the parent document, the initial
burst of enthusiasm, terser, more general, and grander than the treaties, in some
NOTES sense the constitution of the entire movement. This declaration is the most appealed
to for the implementation of human rights.
The Declaration is inspirational and recommendatory rather than being, in a
formal sense, binding. It is an authoritative statement of basic rights to which all are
entitled. It is accepted almost universally as a gauge by which governments can
measure their progress in the protection of human rights. It is constantly appealed to
in the General Assembly, Security Council and other organs and has been mentioned
in various international legal instruments. The main objective of UDHR is to present
the ideals of human rights and freedoms in order to inspire everybody to work for
their progressive realization.
Binding Effect of Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Those who adopted the UDHR did not imagine it to be a legally binding document;
however, its legal impact has grown wider over the years. Internationally, it has
been accepted as an essential legal code. Several international treaties, which are
legally binding, are derived from UDHR and many a time, it has been cited for
justifying various acts of the United Nations as well as that of the Security Council.
The UDHR was basically established as a ‘common standard of achievement for
all peoples and all nations’ and in the past six decades it has become an important
instrument in the International Law and countries around the world are expected to
abide by its principles.
The Declaration was not intended to be legally binding and therefore it did not
impose any legal obligations on the States to give effect to its provisions. From a legal
point of view, it was only a recommendation and was not strictly binding on the States.
It has legal value inasmuch as it contains an authoritative interpretation of the provisions
of the Charter. The General Assembly has declared (Resolution 2625 (XXV), dated
24 October 1970) that ‘the Charter precepts embodied in the Declaration constitutes
basic principles of International Law.’
Having a right is not the same thing as being either morally right or good.
Rights identify legitimate expectations as to what their holders may have or do.
Thus, if I have a right to speak, then I ought to be permitted to speak whether or not
other people think, for some other reason that it is right or good that I should speak.
Rights exclude or trump, other considerations being brought to bear in determining
entitlements. They are valuable normative features of institutional arrangements,
because they can be used to settle disputes, to bring order to human relationships,
and to protect the interests of those who have the rights in question.
Influence of Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The UDHR is a primary proclamation of the international community’s commitment
to human rights and is a basic criterion for realizing these rights for all individuals in

the world. It has inspired United Nations to take corrective actions in several of the Neocolonialism
international human rights treaties. UDHR has been responsible for a number of
declarations and international conventions concluded under the auspices of the UN
and of the specialized agencies. It has been a fundamental source of inspiration for
all national and international efforts to promote and protect human rights and NOTES
fundamental freedoms.
Its provisions have also influenced various national constitutions, national
legislations, regulations and policies that protect fundamental human rights. These
domestic manifestations include direct reference to the UDHR or incorporation of
its provisions. The Declaration is frequently cited in support of judicial decisions
which upheld a particular right guaranteed under domestic constitutions or statutes.
UDHR as a Customary International Law
When UDHR was being adopted, it was agreed that it would not impose any legal
obligation on the member States. The Declaration, however, has been appealed to
several times both within and outside the UN and because of general acceptance
and common legal opinion, it has been asserted that whatever the intention of its
authors may have been, some of the provisions have grown into customary law of
nations, and therefore are binding on all States. If the UDHR is regarded to have
acquired the status of customary rules it would imply that the subject covered by it,
at least in principle, shall be governed by international law and is thus outside the
domestic jurisdiction of the concerned states.
The view that the UDHR has acquired the character of customary rule of
international law is difficult to accept in view of insufficient State practice. However,
it may be said that some provisions of UDHR do reflect customary international
law, e.g., Articles 1, 2 and 7 expressing right to equality, Article 4 consisting provision
against slavery, Article 5 consisting provision against torture, Article 9 consisting
provision against arbitrary arrest and detention.
India and Universal Declaration of Human Rights
India has adopted the UDHR. The UDHR came into existence in the year 1948 and
the Constitution of India came into existence in the year 1950. The different provisions
of UDHR constituting various human rights and the fundamental rights enshrined
under Part III of the Constitution of India are similar. The Indian Constitution is
widely held to have provided the model for the latter’s human rights guarantees.
The Apex Court of India in many cases has viewed that the UDHR is not a legally
binding instrument; however, the founders of our Indian Constitution have shown
their foresight about the provisions of UDHR by incorporating Part III consisting of
fundamental rights. For example, in cases like the Kesvananda Bharti v. State of
Kerala and, Chariman, Railway Board and others v. Mrs. Chandrima Das, the
SC has observed that the UDHR has a moral code of conduct that has been adopted
by the General Assembly of the UN. If the need arises, the principles of the UDHR
may be applied to domestic jurisprudence.

Neocolonialism Limitations of UDHR
The UDHR, on a broad scale, has three limitations. The following are the three
limitations of UDHR:
NOTES • It is not binding on States as law but rather a UN recommendation to States.
• Some of its provisions are as general as that of Article 55 of the UN Charter.
• The Declaration offered no means of implementation other than State goodwill.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

9. When is the ‘Human Rights Day’ celebrated?
10. State the main objective of UDHR.
11. What is the validity of the UDHR from a legal point of view?
3.5 SUMMARY
• The dissolution of the Soviet Union (USSR) in December 1991 saw the United
States of America standing as the reigning super power. This period also
witnessed political scientists and thinkers proposing and rewriting theories on
world power.
• There are many theories propsosed by scientists like Bernard Lewis, Samuel
P Huntington etc.
• It was Bernard Lewis who first used the term clash of civilization. In his
article in the September 1990, Lewis had forecast war would break out among
major civilization in 2020. His theory states that American troops would have
left South Korea, which would lead to reunification of Korean and lessen the
presence for US troops in Japan.
• Huntington’s hypothesis claimed the US will avoid escalating the war due to
domestic pressure wherein the public would view it as American hegemony
in Southeast Asia or control of the South China Sea. While China would be
engaged in war, India would attack Pakistan, which would be joined by Iran
on Pakistan’s side.
• Huntington’s hypothesis divides the global powers between two groups —
the US, Europe, Russia, and India on one side, and China, Japan, and most of
Islamic countries on the other. In case of another world war, the destruction
would be substantial since both sides have nuclear capabilities. But if mutual
deterrence is effective, mutual exhaustion might lead to a negotiated armistice.
• Huntington thesis was that ‘civilization consciousness’ would amplify cultural
differences and that is one of the causes of fault line wars. Unrestricted
movement of people (along with capital) allows economic and political unity
which in turn prevents wars.

• A unipolar world is a situation where a single country acts unilaterally with Neocolonialism
little or no assistance from other countries and manoeuvres international issues;
other states or even a combination of states lack the power to prevent it from
doing so.
• A multipolar world is one where alliances are formed among states to tackle NOTES
international issues. A powerful coalition can resist as well as override stances
taken by smaller groups or states.
• A ‘uni-multipolar world’, is one in which resolution of important international
issues call for action by a single superpower in coalition with other major
state powers.
• America’s superpowerdom has had different levels of response, mostly
negative. At one level, which is relatively low, there is resentment, envy and
fear. At a little higher level, the resentment may turn into dissent, with other
countries refusing to cooperate with it.
• The debate on unipolar versus multipolar is still on. For obvious reasons, the
US and some of its minor allies, like Britain, argue in favor of a unipolar
world. This is opposed by the rest of the world arguing in favor of multi-
polarity. Led by Chirac (France), powers such as Russia, China, India, Brazil,
and a host of lesser powers are working towards a multipolar world.
• Neo-colonialism may simply refer to the involvement of powerful countries in
the affairs of less powerful countries; this is especially relevant in Africa and
Latin America. In this sense, neo-colonialism implies a form of contemporary,
economic imperialism in which powerful nations behave like colonial powers
of imperialism, and this behaviour is linked to colonialism in a post-colonial
world.
• Economic dependencies are those countries which are politically independent.
However, they are not in a position to conduct their economic affairs
independently, as they are dependent upon a foreign state (often from the
developed world) for financial and technical assistance. By extending economic
assistance in the form of grant and loans, the developed countries control the
economic policies of these economic dependencies.
• The Third World countries are not merely the countries involved in the non-
alignment movement, but also is used to denote the countries which had a
colonial history. These countries are also known to have a newly industrialized
economy or countries with a backward and poor economy. The term ‘third
world’ countries is also used sometimes to refer to the countries which newly
gained their independence.
• The main contention of the dependency theorists was that ‘developing countries
were trapped in a cycle of dependence on international capital in which there
was little room to maneuver.’
• Immanuel Wallerstein propounded the centre-periphery theory, also known
as the metropolis-satellite theory. This theory initiated the idea of ‘world
economy’. It argued that in the world economy ‘movement within and between
Neocolonialism the centre and the periphery was possible’ but the movement was ‘regulated
by market forces’.
• The Third World countries were dissatisfied with the ‘existing international
economic structure’ as it increased the gap between the rich and the poor. In
NOTES 1974, they demanded the creation of a New International Economic Order
(NIEO) in the Sixth Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly.
The main idea behind the NIEO was to restructure economic relations between
the developed and the developing countries ‘in favour of redistribution of
wealth.’
• The word non-alignment defines the refusal of states to take sides with one
or the other of the two principal opposed groups of powers such as existed at
the time of the Cold War. Non-alignment can be defined as not entering into
military alliances with any country, either of the Western bloc led by the US
or the communist bloc led by the USSR. It is an assertion of independence in
foreign policy.
• George Schwarzenberger deals with the concepts which are often regarded
as synonymous with the concept of non-alignment. These are: isolationism,
noncommitment, neutrality, neutralization, unilateralism and non-involvement.
• Non-alignment has been adopted as a foreign policy by all the developing and
under developed countries during the Cold War so that they can keep
themselves away from the Camp Politics of the powerful nations.
• After the end of the cold war the reason for the existence of NAM was
questioned. In modern international politics, the NAM has relatively lesser
visibility and voice as compared to other organizations, such as the United
Nations, the European Union, NATO and even ECOWAS.
• NAM continues to be the need of the 21th century. It has not only been a
movement against the Cold War and alliance politics, it has also been a positive
moment for the unity of the new (Third World) states for ending imperialism,
colonialism, neo-colonialism as well as for securing disarmament and arms
control, particularly nuclear disarmament. NAM is needed for securing
economic and political rights of the developing countries vis-a -vis the
developed countries and for securing a new world order based on equality,
justice, freedom and development.
• The preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights speaks of
inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the
human family as the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world.
Member states pledge to achieve, in co-operation with the UN, the promotion
of universal respect and observance of human rights and fundamental
freedoms.
• The objective of UDHR is to endorse and protect various rights of human
beings. The UDHR with various provisions lists out the basic postulates and
principles of human rights in a most comprehensive manner. It deals not only
with civil and political rights, but also with social and economic rights.

• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is inspirational and Neocolonialism
recommendatory rather than being, in a formal sense, binding. It is an
authoritative statement of basic rights to which all are entitled. It is accepted
almost universally as a gauge by which governments can measure their
progress in the protection of human rights. NOTES
• India has adopted the UDHR. The UDHR came into existence in the year
1948 and the Constitution of India came into existence in the year 1950. The
different provisions of UDHR constituting various human rights and the
fundamental rights enshrined under Part III of the Constitution of India are
similar.
3.6 KEY TERMS
• Civilization: It refers to a group of people having common objective elements

such as language, history, religion, customs, institutions, and by the subjective
self-idntification of people.
• Uni-multipolar world: It is a world in which resolution of important
international issues call for action by a single superpower in coalition with
other major state powers.
• Neo-colonialism: It refers to a form of contemporary, economic imperialism
in which powerful nations behave like colonial powers of imperialism, and
this behaviour is linked to colonialism in a post-colonial world.
• Non-alignment: It is the refusal of states to take sides with one or the other
of the two principal opposed groups of powers such as existed at the time of
the Cold War.
1. The two groups of global power as per Huntington’s hypothesis are: 1) US,
Europer, Russia and India on one side and 2) China, Japan and most of Islamic
countries on the other.
2. According to Huntington’s ‘kin-country syndrome’, a country in war with
another country, but of a different civilization, will gather support from within
its own civilization.
3. The economic factor which favours the Western monopolies and acts against
the developing world is the international capital’s control of the world market
as well as of the prices of commodities that are bought and sold there.
4. As per the dependency theory, the present situation of slow economic progress
was likely to continue until the industrialized countries stopped exploiting the
resources of the underdeveloped countries.
5. The critics of free trade argue that international trade produces a value transfer
from less developed countries to more advanced ones. Such transfer shows
up in the form of losses for less industrialised societies through declining
Neocolonialism terms of trade for their products visa-vis the processed goods they import.
Trade imbalance in Third World countries is worsened by the persisting need
to import oil and machinery.
6. Neutrality describes the political and legal status of a country not at war with
NOTES either of the two belligerents. Neutralization on the other hand, is different
form neutrality, because a neutral state remains free to give up its status of
neutrality because a neutral state remains free to give up its status of neutrality
and assume that of a belligerent.
7. Jawaharlal Nehru is the Indian leader who was considered as a strong pillar
of the Non-alignment movement.
8. Multilateralism under the aegis of the United Nations is the framework in
which complex baffling and critical problems of the present age, namely nuclear
weapons race, environmental pollution, economic inequality, international
terrorism, nuclear hegemony and several others, can be solved.
9. ‘Human Rights Day’ is celebrated all over the world on 10 December marking
the adoption of the Declaration.
10. The main objective of UDHR is to present the ideals of human rights and
freedoms in order to inspire everybody to work for their progressive realization.
11. From a legal point of view, the UDHR is only a recommendation and not
strictly binding on the States.
1. Write a short note on religion as the sole cause of the conflicts in the world.
2. What is the criticism against the unipolar and multipolar world order?
3. Briefly explain the mechanism of neo-colonialism.
4. What is the relevance of the Non-Alignment movement in the 21st century?
5. Give a summary of the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.
1. Explain the Huntington hypothesis on world power.
2. Compare and contrast the unipolar and multipolar world systems.
3. Describe the theories related to the emergence and problems of the Third
world nations.
4. Discuss the origin and phases of the Non-alignment movement.
5. Elucidate on the significance and the influence of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights.
6. Discuss the success and failures of the several NAM summits.
Neocolonialism
3.9 FURTHER READING
Bajpai, K. and Siddhartha Mallavarapu (Eds). 2005. International Relations in

India: Bringing theory Back Home. New Delhi: Orient Blackswan. NOTES
Freeman, Michael. 2011. Human Rights. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fagan, Andrew. 2009. Human Rights - Confronting Myths and
Misunderstandings. United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
John Baylis, Steve Smith and Patricia Owens. 2008. The Globalization of World
Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Morgenthau, Hans J. 2005. Politics Among Nations. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Goldstein, Joshua. 2005. International Relations. Pearson Education, Inc. and
Dorling Kindersley Publishing Inc.

International Organizations
UNIT 4 INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS
NOTES
Structure
4.0 Introduction
4.1 Unit Objectives
4.2 The League Covenant and the United Nations Charter Compared
4.3 Purposes and Principles of the UNO, UN Charter, Principal Organs
of the UNO
4.4 International Organizations
4.4.1 SAARC
4.4.2 OPEC
4.4.3 WTO
4.4.4 IMF
4.5 Summary
4.6 Key Terms
4.9 Further Reading
4.0 INTRODUCTION
The world up until now has witnessed two World Wars, one Cold War and several
other disputes among nations. The differences which lead to such destructive ends
have been varied, from the fight over limited resources to the dispute over beliefs
and ideologies and a lot of times a pure thirst for power and expansion. Whatever be
the reason, our world can never afford to bear wars be it a small or a large level.
The destruction of lives, properties and resources can never be fully recompensed
with. And this is why it is important that the nations of the world with the different
interests learn to peacefully coexist. The organizations set up on the worldwide level
have some agreed upon objectives to ensure that the situation doesn’t escalate to
the level of war. In this unit, we will learn about the League Covenant, the United
Nations; the purposes and principles of the UNO, UN Charter, Principal Organs of
the UNO and the different international organizations such as the SAARC, OPEC,
WTO and IMF.

4.1 UNIT OBJECTIVES

NOTES • Explain the League Covenant and the United Nations Charter
• Describe the purposes and principles of the UNO, UN CHARTER and the
principle organs of the UNO
• Discuss international organizations such as the SAARC, OPEC, WTO and
IMF
4.2 THE LEAGUE COVENANT AND THE UNITED

NATIONS CHARTER COMPARED
In this section, we will have a look at the two prominent worldwide organizations:
The League Covenant and The United Nations Charter.
League of Nations was the first stable worldwide security organization whose major
aim was to uphold world peace. It was an intergovernmental association. It was
established as a result of the Paris Peace Conference. The League of Nations had
its maximum extent from 28 September 1934 to 23 February 1935. It comprised
fifty-eight members.
Origin
The 20th century provided the world two main power blocs through alliances between
powerful European countries. These coalitions came into power in 1914, i.e. at the
beginning of the World War I, drawing all the main European countries into the war.
When the war ended in November 1918, it had had a profound impact, endangering
the social, political and economic fabrics of Europe and inflicting psychological and
physical harm on the continent. Anti-war feeling rose across the world sovereign
states to enter into war for their own advantage.
The Paris Peace Conference was summoned to build a permanent peace
after World War I. The Covenant of the League of Nations was prepared by a
particular commission, and the League was set up by Part I of the Treaty of Versailles.
On 28 June 1919, fourty-four countries signed the Covenant, including thirty-one
countries that participated in the war on the side of the Triple Entente or joined when
the war was going on.
Goals
Its primary goals, as mentioned in its Covenant, included the following:
• Preventing war by combined security and disarmament
• Settling global disputes by negotiation and arbitration

Other goals in this and pertaining treaties were as follows: International Organizations
• Labour conditions
• Just treatment of native inhabitants
• Trafficking in persons and drugs
NOTES
• Arms trade
• Global health
• Prisoners of war
• Safeguard of minorities in Europe
The diplomatic philosophy behind the League reflected a basic shift in thought
from the preceding hundred years.
Span
The League of Nations did not possess its own armed forces; therefore, it depended
on the Great Powers to put into effect its resolutions, for being offered with army
when needed. At several times the great powers refused to adhere to this
arrangement.
Benito Mussolini replied with the comment that ‘the League is very well
when sparrows shout, but no good at all when eagles fall out’ when, during the
Second Italo-Abyssinian War, the League accused Italian soldiers of targeting Red
Cross medical tents.
Languages and symbols
French, English and Spanish (from 1920) were the official languages of the League
of Nations. It also considered adopting Esperanto as its working language and actively
encouraging its use but none of the option was ever adopted.
Emblem
In 1939, the League of Nations had a semi-official emblem — Two five-pointed
stars within a blue pentagon. The symbol referred to the five continents and five
races on the Earth. A bow on top and at the bottom showed the name in English
(League of Nations) and French. This flag was installed on the building of the New
York World’s Fair in 1939 and 1940.
Postal department
The postal department of the League was very active. Huge numbers of mailings
were carried out from headquarters, the specialized agencies and at global
conferences. In many instances, exceptional envelopes or overprinted postage stamps
were employed.
Principal organs
The following were the constitutional organs of the league:
• The assembly
• The council

International Organizations • The permanent secretariat (headed by the general secretary and based in
Geneva)
It had two important wings in the permanent court of International Justice
and the International Labour Organization.
NOTES
The covenant implied the setup of auxiliary bodies for a variety of questions
of a relatively technical character. Thus, the League had many agencies and
commissions.
Concord was needed for the decisions of both — the assembly and the council,
apart from the matters of procedure and some other precise cases, for example, the
admission of new members. This general regulation concerning agreement was the
gratitude of national sovereignty.
Secretariat
The Permanent Secretariat, set up at the seat of the League at Geneva (Figure 4.1),
consisted of a body of experts in several spheres under the direction of the General
Secretary. The major sections of the secretariat were:
• Political
• Financial
• Economics
• Transit
• Minorities
• Administration
• Mandates
• Disarmament
• Health
• Social
Fig. 4.1 Palace of Nations, Geneva, the League’s Headquarters from 1929
until its Dissolution

Staff International Organizations
The Staff of the League’s secretariat was accountable for readying the agenda for
the council and assembly and printing reports of the meetings and other scheduled
matters, efficiently acting as the civil service for the League.
NOTES
Assembly
The assembly comprised representatives of all associates of the League. Each state
was permitted up to three representatives and one vote. The exceptional functions
of the Assembly involved:
• The admission of new Members
• The periodical election on non-permanent Members of the council
• The election with the council of the judges of the permanent court
• The control of the budget.
In a way, the Assembly had become the general directing force of League’s activities.
Permanent Court of International Justice
The Covenant provided the Permanent Court of International Justice, but it was not
established by it. The Council and Assembly framed its constitution. Its judges were
appointed by the Council and Assembly, and its budget was approved by the Assembly.
The Court included eleven judges and four deputy-judges, who were elected for
nine years.
International Labour Organization
The International Labour Organization (ILO) was set up in 1919 on the basis of part
XIII of the Treaty of Versailles and thus became the part of the League’s operations.
Health Organization
The League’s health organization included the following three bodies:
• A Health Bureau, containing permanent officials of the League, an executive
section
• The General Advisory Council or Conference consisting of medical experts
• A Health Committee
Committee on Intellectual Cooperation
The League of Nations had focused on the question of international intellectual
cooperation right from the time of its creation. The work of the Committee involved
enquiry into the states of intellectual life, help to countries whose intellectual life was
scarce, formation of national committees for intellectual cooperation, collaboration
with global intellectual organizations and security of intellectual property.
Slavery commission
The Slavery Commission was made to eliminate slavery and slave trading across
the globe and fought forced prostitution.
International Organizations Committee for the study of the legal status of women
The committee for the study of the legal status of women was made to conduct an
inquiry into the status of women across the world.
NOTES Members
Among the League’s fourty-two founding members, twenty-three (or twenty-four,
counting Free France) did not leave the League until it was dissolved in 1946. In the
beginning year, six other countries joined, only two of which remained as its members
till it got dissolved. An additional fifteen countries joined in later years.
Resolving Territorial Disputes
The consequences of World War I left a lot of issues to be settled between nations,
including the precise position of national boundaries and which country in the particular
regions would like to join. Most of these questions were taken care by the triumphant
allied powers in bodies for example the allied supreme council.
Albania
The borders of Albania had not been set all through the Paris Peace Conference in
1919, being left to the League to make a decision, but had not yet been decided by
September 1921. This led to an unbalanced situation with Greek troops frequently
crossing into Albanian territory on military actions in the south and Yugoslavian
forces engaged, after fights with Albanian tribesmen, far into the northern part of
the nation. The League sent a commission of representatives from diverse powers
to the area and in November 1921 and decided that the boundaries of Albania should
be the similar as they were in 1913 with three small changes that favoured Yugoslavia.
Yugoslav forces pulled back a few weeks later, albeit under objection. Mussolini
ordered a warship to shell the Greek island of Corfu and Italian forces captured that
island on 31 August 1923. This breached the League’s covenant so Greece demanded
the League’s intervention in dealing with the situation.
Aland Islands
Åland is a group of around 6,500 islands that are located between Sweden and
Finland. The islands are entirely Swedish speaking, but in 1809, Sweden had lost
both Finland and the Åland Islands to Imperial Russia. In December 1917, during
the chaos of the Russian October Revolution, Finland declared freedom, and the
majority of the Ålanders wished the islands to become part of Sweden again. The
government of Finland, however, felt that the islands should be the part of their new
nation, as the Russians had included Åland in the Grand Duchy of Finland formed in
1809. By 1920, the clash had spiralled to such a level that there was a risk of war.
The British government referred the crisis to the League’s Council, but Finland did
not let the League interfere as it considered it a domestic matter. The League came
up a small panel to determine if the League should examine the matter and, with a
positive response, a neutral commission was set up. In June 1921, the League declared
its decision; the islands should remain a part of Finland but with guaranteed safety of
the islanders, including demilitarization. With Sweden’s unwilling agreement, this
became the first European global agreement concluded unswervingly through the International Organizations
League.
The United Nations was founded in 1945 after World War II to substitute the League NOTES
of Nations, to end wars between nations and to offer a platform for dialogue. It
contains manifold subsidiary organizations to complete its missions. The name ‘United
Nations’ was planned by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt and was first applied
in the ‘Declaration by United Nations’ of 1 January 1942, during the World War II,
when envoys of twenty-six nations vowed their governments to carry on fighting
together against the Axis Powers.
The idea
The idea for the future United Nations as a global organization came up in declarations
signed at the time of the World War II at the wartime Allied conferences: the Moscow
Conference and the Tehran Conference in 1943. From August to October 1944,
envoys of France, the Republic of China, the United Kingdom, the United States,
and the USSR met to discuss plans at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference in
Washington, D.C. Those and later talks led to the proposals outlining the functions
of the United Nations Organization, its membership and organs, as well as
arrangements to keep international peace and security and global economic and
social cooperation. Governments and private citizens, all-inclusive, discussed and
debated these suggestions.
The origin
The United Nations Charter was drafted by the envoys of fifty countries at the
United Nations Conference on International Organization, which met at San Francisco
from 25 April to 26 June 1945. The members deliberated the aims worked out by the
envoys of — China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States at
Dumbarton Oaks in August-October 1944. The Charter was signed on 26 June
1945 by the envoys of the fifty nations. Poland, which was not present at the
Conference, signed it later and became one of the original fifty-one Member States.
The United Nations formally came into subsistence on 24 October 1945, when the
Charter had been ratified by China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom
and the United States and by a majority of other signatories. On 24 October each
year, the United Nations Day is celebrated.
Establishment
On April 25, 1945, the United Nations conference on global organization started in
San Francisco. In addition to governments, many non-governmental organizations,
including Rotary International and Lions Clubs International were invited to help in
the drafting of a charter. After a hard work of two months, the fifty countries
represented at the conference signed the Charter of the United Nations on June 26.
Poland, which was incapable of sending a representative to the conference because
of political instability, signed the charter on 15 October 1945. The charter noted that

International Organizations before it would be implemented, it must be ratified by the governments of the Republic
of China, France, the USSR, the United Kingdom and the United States, and by a
majority of the other fourty-six signatories. That happened on 24 October 1945 and
the United Nations was officially established.
NOTES The League of Nations officially dissolved itself on 18 April 1946 and handed
over its mission to the United Nations.
The High Hopes
The UN leaders had high hopes that it would take action to stop conflicts between
nations and make future wars impossible. Those hopes have clearly not completely
come to pass. From about 1947 until 1991, the splitting up of the world into hostile
camps during the Cold War made accord on peacekeeping matters very hard. After
the end of the Cold War, renewed calls arose for the UN to turn out to be the agency
for attaining world peace and collaboration, as several dozen active military
disagreements continued to rage across the globe. The disintegration of the Soviet
Union has also left the United States in a sole position of international dominance,
creating a number of new problems for the UN.
The Aim
The United Nations is a global organization whose declared aims are as follows:
• Facilitating cooperation in international law
• International security
• Economic development
• Social progress
• Human rights
• Achievement of world peace
It has its offices all across the world. The UN and its specialized agencies
decide on substantive and secretarial issues in regular meetings held throughout the
year.
Six principal organs
The organization has the following six principal organs:
• The General Assembly (the main deliberative assembly)
• The Security Council (for deciding certain resolutions for peace and security)
• The Economic and Social Council (for assisting in promoting international
economic and social cooperation and development)
• The Secretariat (for providing studies, information and facilities needed by
the UN)
• The International Court of Justice (the primary judicial organ)
• The United Nations Trusteeship Council (which is currently inactive)

Other famous UN System agencies include the World Health Organization International Organizations
(WHO), the World Food Programme (WFP) and United Nations Children’s Fund
(UNICEF).
Legal basis of establishment NOTES
Just after its setting up, the UN sought identification as an international legal person.
Therefore, the court has come to the conclusion that the organization is a global
person. That is not the similar as saying that it is a State, which it surely is not, or that
its legal personality and rights and duties are the same as those of a State ... What it
does mean is that it is a subject of international law and competent of possessing
international rights and duties, and that it has ability to maintain its rights by bringing
global claims.
The General Assembly
The General Assembly (Figure 4.2) is the major deliberative assembly of the United
Nations. It comprises of all the United Nations’ member states. The assembly meets
in regular annual sessions under a president elected from among the member nations.
Over a two-week period at the beginning of each session, all members have the
chance to address the assembly. Usually, the Secretary-General makes the initial
statement, followed by the president of the assembly. The first session was convened
on 10 January 1946 in the Westminster Central Hall in London and incorporated
representatives of fifty-one nations. When the General Assembly votes on significant
questions, a two-thirds majority of those present and voting is needed.
Fig. 4.2 The General Assembly
UN Headquarters in New York City

In December 1945, the US Senate and the US House of Representatives, by agreed
votes, requested that the UN establish its headquarters in the United States. The
UN accepted this proposal and, after considering sites in the Black Hills, The UN
headquarters formally opened on 9 January 1951. Although the main headquarters
of the UN remain in New York City, chief agencies base themselves in Geneva, The
Hague, Vienna (Figure 4.3), Nairobi and elsewhere.

NOTES
Fig. 4.3 UN Building in Vienna
Structure and associated organizations

The essential constitutional makeup of the United Nations has altered a little, though
greatly increased membership has changed the functioning of some elements. The
UN has generated a rich variety of non-governmental organizations and individual
bodies over the years: some with a regional focus, some specific to a variety of
peacekeeping missions, and others of global scope and significance. Other bodies
(such as the International Labour Organization) formed before the setting up of the
United Nations and only then became associated with. Over the lifetime of the UN,
over eighty colonies have achieved freedom. The General Assembly adopted the
Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in
1960 with no votes against but abstentions from all main colonial powers. Through
the UN Committee on Decolonization, set up in 1962, the UN has focused substantial
attention on decolonization.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

1. Name the conference which was summoned to build a permanent peace
after World War I.
2. Which treaty specified the setting up of the International Labour
Organization in the year 1919?
3. When the UN General Assembly votes on significant questions, what kind
of a majority is required?
4.3 PURPOSES AND PRINCIPLES OF THE UNO,

UN CHARTER, PRINCIPAL ORGANS OF THE
UNO
The United Nations Organization (UNO), as we have learnt is better known

as the United Nations (UN), is an international organization. It was founded on
24 October 1945 after the Second World War, replacing the League of Nations, to International Organizations
prevent any further wars between countries and provide a platform for dialogue. It
contains multiple subsidiary organizations to carry out its missions.
There are currently 192 member states, including nearly every sovereign
state in the world. From its offices around the world, the UN and its specialized NOTES
agencies decide on substantive and administrative issues in regular meetings held
throughout the year
Objectives of United Nations
The objectives of United Nations are enshrined in the Preamble of the UN Charter.
It has been given in the following four objectives, which are mentioned as follows:
(i) To save the succeeding generations from the scourge of war
(ii) To reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the work and dignity of
human person and equal rights of men, women and nations large and small
(iii) To establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations
arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained
(iv) To promote social progress and better standard of life in large freedom.
Objectives, purpose and principles of united nations
The constitution of the United Nations is the Charter of the UN. It has nineteen
chapters which is divided into 111 articles that explain the purposes, principles and
operating methods of the organization.
(i) Objectives
The objectives of the UN are enshrined in the preamble to the Charter of UN. It has
the four objectives as mentioned below:
(a) To save the succeeding generations from the scourge of war
(b) To reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the work and dignity of the
human person and equal rights of men, women and nations large and small.
(c) To establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations
arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained,
and
(d) To promote social progress and better standard of life in larger freedom.
(ii) Purpose
The purpose of the UN has been set forth in Article 1 of the Charter. These are
mentioned as follows:
(a) Maintenance of international peace and security
(b) Development of friendly relations among nations
(c) International cooperation in solving problems of economic, social, cultural
and humanitarian nature; promotion and encouragement of respect for human
rights and fundamental freedoms; and
International Organizations (d) To be a center of harmonizing the actions of nations to achieve the above
ends.
(iii) Principles
NOTES To fulfill the purposes of the UN, the following principles are envisaged in Article 2
of the Charter. It has been mentioned as follows:
(a) The organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its
members.
(b) All members shall fulfill in good faith the obligations they have assumed under
the Charter.
(c) The members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means.
(d) The members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or
use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purpose of the UN.
Principal organ of United Nations
The United Nations has six official languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, French,
Russian, and Spanish. As we have discussed in the previous section, the six principle
organs of the UN are:
(a) The General Assembly
(b) The Security Council
(c) The Economic and Social Council
(d) The Secretariat
(e) The International Court of Justice and
(f) The United Nations Trusteeship Council
General Assembly
The General Assembly is the only major organ in which all members are presented.
It is the apex body of the United Nations. It has been described as ‘the town meeting
of the world’ since all members are ipso facto members of the General Assembly.
It is the main deliberative assembly of the United Nations and also one of the most
important of the six principal organs. As it is the forum in which all member states
are represented and in which each member has an equal vote irrespective of its size
or population. The importance of the General Assembly has grown through the
expansion of UN membership.
Composition of General Assembly
According to the Article 4 of Chapter 2 of the United Nations Charter, the membership
of United Nations is open to all peace-loving states which accept the obligations as
well as the judgment of the Organization that is contained in the present Charter and
are able and willing to carry out these obligations. The admission of any such state
to membership in the United Nations will be effected by a decision of the General
Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.

Beginning with fifty-one nations at the end of the Second World War, the International Organizations
membership of the General Assembly has grown to 192 members at present. All the
members of the General Assembly are the member states of United Nations.
The General Assembly meets in regular yearly sessions under a president,
who is elected from among the member states. The first session was convened on NOTES
10 January 1946 in the Westminster Central Hall in London and included
representatives of fifty-one nations. Traditionally, the Secretary-General makes the
first statement, followed by the president of the assembly. Over a two-week period
at the start of each session, all members have the opportunity to address the assembly.
Each member country has one vote. Apart from approval of budgetary matters,
resolutions are not binding on the members. The Assembly may make
recommendations on any matters within the scope of the UN, except matters of
peace and security that are under Security Council consideration. When the General
Assembly votes on important questions, a two-thirds majority of those present and
voting is required. All other questions are decided by majority vote. The examples of
important questions include:
• Recommendations on peace and security;
• Election of members to organs;
• Admission of new members,
• Suspension, and expulsion of members; and,
• Budgetary matters
Committee of General Assembly
The General Assembly is quite a large body and therefore for an effective deliberation,
it works through various Committees. The matters are allocated to the various
committees on the advice of the General Committee. The main committees of the
General Assembly in addition to the General Committee, are as follows:
(i) First Committee (Disarmament and related International Security Matters
(ii) Special Political Committee
(iii) Second Committee (Economic and Financial matters)
(iv) Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural matters)
(v) Fourth Committee (Decolonization matters)
(vi) Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary matters)
(vii) Sixth Committee (Legal matters)
Functions and powers of General Assembly
The General Assembly performs varied and extensive functions which can be studied
under the following heads:
(i) Deliberative functions
The General Assembly can discuss any question or matter within the scope of the
UN Charter and relating to any organ of the United Nations. It can invite the attention

International Organizations of the Security Council to the situation which is likely to endanger international
peace and security. It can also recommend measures for the peaceful adjustment of
situation which is likely to disturb the friendly relations amongst nations.
The General Assembly can also initiate studies and make recommendations
NOTES for the following:
(a) Promoting international co-operation in political arena and encourage
progress of international law and its codification
(b) Promoting international co-operation in the economic, social, cultural,
education and health fields
(c) Assisting in realizing human rights and fundamental freedom for all
without discrimination as to race, sex, language or religion.
However, the recommendations of the General Assembly do not possess any
legal sanction and are merely an expression of opinion or advice of the Assembly
which is not binding on the member states.
(ii) Legislative functions
The General Assembly has also performed legislative functions even though the UN
Charter did not assign any legislative functions to the Assembly. This occurs whenever
there can not be an agreement between any countries, they would refer the matter
to the General Assembly for its recommendations on the issues, with the
understanding that the recommendations of the General Assembly would be binding
on the parties; as it had happened in the case of US, Great Britain, France and
Soviet Union in relation to the disposal of their Italian colonies.
(iii) Supervisory functions
The supervisory functions of the General Assembly include the power to exert control
and regulate working of other organs and agencies of the United Nations. It receives
and considers annual and special reports from other organs of the United Nations.
Thus, the Security Council reports to the General Assembly the measures decided
upon or taken for the maintenances of international peace and security.
(iv) Financial functions
The General Assembly enjoys important financial powers as it appoints expenses
among the member states and approves the budget of the United Nations. It has to
also review the working of the other organs of the United Nation as the responsibility
for the financial and budgetary arrangements of the specialized agencies of the
organization also rests with the General Assembly. The control over finances gives
the General Assembly the power to supervise and control the activities of other
organs and agencies of the organization.
(v) Electoral functions
The Electoral Functions of the General Assembly include the admission of new
members and selection of members of other organs. It admits new members to the
UN on the recommendation of the Security Council but no new members can be
admitted without an affirmative vote of the General Assembly.
The General Assembly can also suspend a member on the basis of International Organizations
recommendations of the Security Council on the ground of violating the principles of
the UN Charter continuously.
The General Assembly also elects members of several other organs such as
the ten non-permanent members of the Security Council, the judges of the International NOTES
Court of Justice for a period of nine years in concurrence with the Security Council.
It also appoints the Secretary General on the recommendation of the Security Council.
(vi) Constituent functions
The General Assembly enjoys important power with regard to the amendments of
the Charter. The amendments to the UN Charter can be carried out by the General
Assembly by two thirds majority of its members. However, this member has to be
ratified by two thirds of the members of the United Nations, including all permanent
members of the Security Council, in accordance with their constitutional processes.
The General Assembly can also convene a General Conference in concurrence
with the Security Council to review the original Charter. For the discharge of these
duties, the General Assembly can establish various committees and subsidiary organs.
Some of the Committees which have been set up by the General Assembly in this
regard include the Political and Security Committee, Economic and Financial
Committee, Social Humanitarian and Cultural Committee, Trusteeship Committee,
Administrative and Budgetary Committee, Legal Committee, General Committee
and the Credential Committee.
Security Council
The Security Council is often described as the enforcement wing of the United
Nations. Its primary responsibility is to maintain international peace and security
among countries. In other words, the services can be requisitioned any time; the
Security Council has to work continuously so that it can take quick action in the
event of threat to international peace and security.
While the other organs of the United Nations can only make ‘recommendations’
to member governments, the Security Council has the power to make binding decisions
that the member governments have agreed to carry out, under the terms
of Charter Article 25. The decisions of the Council are known as United Nations
Security Council resolutions.
Composition of the Security Council
The Security Council is made up of fifteen member states, consisting of five permanent
members- namely; China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States–
and ten non-permanent members. The five permanent members hold veto
power over substantive but not procedural resolutions allowing a permanent member
to block adoption but not to block the debate of a resolution unacceptable to it.
The ten temporary seats are held for two-year terms with member states
voted in by the General Assembly on a regional basis. The presidency of the Security
Council is rotated alphabetically each month and is held by Uganda for the month of

International Organizations October 2010 followed by United Kingdom and United States till December 2010
and in January 2011it will start from Bosnia and Herzegovina followed by Brazil.
Functions and powers of Security Council
NOTES The UN Charter has entrusted the responsibility of maintenance international peace
and security to the Security Council. It is for this purpose that all members of the
United Nations are committed to carry out the decisions of the Security Council.
The main functions of the Security Council can be conveniently studied under
the following heads:
(i) Deliberative functions
The Security Council has the power to discuss and investigate any dispute or situation
and make recommendations to the member states to settle their disputes by peaceful
means. Any disputes or a situation that is likely to endanger international peace and
security may be brought to the attention of the Security Council by any member of
UN, General Assembly or by the Secretary General.
Even the non member states can bring the dispute before the Council provided
they accept in advance the obligations of a peaceful settlements contained in the
UN Charter.
(ii) Enforcement functions
The Security Council has also been vested with important enforcement powers.
This include adopting measures such as partial or complete interruption of economic
relations such as severing of rail, sea, air, postal, radio and other communications
links like snapping of diplomatic relations; when the Security Council finds peaceful
settlement among the disputant countries is not possible.
The Security Council can also urge the member nation states to apply sanctions
against the aggressor as given in Article 43 of the UN Charter.
To assist the Security Council on all questions relating to its military
requirements for the maintenance of international peace and security, a Military
Staff Committee has been established. This Committee also assists the Security
Council with regard to employment and command of forces at its disposal, the
regulation of armaments and possible disarmaments.
(iii) Electoral functions
The Security Council enjoys extensive electoral powers which pertain to admission
of new members and the Constitution of other organs of the United Nations. The
new members to the world body can be admitted by the General Assembly only on
the recommendation of the Security Council.
The Security Council also takes part in the election of the Judges of the
International Court of Justice. It also make recommendations regarding the
appointment of the Secretary General and the in the suspension of a member of the
United Nations by the General Assembly.

The Economic and Social Council International Organizations
The framers of the UN Charter were fully aware of the importance that the social
and economic conditions for preserving world peace. Therefore the Economic and
Social Council (ECOSOC) has been established to coordinate the economic and
NOTES
social work of the United Nations along with the specialized agencies and institutions
to assist the General Assembly in promoting international economic and social
cooperation and development.
The ECOSOC is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations that
operate under the authority of the General Assembly in accordance to the Article 55
of the UN Charter. The article also enjoins the United Nations to create conditions
of stability and well being which are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations
among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination
of the people by:
(i) Promoting higher standards of living, full employment and conditions of
economic and social progress and development
(ii) Solutions of international economic, social, health and related problems
and in international cultural and educational cooperation
(iii) Universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental
freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.
Composition of Economic and Social Council
The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) has fifty-four members. Each year
the General Assembly elects eighteen members for a period of three-year term but
the retiring members are eligible for immediate re-election. Originally, the Council
comprised of twenty-seven members which was raised to fifty-four in 1974. The
Council’s fifty-four member Governments are elected by the General Assembly for
overlapping three-year terms. The seats on the Council are based on geographical
representation with fourteen of the seats allocated to African States, eleven to Asian
States, six to Eastern European States, ten to Latin American and Caribbean States,
and thirteen to Western European and other States.
The president is elected for a one-year term and chosen amongst the small or
middle powers represented on ECOSOC. All the decisions are taken by a simple
majority with each member enjoying one vote.
The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) meets once a year in July for
a four-week session. One session is held at New York and the other is held at
Geneva. It has also held another meeting each April with the finance ministers who
head key committees of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
since 1998. During the remaining part of the year, the Council carries on its work
through its subsidiary bodies-commission and committees, which meet at regular
intervals and report back to the Council.
Functions of Economic and Social Council
The functions of the ECOSOC include information gathering, advising member
nations, and making recommendations. Besides, providing policy coherence and
International Organizations coordinating the overlapping functions of the UN’s subsidiary bodies. There are
many UN organizations and agencies that function to work on particular issues.
Besides, the Council also performs variety of functions through studies and
reports, discussions and recommendations and coordination, such as the following:
NOTES
(i) It can make or initiate studies and reports with respect to international
economic, social, cultural, educational, health and related matters. Thus
the Council has made studies regarding the problem of refugees, the
world shortage of housing, the reconstruction of devastated areas and
the economic status of the women. These studies and reports are very
helpful in tackling these problems.
(ii) The Economic and Social Council also makes recommendations to the
General Assembly, the members of the United Nations and specialized
agencies with regard to economic, social, cultural, educational, health
and related matters.
It can also make recommendations for the purpose of promoting respect
for the observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all.
However, it may be noted that the recommendations of the Council are
not binding on the members.
(iii) The Economic and Social Council can prepare draft and conventions
for submission to the General Assembly with respect to matters falling
within its competence. Such draft conventions have proved quite useful
device for the conclusion of international agreements.
(iv) The Economic and Social Council convenes international conferences
both on its own initiative as well as on instructions from the General
Assembly. These conferences can be both intergovernmental as well
as non-governmental and usually pertain to matter beyond the domestic
jurisdiction of the members. Some of the important conferences
convened by the Economic and Social Council include the World
Population Conference in 1954, the UN Scientific Conference on
Conservation and Utilization of Resources, etc.
The Council can also call conferences of regional character on subjects
like health, trade, transport, employment, refugees, stateless persons,
etc.
(v) The Economic and Social Council coordinates the work of the specialized
agencies of the United Nations. These specialized agencies are created
through inter-governmental agreements and have wide international
responsibilities such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Food
and Agriculture Organization, UNESCO (United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization), the World Bank and the World
Health Organization. It is through these agencies that the UN performs
most of its humanitarian work such as mass vaccination programmes
(through the WHO), the avoidance of famine and malnutrition (through
the work of the WFP) and the protection of vulnerable and displaced
people through UNHCR).

Subsidiary Bodies of the Council International Organizations
The Subsidiary bodies of the Economic and Social Council include five regional
commissions, six functional commissions, six standing committees and other standing
expert bodies.
NOTES
(i) Regional Commission
The Economic and Social Council has five Regional Commissions which are as
mentioned below:
(a) Economic Commission for Africa with head quarters at Addis Ababa in
Ethiopia
(b) Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific with head quarters at
Bangkok in Thailand.
(c) Economic Commission for Europe, with head quarters at Geneva in
Switzerland
(d) Economic Commission for Latin America and Caribbean, with head quarters
at Santiago, Chile
(e) Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, with head quarters at
Baghdad, Iraq
(ii) Functional Commission
The Economic and Social Council has six functional commissions, which are discussed
as follows:
(a) Statistical Commission: The Statistical Commission promotes the
development of national statistics, the coordination of statistical work and the
development of central statistical works. It also advices the organs of the
UN, on general questions of statistical information.
(b) Population Commission: The Population Commission studies and advices
on the size and structure of populations in different country. The interplay of
demographic factors and policies which is designed to influence the size and
structure of population and changes therein.
(c) Commission for Social Development: The Commission for Social
Development advices on social policies of a general character on vital social
problems and on related required measures.
(d) Commission on the status of women: The Commission on the status of
women prepares recommendations and reports on promotion of women’s
rights in political, economic, civil, social and educational fields.
(e) Commission on Narcotics Drugs: The Commission on Narcotics Drugs
assists in exercising powers of supervision over the application of international
conventions and agreements dealing with narcotic drugs. It advises the Council
on all matters pertaining to the control of narcotic drugs and prepares such
draft on international conventions as may be necessary.

International Organizations (f) Commission on Human Rights: The Commission on Human Rights and
its Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of
Minorities and prevention of discrimination are involved in upholding the basic
human rights and all out any injustice or discrimination.
NOTES (iii) Standing Committees
The Economic and Social Council has six standing Committees. These include the
Committee for Programme and Coordination which advises and assists the Council
in the discharge of the coordination function and keeps under review the activities of
the United Nations and its related agencies and programmes.
The Standing Committee is expected to continuously review the steps required
to implement within the United Nations to recommend the Ad Hoc committees of
Experts to examine the finances of the United Nations and concerning the
development of an integrated system of long term planning programming and
budgeting.
This Standing Committee is as mentioned below:
(a) The Committee on Non Governmental Organizations and on
negotiations with intergovernmental agencies recommends the status
of individual Non-governmental organizations and is called whenever it
is necessary to negotiate an agreement with a newly created agency.
(b) The Committee of Housing, Building and Planning examines reports
and makes recommendations to the Governments and United Nations
bodies. It promotes research in the field of housing related community
facilities and physical planning.
(c) The Committee on Natural Resources lays down guidelines, examines
reports, analyses existing resolutions and makes recommendations in
areas related to the natural resources.
(d) The Committee on Science and Technology promotes international
cooperation. It encourages formulation of over all policy and evaluates
and reviews policies and new developments in the field of science and
technology.
(e) The Committee on Review and Appraisal assists the Council and the
General Assembly in the overall review and appraisal of the UN
Development Decades. The committee also examines the obstacles
and reasons for shortfalls identified in the various sectorial and regional
reviews; and recommends on the basis of such reviews and its own
conclusions. It measures to overcome the obstacle and shortfalls,
including new or revised goals and policy measures required.
(iv) Expert Bodies
The Economic and Social Council has a number of standing expert bodies, advisory
committees and on Ad hoc groups.
The export bodies are on the following subjects as mention below:
(a) Crime Prevention and Control; advises policies and international action
in the area of crime prevention.
(b) Development Planning evaluates programmes in their progress, analyse International Organizations
major trends and studies individual question in the area of economic
planning, programmes and projection.
(c) International Cooperation in tax matters explores ways and means
for facilitating the conclusion of tax treaties between the developed and NOTES
developing countries; and
(d) Transport of dangerous goods not only revises and updates the list of
dangerous goods but also considers the existing transportation practices
and studies problems relating to packing and other related matters.
There is an advisory committee on Application on Science and Technology to
Development which reviews programmes and suggests practical measures for such
application. It also advises on desired changes in the area of science and technology.
The Ad hoc group of Experts on Tax Treaties explores ways and means for
facilitating the conclusion of tax treaties between the developed and developing
countries.
The meeting of the Experts on the United Nations Programme in Public
Administration works in close collaboration with the specialized agencies and non
governmental organizations and formulates programmes in the field of public
administration. It also examines the Secretary General’s proposals on public
administration for the development decades.
Trusteeship Council
The Trusteeship Council has been one of the principal organs of the United Nations
in the UN Charter. It works as an auxiliary organ of the General Assembly in so far
as it supervises the administration of the non-strategic trust territories and an auxiliary
organ of the Security Council with regard to strategic areas.
Composition of Trusteeship Council
The UN Charter did not prescribe the size of the Council and merely provided that
the Trusteeship Council must reflect a balance between members that administers
Trust Territories and the members that do not. In order to ensure this balance, it was
provided that the General Assembly may elect for three years as many members as
may be necessary in order to ensure that the total membership may of the Trusteeship
Council is equally divided between those members of the United Nations which
administer Trust Territories and those which do not .
Objectives of the Trusteeship System
According to the UN Charter, the Trusteeship System has the following objectives
as mentioned below:
(a) To promote international peace and security
(b) To promote the political, economic, social and educational advancement of
the inhabitants of the trust territories and their progressive developments
towards self-government or independence as may be appropriate to the
particular circumstances of each territory and its people and the freely
International Organizations expressed wishes of the people concerned, and as may be approved by the
terms of each trusteeship agreement.
(c) To encourage respect for all without distinction as to race, sex or religion and
to encourage recognition of the interdependence of the people of the world
NOTES
(d) To ensure equal treatment in social, economic and commercial matters for all
members of the United Nations and also equal treatment of the latter in the
administration of justice without prejudice to the attainment of the foregoing
objectives.
Functions and Powers of Trusteeship Council
The functions and powers of the Trusteeship Council have been outlined in Article
87 of the UN Charter. Its functions include the following:
(a) Consideration of reports submitted by the administering authority
(b) Acceptance of petitions and their examinations in consultation with the
administering authority
(c) To arrange periodic visits to the respective trust territories at times agreed
upon with the administering authority
(d) To take over other actions in conformity with the terms of the trusteeship
agreements.
The functions can be studied under the following heads as follows:
(i) Consideration of reports from Administering Authority
According to the UN Charter, each of the administering authority is
expected to submit an annual report for the territories under its control.
In the report, it should provide information regarding the political,
economic, social and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the
territory under its control.
The council also studies reports with the help of the specialized agencies
and make necessary suggestions. It is on this basis of the examination
that the reports that the Council drafts and incorporate the annual report
as given to the General Assembly in the case of non-strategic territories
and areas and to the Security Council in the case of the strategic areas.
(ii) Receipt and examination of petitions
The Trusteeship Council reviews and examines the petitions from
individuals as well as Organization in the Trust Territories. On receipt
of petitions, the same are sent to the administering authority for
comments before these are examined by the Council. These petitions
can cover a wide range of subjects such as property claims and titles,
denial of civil and human rights, racial discrimination, poor educational
services and appeals for greater participation in local administration.
(iii) Visit to trust territories
The Trusteeship Council can also arrange periodic visits to the Trust
territories, at times agreed upon with the Administering Authority in

order to acquire first hand information about the conditions and problems International Organizations
of the Trust territories. Usually such missions are sent to each trust
territory every two years.
In addition to the above function, the Trusteeship Council can take any
other action in conformity with the terms of the Trusteeship Agreements. NOTES
International Court of Justice

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United
Nations. It has been established in 1945 according to the Statute of the International
Court of Justice which forms an integral part of the UN Charter. The Statute of the
International Court of Justice, similar to that of its predecessor, is the main
constitutional document constituting and regulating the Court. It is based on the
Permanent Court of International Justice which was prepared by the League Council
and has been unanimously approved by the League Council in 1920.
It is located in The Hague, Netherlands and is based in the Peace
Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, sharing the building with the Hague Academy
of International Law, a private centre for the study of international law. The Court
began work in 1946 as the successor to the Permanent Court of International Justice.
Its purpose is to adjudicate disputes among states. The court has heard cases related
to war crimes, illegal state interference and ethnic cleansing, among others, and
continues to hear cases.
Membership of International Court of Justice
All the members of the United Nations are ipso facto member of the International
Court of Justice. A state which is not member of the United Nations can also become
a party to the statute of the Court.
The conditions for the membership of the Court have been laid down in the
General Assembly, which includes the following:
(i) Acceptance of the Statute and other obligations with respect to the
Court which other members of UN have accepted
(ii) Undertaking to contribute to the expenses an amount assessed by the
General Assembly after consultation with the Government concerned.
Composition of International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice consists of fifteen judges elected by the General
Assembly and the Security Council, voting independently. The Judges are elected
on the basis of their merit and their high moral character and not on the basis of their
nationality. It carefully elects the judges so that no two judges can be nationals of the
same state. This has been done in order to ensure that no country or group dominate
the courts.
Functions and Powers of International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice enjoys two types of powers viz settlement of
disputes and rendering advisory opinions.

International Organizations (i) Settlement of disputes
The Court hears all the cases involving the sovereign states which have
accepted the Statute of the Court. The other states can also take their disputes
to the court on fulfillment of conditions laid down by the Security Council.
NOTES
Although, the court does not enjoy any compulsory jurisdiction, the states
who are party to the statute may at any time declare that they recognize as
compulsory ipso facto and without special agreements, in relation to any
other states accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the Court in all
legal disputes concerning the following:
(a) The interpretation of a treaty
(b) Any question of international laws
(c) The existence of any facts which if, established, would constitute a
breach of an international obligation
(d) The nature of extent or the reparation to be made for the breach of an
international obligation.
(ii) Law applied
The International Court of Justice decides the case referred in accordance to
the international law, international conventions and the general principles of
law recognized by civilized nations. In addition, to this the court also makes
use of judicial decisions and teachings of highly qualified publicists of various
countries to determine the rules of law.
The Court does not enjoy any enforcement power. It has to mainly rely on
two factors for the enforcement of its decisions.
Firstly, each member of the United Nations has an obligation to comply with
the decisions of the Court in any case to which it is as under. In other words,
if the state has agreed to submit the case to the court, it would accept the
decisions of the court.
Secondly, the Security Council can undertake enforcement action to give
effect to the judgments of the Court, the other party, the other party may
have recourse to the Security Council, which may if it deems necessary,
make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken or give effects
to the judgments.
(iii) Advisory opinions
The International Court of Justice also enjoys power to give advisory opinion
to the General Assembly, the Security Council and other specialized agencies
of the United Nations, on legal questions. While seeking such an opinion the
agency has to submit in writing the request containing an exact statement of
the question upon which an opinion is required as well as all the documents
likely to throw light upon the question.
Besides, the advice of the court is more like an advice than a decision and the
Court does not render advisory opinion on its own.

The Secretariat International Organizations
The Secretariat is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations. It comprises
the Secretary General and such other staff as the organization may require. It provides
services to the other organs of the United Nations namely the General Assembly,
NOTES
the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and the Trusteeship Council
as well as their subsidiary bodies in their duty stations around the world; carrying out
the diverse day-to-day work of the Organization. At its head is the Secretary-General,
who is appointed by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security
Council for a five-year, renewable term.
The duties carried out by the Secretariat are as varied as the problems dealt
with by the United Nations. These range from administering peacekeeping operations
to mediating international disputes, from surveying economic and social trends and
problems to preparing studies on human rights and sustainable development.
Secretariat staff also informs the world’s communications media about the work of
the United Nations; organize international conferences on issues of worldwide
concern; and interpret speeches and translate documents into the Organization’s
official languages.
The Secretariat has offices located at the headquarters of the United Nations
in New York. It also has branch offices at Geneva, Vienna and Nairobi. The
Secretariat also includes the regional commission’s secretariat at Addis Ababa,
Baghdad, Bangkok, Geneva and Santiago and has offices all over the world
The staff members and the Secretary-General are answer to the United
Nations alone for their activities, and take an oath not to seek or receive instructions
from any Government or outside authority, as international civil servants. Under the
Charter, each Member State undertakes to respect the exclusively international
character of the responsibilities of the Secretary-General and the staff and to refrain
from seeking to influence them improperly in the discharge of their duties.
Composition of the Secretariat
The United Nations Secretariat is headed by the Secretary-General who is assisted
by a staff of international civil servants worldwide. It provides studies, information,
and facilities needed by United Nations bodies for their meetings. It also carries out
tasks as directed by the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, the UN
Economic and Social Council, and other UN bodies. The United Nations Charter
provides that the staff be chosen by application of the ‘highest standards of efficiency,
competence, and integrity,’ with due regard for the importance of recruiting on a
wide geographical basis.
The UN Charter provides that the staff shall not seek or receive instructions
from any authority other than the UN. Each UN member country is enjoined to
respect the international character of the Secretariat and not seek to influence its
staff. The Secretary-General alone is responsible for staff selection.
The Secretary-General’s duties include helping resolve international disputes,
administering peacekeeping operations, organizing international conferences, gathering

International Organizations information on the implementation of Security Council decisions, and consulting with
member governments regarding various initiatives. The key Secretariat offices in
this area include the Office of the Coordinator of Humanitarian Affairs and the
Department of Peacekeeping Operations. The Secretary-General may bring to the
NOTES attention of the Security Council any matter that, in his or her opinion, may threaten
international peace and security. At present the Secretary General is António Guterres
from Portugal.
Functions of the Secretariat
The main functions of the Secretariat are as follows:
(i) Production of reports and other documents containing information, analysis,
historical background, research findings, policy suggestions etc. to facilitate
deliberations and decision making by other organs and their subsidiary bodies.
(ii) Provision of secretarial services to legislative organs in accordance with the
policies adopted by the General Assembly
(iii) Provision of meeting services to the legislative organs in accordance with the
policies adopted by the General Assembly
(iv) Provision of editorial, translation and documents reproduction services for
the issuance of UN documents in different languages
(v) Conduct of studies and provision of information that answers to the priority
needs of the governments of member countries in meeting challenges in various
fields.
(vi) Production of statistical publications, information bulletins and analytical work
which the General Assembly has decided.
(vii) Organization of conference, expert groups meetings and seminars on topics
of concern to the international community
(viii) Provision of technical assistance to developing countries
(ix) Undertaking of services missions to countries, areas or locations as authorized
by the General Assembly or the Security Council
(x) To arrange for dissemination of information on United Nations activities and
decisions among the public
(xi) Provision of programme planning, financial, personal, legal, management and
general services which are essential for rational selection of work items and
allocations of resources among them for effective, economic and efficient
performance of the services and functions of the Secretariat.
Secretary-General
The Secretariat is headed by the Secretary-General, who acts as the de
facto spokesperson and leader of the UN. The Secretary-General is the chief
administrative officer of the Secretariat. He is appointed by the General Assembly
on the recommendations of the Security Council. The current Secretary-General
is António Guterres, who took over from Ban ki Moon in 2017 and will be eligible
for reappointment when his first term expires in 2021.
Envisioned by Franklin D. Roosevelt as a ‘world moderator’, the position is International Organizations
defined in the UN Charter as the organization’s ‘chief administrative officer’, but
the Charter also states that the Secretary-General can bring to the Security Council’s
attention ‘any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance
of international peace and security’, giving the position greater scope for action on NOTES
the world stage. The position has evolved into a dual role of an administrator of the
UN organization, and a diplomat and mediator addressing disputes between member
states and finding consensus to global issues.
The Secretary-General is appointed by the General Assembly, after being
recommended by the Security Council, any member of which can veto, and the
General Assembly can theoretically override the Security Council’s recommendation
if a majority vote is not achieved, although this has not happened so far. There are
no specific criteria for the post, but over the years, it has become accepted that the
post shall be held for one or two terms of five years, that the post shall be appointed
on the basis of geographical rotation, and that the Secretary-General shall not originate
from one of the five permanent Security Council member states.
Powers and function of the Secretary-General
The UN Secretary General has been given more powers than he enjoyed under the
League of Nations. These can be conveniently studied under the following heads:
(i) Administrative and service functions
The Secretary-General is responsible for the organization and direction of the
activities of the UN. The staff of all the UN organs excluding the International
Court of Justice falls under his purview.
It is his responsibility to ensure that the various organs of the UN and
their committees and conferences work properly. It is for this purpose that he
draws the provisional agenda, notifies about the meetings to various members,
provides staff and facilities for the holdings of meetings, examines the
credentials or representatives and submits reports to the concerned organ.
He also assists in the drafting of documents, resolutions and reports and
provides legal and technical advice. He also takes necessary action on the
resolutions passed by the General Assembly viz communicates these resolutions
to the member governments and ascertain the steps taken to implement these
resolutions or recommendations.
According to Article 102 of the UN Charter ‘every treaty and every
international agreements entered into by any member of the United Nations
shall, as soon as possible be registered with the Secretariat and published by
it’.
(ii) Financial functions
The Secretary-General has also been entrusted with important financial
responsibilities, subject to the authority of the General Assembly; he prepares
the budget of the United Nations. He allocates funds, control expenditure,
collects the contributions from members and acts as custodian of all the funds.

International Organizations He tries to develop common fiscal controls and financial practices in
consultation with specialized agencies and undertakings.
(iii) Representational functions
NOTES The Secretary-General represents United Nation in negotiations with other
agencies and governments as the chief representative of UN. He also
occupies a central position in the working of the various organs of the UN
because the staff of these organizations and agencies is not only recruited but
also controlled by the Secretary-General.
(iv) Political functions
The Secretary-General has also been assigned important political functions.
It is through these political functions he exercises profound influence on the
formulation of the policy. This power emanates from Article 99 of the UN
Charter which stipulates that ‘the Secretary General may bring to the attention
of the Security Council any matters of which in his opinion may threaten
international peace and security.’
Critical Evaluation of United Nations
Unlike other intergovernmental organization, United Nations (UN) is unique in its
scope. Nearly all the nations of the world are members of the UN. This arrangement
provides an unprecedented legitimacy and an opportunistic forum in which all the
nations are heard, but if any member nation tries to ignore the voice of another the
status and efficiency of the system becomes intimidated.
The basis of the UN is the concept of collective security. This concept originally
gained importance with the persistence of President Wilson of the USA. After the
end of World War I, after recognizing the ‘failures’ of the typical balance of power
system, Wilson disputed that a joint power would be the most competent way to limit
the future destructiveness of any nation who wanted decisive power and conquest.
The basis of this system was that no nation should become powerful enough
so as to be capable of overpowering the others. Through this arrangement, an uneven
equality was kept by two camps of states in the system. Basically, this arrangement
occurred due to the fear of empire that so often troubled Europe.
The United Nations came up in October of 1945, with the major objective of
maintaining international peace and security in the hope of evading another world
war. The UN has an array of mechanisms that it uses for achieving its aims.
The Security Council first determines whether there is a ‘threat to the peace,
breach of the peace or act of aggression and makes recommendations, or decide
what steps should be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, for maintaining or
restoring international peace and security.’ If such a determination is made, the
Security Council then has the ability to determine whether or not to give sanctions,
first to non-military (Article 41), and then to military (Article 42) only after it has
been decided that measures provided for under Article 41 were insufficient.

The future of the collective security arrangement is problematic as it requires International Organizations
all participating parties to be eager to refrain from violence and completely accept
the system.
Nowadays, communal security has become quite difficult to market, not only
to just discontented nations, but also to the US as well. NOTES
The United Nations gives the best options by which the international peace
and security can be maintained, and all nations, including the US, should be eager to
give up selfish needs in the quest of this aim.
The UN is a little bit better than the League of Nations but still not enough.
People need an international organization that is on the vertical rather than the
horizontal.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

4. Name the six principal organs of the United Nations.
5. What are the supervisory functions of the General Assembly?
6. Where is the International Court of Justice located?
7. State the duties of the Secretary-General.
4.4 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
In this section, we will have a look at the major international organizations which
have been formed for various reasons including regional cooperation, united front
against terrorism, trade facilitation among other. The four major international
organizations of interest to us here are the SAARC, OPEC, WTO and IMF.
4.4.1 SAARC
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is an organization
of the South Asian nations. It was founded in 1985 dedicating to the economic,
technological, social and cultural development and emphasizing of collective self-
reliance.
Its seven founding members are Bangladesh, Bhutan, India,
the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Recently, Afghanistan became its
member. The Headquarters of SAARC is in Kathmandu, Nepal. The meetings of
the heads of state are scheduled annually while the meetings of foreign secretaries
happen twice annually.
Origin and Development of SAARC
The concept of SAARC was first adopted by Bangladesh during 1977, under the
administration of the then President Ziaur Rahman. He mooted the idea of SAARC
among the neighbouring states of South Asia based on the goodwill visits of the
leaders of the neighbouring South Asian Nations between 1977–1980. In November
International Organizations 1980, a working paper on ‘Regional co-operation in South Asia’ was prepared by
Bangladesh and circulated among the South-Asian countries.
The ministerial conference meeting was convened in New Delhi, India 1983
to set up the Committee for SAARC, and an Integrated Programme for Action
NOTES (IPA) was launched. Under these agreements, cooperation in the following areas
was agreed on:
• Education
• Culture and sports
• Environment and meteorology
• Health and population activities and child welfare
• Prevention of drug trafficking and drug abuse
• Rural development
• Science and technology
• Tourism
• Transport
• Women in development
Objectives of SAARC
SAARC has been created with the following objectives:
• To promote the welfare of the people of South Asia and to improve their
quality of life.
• To accelerate the economic growth, social progress and cultural development
in the region.
• To provide all the individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realize
their full potential.
• To promote and strengthen collective self-reliance among the countries of
South Asia.
• To contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciation of one another’s
problems.
• To promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social,
cultural, technical and scientific fields.
• To strengthen cooperation with other developing countries.
• To strengthen cooperation among themselves in international forums on matters
of common interest.
• To cooperate with international and regional organizations with similar aims
and purposes.
Structure of SAARC
The SAARC, as a regional cooperation, has a structure according to which it seeks
to function effectively. It is operated through the following structures:
• Meetings of Heads of State or Government
• The Council of Ministers International Organizations
• The Standing Committee of Foreign Secretaries

• The Programme Committee
• The Technical Committee NOTES
• The Secretariat
Political Issues in SAARC
SAARC, as a regional cooperation, has discussed and deliberated on different political
issues. It has stressed on the ‘core issues’ which are mentioned above. SAARC
meetings are conducted on the margins of political dialogue. It has refrained from
interfering in the internal matters of the member states.
The idea of regional cooperation in South Asia was again mooted in May
2001. It has deliberated on the different issues which are mentioned as follows:
• Political issue-terrorism: One of the political issues that the SAARC
countries has deliberated and discussed is on the topical theme of Terrorism.
During the 12th and 13th SAARC summits in 2004 and 2005 SAARC laid
extreme emphasis on greater cooperation between the SAARC members’
countries to fight terrorism.
• Economic issue-free trade area: The SAARC countries focus on
cooperation in the economic areas. They signed an agreement to gradually
lower tariffs within the region, in Dhaka, 1993. After eleven years, at the
12th SAARC Summit at Islamabad, they devised the South Asia Free
Trade Agreement as a framework for the establishment of a free trade
area covering 1.6 billion people.
• Cultural areas: One of the areas that the SAARC has focus is on the
cultural areas through cultural exchange as well. It has also instituted the
SAARC Youth Award in recognition of the outstanding individuals from
the SAARC region. The award recognizes and promotes the commitment
and talent of the youth who give back to the world at large through various
initiatives such as Inventions, Protection of the Environment and Disaster
relief and is based on specific themes designated every year.
The recipients who receive this award are the ones who have dedicated
their lives to their individual causes to improve situations in their own
countries as well as paving a path for the SAARC region to follow.
The recipients of the awards have been given to Mr. Md. Sukur Salek of
Bangladesh for Outstanding Social Service in Community Welfare in 1997,
Dr. Najmul Hasnain Shah of Pakistan in 1998 for New Inventions and
Discoveries, Mr. Mushfiqul Alam of Bangladesh for Creative Photography:
South Asian Diversity in 2001. In 2002, it was given to Dr. Masil Khan of
Pakistan for his Outstanding contribution to protect the Environment. In
2003, it was given to Mr. Hassan Sher of Pakistan for his Invention in the
Field of Traditional Medicine and in 2004 to Mr. Ajij Prasad Poudyal of
Nepal for his Outstanding contribution to raising awareness for TB and/

International Organizations or HIV/AIDS and so on. In 2010 the award was given to Ms. Anoka
Abeyrathne of Sri Lanka for her outstanding contribution for the Protection
of Environment and mitigation of Climate Change.
NOTES 4.4.2 OPEC

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is a permanent,
intergovernmental Organization, created at the Baghdad Conference on September
10–14, 1960, by Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. The five Founding
Members were later joined by nine other Members: Qatar (1961); Indonesia (1962)
– suspended its membership in January 2009, reactivated it in January 2016, but
decided to suspend it again in November 2016; Libya (1962); United Arab Emirates
(1967); Algeria (1969); Nigeria (1971); Ecuador (1973) – suspended its membership
in December 1992, but reactivated it in October 2007; Angola (2007); and Gabon
(1975) - terminated its membership in January 1995 but rejoined in July 2016. OPEC
had its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, in the first five years of its existence.
This was moved to Vienna, Austria, on September 1, 1965.
OPEC’s objective is to co-ordinate and unify petroleum policies among Member
Countries, in order to secure fair and stable prices for petroleum producers; an
efficient, economic and regular supply of petroleum to consuming nations; and a fair
return on capital to those investing in the industry.
The 1960s
OPEC’s formation by five oil-producing developing countries in Baghdad in September
1960 occurred at a time of transition in the international economic and political
landscape, with extensive decolonisation and the birth of many new independent
states in the developing world. The international oil market was dominated by the
‘Seven Sisters’ multinational companies and was largely separate from that of the
former Soviet Union (FSU) and other centrally planned economies (CPEs). OPEC
developed its collective vision, set up its objectives and established its Secretariat,
first in Geneva and then, in 1965, in Vienna. It adopted a ‘Declaratory Statement of
Petroleum Policy in Member Countries’ in 1968, which emphasized the inalienable
right of all countries to exercise permanent sovereignty over their natural resources
in the interest of their national development. Membership grew to ten by 1969.
The 1970s
OPEC rose to international prominence during this decade, as its Member Countries
took control of their domestic petroleum industries and acquired a major say in the
pricing of crude oil on world markets. On two occasions, oil prices rose steeply in a
volatile market, triggered by the Arab oil embargo in 1973 and the outbreak of the
Iranian Revolution in 1979. OPEC broadened its mandate with the first Summit of
Heads of State and Government in Algiers in 1975, which addressed the plight of the
poorer nations and called for a new era of cooperation in international relations, in
the interests of world economic development and stability. This led to the establishment
of the OPEC Fund for International Development in 1976. Member Countries
embarked on ambitious socio-economic development schemes. Membership grew
to 13 by 1975.
The 1980s International Organizations
After reaching record levels early in the decade, prices began to weaken, before
crashing in 1986, responding to a big oil glut and consumer shift away from this
hydrocarbon. OPEC’s share of the smaller oil market fell heavily and its total
NOTES
petroleum revenue dropped below a third of earlier peaks, causing severe economic
hardship for many Member Countries. Prices rallied in the final part of the decade,
but to around half the levels of the early part, and OPEC’s share of newly growing
world output began to recover. This was supported by OPEC introducing a group
production ceiling divided among Member Countries and a Reference Basket for
pricing, as well as significant progress with OPEC/non-OPEC dialogue and
cooperation, seen as essential for market stability and reasonable prices.
Environmental issues emerged on the international energy agenda.
The 1990s
Prices moved less dramatically than in the 1970s and 1980s, and timely OPEC
action reduced the market impact of Middle East hostilities in 1990–91. But excessive
volatility and general price weakness dominated the decade, and the South-East
Asian economic downturn and mild Northern Hemisphere winter of 1998–99 saw
prices back at 1986 levels. However, a solid recovery followed in a more integrated
oil market, which was adjusting to the post-Soviet world, greater regionalism,
globalisation, the communications revolution and other high-tech trends. Breakthroughs
in producer-consumer dialogue matched continued advances in OPEC/non-OPEC
relations. As the United Nations-sponsored climate change negotiations gathered
momentum, after the Earth Summit of 1992, OPEC sought fairness, balance and
realism in the treatment of oil supply. One country left OPEC, while another suspended
its Membership.
The 2000s
An innovative OPEC oil price band mechanism helped strengthen and stabilise crude
prices in the early years of the decade. But a combination of market forces, speculation
and other factors transformed the situation in 2004, pushing up prices and increasing
volatility in a well-supplied crude market. Oil was used increasingly as an asset
class. Prices soared to record levels in mid-2008, before collapsing in the emerging
global financial turmoil and economic recession. OPEC became prominent in
supporting the oil sector, as part of global efforts to address the economic crisis.
OPEC’s second and third summits in Caracas and Riyadh in 2000 and 2007 established
stable energy markets, sustainable development and the environment as three guiding
themes, and it adopted a comprehensive long-term strategy in 2005. One country
joined OPEC, another reactivated its Membership and a third suspended it.
2010 until now
The global economy represented the main risk to the oil market early in the decade,
as global macroeconomic uncertainties and heightened risks surrounding the
international financial system weighed on economies. Escalating social unrest in
many parts of the world affected both supply and demand throughout the first half

International Organizations of the decade, although the market remained relatively balanced. Prices were stable
between 2011 and mid-2014, before a combination of speculation and oversupply
caused them to fall in 2014. Trade patterns continued to shift, with demand growing
further in Asian countries and generally shrinking in the OECD. The world’s focus
NOTES on multilateral environmental matters began to sharpen, with expectations for a new
UN-led climate change agreement. OPEC continued to seek stability in the market,
and looked to further enhance its dialogue and cooperation with consumers, and
non-OPEC producers.
4.4.3 WTO
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) is a multilateral agreement
regulating trade among 153 nations. It was set up after World War II along with
other international institutions such as International Monetary Fund and World Bank
to promote economic cooperation of nations. Of the fifty countries who had drafted
the Charter for International Trade Organization (ITO), a specialized agency of the
UN, twenty-three countries became members of GATT. The Charter provided rules
for world trade and also for restrictive business practice, employment, commodity
agreements and international investments and services. After World War II, an
effort was made to boost trade liberalization and remove protectionist measures
existing since 1930s. For this, tariff negotiations were initiated among the twenty-
three founding ‘contracting parties’ in 1946. The trade rules included in the ITO
Charter and tariff concessions were together known as GATT that came into force
in January 1948. Despite the fact that GATT was only provisional in nature, it remained
the only multilateral institution governing international trade from 1948 until WTO
was established in 1995. A series of trade rounds was held as a continuous measure
for tariff reduction. In the first round of negotiations, 45,000 tariff concessions affecting
$10 billion, which was 1/5 of the world trade, were made.
Objectives
• GATT aimed to bring all-round economic prosperity by liberalizing and
expanding international trade.
• It aimed at preventing discrimination in world trade and reducing trade barriers.
• It provided a platform for member countries to settle trade-related disputes.
• It helped to fully utilize the resources of the world and expand production of
goods.
• It aimed at raising standard of living and ensuring full employment in the
member countries.
• It aimed to reduce tariff on imports of member countries.
Membership
By 1994, 128 countries had signed GATT. World Trade Organization (WTO) replaced
the original GATT on 1 January 1995 and all the existing GATT contracting parties
came to be known as WTO members. India joined WTO in 8 July, 1948.

Provisions of GATT International Organizations
1. Tariff (i) Under GATT, it is obligatory for each country to accord

non-discriminative, most favored nation (MFN) treatment to
the respective contracting parties in respect to tariffs. NOTES
(ii) Imports from contracting parties are subject to tariffs or
quotas. MFN treatment means no countries, apart from the
ones that have signed the contract, receive better treatment
or lower tariffs.
Exceptions to (i) Existing tariff preferences such as those between British

MFN Commonwealth
(ii) GATT/WTO allows the formation of customs union, which
causes a significant erosion of the MFN principle.
(iii) An escape clause allows any contracting party to
withdraw or modify tariff concessions, if it threatens a serious
injury to domestic producers.
2. Quantitative GATT in general prohibits the use of quantitative restrictions

Restrictions on imports and exports.
Exceptions (i) Agriculture—when the government needs to remove

surplus of agricultural and fisheries products. Important to the
US.
(ii) Balance of payments–to safeguard balance of payments.
If a country's foreign exchange reserve is low.
(iii) Developing countries—least-developed countries (LDCs)
may use import quotas to encourage infant industries.
(iv) National Security—strategic controls on certain exports.
Patents, copyrights.
3. Developing Special provisions to promote trade in developing countries.

Countries In 1965, the contracting parties added Part IV (Trade and
Development) to GATT.
(i) Reduction/elimination of tariffs on products of LDCs will be

given high priority by developed economies.
(ii) Refrain from introducing tariffs and NTBs to such imports.
(iii) Refrain from imposing internal taxes to discourage
consumption of primary products from LDCs
(iv) Not expect reciprocal commitments from LDCs.
Other Provisions to eliminate concealed protection such as

provisions customs valuation. For example, American Selling Price
(ASP) valuation. By ASP, an ad valorem tariff is imposed on
the domestic price.
Procedural matters: each member is entitled to one vote,
decisions are made by majority vote. 2/3 majority is required
to waive obligations. Settlements of disputes.

International Organizations Principles of GATT
• Non-Discriminatory Most Favored Nation (MFN Status): There should
be no discrimination in world trade. Under this principle, there was to be no
discrimination among member countries in the conduct of international trade
NOTES
and MFN status had to be applied to all imports and exports among all member
countries.
• Prohibition of quantitative restrictions: GATT stresses on limiting
restrictions on trade and to remove quantitative restrictions as far as possible.
Besides, non-tariff barriers like quotas, excessive regulations and import
licensing were also to be eliminated.
• Consultations: GATT provided continuous consultation to member countries
and thereby helped to resolve disagreements.
Evolution of GATT
GATT is a consensual organization of sovereign states. It works essentially through
conferences. Here is a list of GATT Conferences held so far:
• The Geneva Tariff Conference, 1947: This was the first round held in
Geneva and in this first round of negotiations 45,000 tariff concessions affecting
$10 billion which was 1/5 of the world trade were made.
• The Annecy Tariff Conference, 1949: This was the second round held in
Annecy, France in which thirteen countries participated. The main focus was
on further tariff reduction on around 5000 items in total.
• The Torquay Tariff Conference, 1950-51: In this third round held in Torquay
in England, thirty-eight countries participated and 8,700 tariff concessions
were made which was equivalent to ¼ of the tariffs existing in 1948.
• The Geneva Tariff Conference, 1955-56: In this round, twenty-six countries
participated and a decision was taken to reduce around $2.5 billion in tariff.
• The Dillon Round, 1960-62: This fifth round again occurred in Geneva
and twenty-six countries participated in this round. In this round around $4.9
billion in tariffs were reduced and also discussions for the creation of a
European Economic Community (EEC) were held.
• The Kennedy Round held in 1964-67.
• The Tokyo Round held in 1973-79: In this round, 102 countries participated
and concessions were made to the tune of $190 billion. The idea was to
further control the increase of voluntary export restrictions and non-tariff
barriers.
• The Uruguay Round held in 1986-94: It was the most important round till
date which aimed to expand the competence of GATT to new areas such as
capital, services, textiles, agriculture and intellectual property.

The Uruguay Round International Organizations
The seeds of the Uruguay Round were sown in November 1982 at a ministerial
meeting of GATT members in Geneva. Despite its troubled progress, participants
had agreed on a package of cuts in import duties on tropical products—which are
NOTES
mainly exported by developing countries. They had also revised the rules for settling
disputes, with some measures implemented on the spot. And they called for regular
reports on GATT members’ trade policies, a move considered important for making
trade regimes transparent around the world.
Highlights
• Liberalization of trade in textile goods and agriculture: Textiles and
agriculture sector were highly protected sectors but this round brought about
liberalization of both these sectors and also reduced import barriers on them.
• Reduction in agriculture subsidies: Export subsidies to be cut by 20 per
cent in developed countries and by 13.3 per cent in developing countries.
• Expansion in the sphere of activities: This round expanded the sphere of
activities of GATT from international trade in goods to trade in for information
and investment, services and technology.
• Reduction in tariff: Tariffs in sectors like pharmaceutical, wood and wood
products and steel were totally eliminated while tariffs were to be cut by 36
per cent in developed countries and by 24 per cent in developing countries.
• Opening trade in services: This round extended the scope of GATT to
services as well. Initially only the goods came under the purview.
• Establishment of WTO: This round made the rules and regulations for
international trade more transparent which were finally to be implemented by
WTO, which later replaced GATT.
• Dispute settlement: Initially settlement of disputes under GATT was a time-
taking process but after this round it was decided that all disputes would be
settled within eighteen months and the verdict had to be binding to all concerned
parties.
• A code was drafted to deal with intellectual property rights, especially copyright
violation.
Achievements of GATT
• It led to free global trade among member countries.
• GATT contributed in increasing world trade by 12 per cent.
• Helped to increase the share of developing countries in the world trade by 31
per cent.
• Helped to increase the world income and standard of living.
• Helped countries to specialize in trade and production.
• It led to the reduction of duty on industrial goods by developed countries by
about 40 per cent.
International Organizations • It also paved way for the developed countries to scrap import duties on steel,
medical equipment, furniture, pharmaceutical, construction equipments and
farm equipments.
NOTES Limitations of GATT

• Developed countries dominated all affairs.
• Negotiations between member countries were again dominated by developed
nations.
• Countries in many instances still preferred bilateral agreements as compared
to GATT.
• Adverse effects were felt by many developing countries on patenting of certain
goods.
Difference between GATT and WTO
GATT was replaced by ‘amended GATT’, i.e. WTO on 1 January 1995. WTO is
just not an extension of GATT but is different in many ways. Let us study the
differences below:
GATT WTO
GATT was a multilateral agreement WTO is a permanent institution with its
with a set of rules which were not own secretariat.
enforceable. It had no institutional
framework and a very small secretariat
It was applied on a provisional basis Its commitments are full and
initially and continued to be treated like permanent.
that even after 40 years of its existence
GATT applied to only trade in WTO applies to both trade of
merchandise goods merchandise goods and services anf
also trade related aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights.
Agreements constituting GATT were All agreements are multilateral in
initially multilateral in nature but by nature and involve commitments by all
1980s many new agreements which members.
were added were pluri-lateral or of
selective nature.
GATT dispute settlement was slower WTO dispute settlement is more
and with a lot of hurdles. automatic and faster than that of GATT.
GATT existed until 1995 as GATT WTO agreements still constitutes
1994-which was an updated version of ‘GATT 1994’ focusing on disciplines
GATT 1947 regarding international trade.
Achievements of GATT/WTO
The establishment of WTO brought in a new trade order and world trade expanded.
Some of its achievements and drawback are as follows:
• Many studies have proven that increased trade promotes peace. There have
been no world wars since 1948.
• It led to trade liberalization of industrial products (as per the goal of Kennedy
Round).

• GATT has over 100 members and has generated 85-90 per cent of world International Organizations
trade.
Problems of GATT/WTO
• GATT/WTO did not succeed in liberalizing trade in agricultural products to a NOTES
large degree (as per the goal of Uruguay Round).
• It has not been successful in regulating trade practices which have been
adopted by member countries to handle balance of payment problems. For
example, when the US imposed 10 per cent surcharge on its imports in 1971
leading to double import duties, GATT could not stop that.
• It has led to gradual erosion of the most favored nation (MFN) principle by
European Union (EU) and to a lesser degree by NAFTA. As per article 14 of
GATT, member countries could form an FTA. Taking advantage of this EU
adopted VILs, to lower duties to many African and Mediterranean countries
and also to keep out the agricultural products.
• GATT has critically managed trade for textiles due to pressure from the US
and automobiles (VERs). Since GATT was just a voluntary agreement it
could not be enforced if members violated the rules. Besides this, members
had the freedom to bypass or sidestep rules which were inconsistent with
their domestic laws at the time of their joining GATT and narrowly defined
commodities for tariff reasons.
• GATT has failed to control currency manipulations used by countries to restrict
imports. Example: China.
• Pirate activities in Africa could not be eliminated by GATT/WTO.
WTO Membership and its Importance
As on 10 May 2012, WTO membership reached 155. Through its trade agreements,
WTO helps trade to be conducted smoothly throughout the world. Members of
WTO enjoy global benefits such as any trade-related disputes settlement without
resorting to violence or war. Besides, as WTO members, countries are prevented to
erect trade barriers to protect their domestic industries which may benefit them
temporarily but later hurt the overall world trade as seen during the Great Depression
in 1929 when the global trade decreased by 25 per cent. Trade barriers imply tariffs,
excessive regulations and import quotas. As a part of WTO, countries have to abide
by certain trade-related rules and are also aware of the penalties for breaking them.
This creates a safer trading scenario for everyone and its benefits can be felt by
everyone. Members of WTO enjoy lower trade barriers between each other and
have to give no preferential trade treatment to any one partner. Lower trade barriers
lead to greater markets for goods which further lead to greater sales, more jobs and
faster economic growth. It is seen that more than 75 per cent of WTO’s members
are developing countries. These countries being a part of WTO get an access to
developed markets at a lower tariff rate and also are able to do away with their own
reciprocal tariffs. As a result these countries are able to catch up to the MNCs and
their mature industries before facing the competitive pressure in their own domestic
markets.
International Organizations Current Status of WTO
The WTO is an organization for trade opening. It is a forum for governments to
negotiate trade agreements and settle trade disputes. It operates a system of trade
rules. Essentially, the WTO is a place where member governments try to sort out
NOTES
the trade problems they face with each other.
The bulk of the WTO’s current work comes from the 1986–94 negotiations
called the Uruguay Round and earlier negotiations under the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The WTO is currently the host to new negotiations,
under the ‘Doha Development Agenda’ launched in 2001.
Where countries have faced trade barriers and wanted them lowered, the
negotiations have helped to open markets for trade. But the WTO is not just about
opening markets, and in some circumstances its rules support maintaining trade barriers
— for example, to protect consumers or prevent the spread of disease.
At its heart are the WTO agreements, negotiated and signed by the bulk of
the world’s trading nations. These documents provide the legal ground rules for
international commerce. They are essentially contracts, binding governments to keep
their trade policies within agreed limits. Although negotiated and signed by
governments, the goal is to help producers of goods and services, exporters, and
importers conduct their business, while allowing governments to meet social and
environmental objectives.
The system’s overriding purpose is to help trade flow as freely as possible —
so long as there are no undesirable side effects — because this is important for
economic development and well-being. That partly means removing obstacles. It
also means ensuring that individuals, companies and governments know what the
trade rules are around the world, and giving them the confidence that there will be
no sudden changes of policy. In other words, the rules have to be ‘transparent’ and
predictable.
Trade relations often involve conflicting interests. Agreements, including those
painstakingly negotiated in the WTO system, often need interpreting. The most
harmonious way to settle these differences is through some neutral procedure based
on an agreed legal foundation. That is the purpose behind the dispute settlement
process written into the WTO agreements.
Trade negotiations
The WTO agreements cover goods, services and intellectual property. They spell
out the principles of liberalization, and the permitted exceptions. They include individual
countries’ commitments to lower customs tariffs and other trade barriers, and to
open and keep open services markets. They set procedures for settling disputes.
These agreements are not static; they are renegotiated from time-to-time and new
agreements can be added to the package. Many are now being negotiated under the
Doha Development Agenda

Building trade capacity International Organizations
WTO agreements contain special provision for developing countries, including longer
time periods to implement agreements and commitments, measures to increase their
trading opportunities, and support to help them build their trade capacity, to handle
NOTES
disputes and to implement technical standards. The WTO organizes hundreds of
technical cooperation missions to developing countries annually. It also holds numerous
courses each year in Geneva for government officials. Aid for trade aims to help
developing countries develop the skills and infrastructure needed to expand their
trade.
4.4.4 IMF
International monetary fund is an international organization set up for standardizing
global financial relations and exchange rates.
The current membership of IMF is of 188 countries. India joined the IMF on
December 27, 1945, as one of the IMF’s original members. To become a member, a
country must apply and then get the approval of the majority of members. Once a
country becomes a member of IMF, it is assigned a quota, which is based on its size
in the world economy. A member’s quota in IMF determines its organizational and
financial relationship with IMF such as special drawing rights (SDR) allocation,
voting power, its capital subscription and its access to IMF financing. Each member
country’s quota determines the amount of financial resource that country needs to
provide to IMF. This capital subscription is supposed to be paid in full by the member
country upon joining. Twenty-five per cent of this amount can be paid in SDR or any
hard currency such as dollar, Yen, euro or pound sterling and the remaining can be
paid in the member country’s own currency. Further, a member’s voting power in
IMF’s decisions is also determined by its quota. Each member is allocated the basic
vote alongwith one additional vote for each special drawing rights 1,00,000 of quota.
Besides this, the quota also determines the amount of financing a member
can obtain from IMF. For example, a member can borrow up to 200 per cent of its
quota in a year and 600 per cent cumulatively under the Stand By and Extended
Agreements which is a type of loan granted by IMF.
On November 2010, there has been an agreement between the member
countries to rejig the quota system to take into consideration the changing dynamics
of the global economic realities.
IMF’s main goals:
• promoting international monetary cooperation
• facilitating the expansion and balanced growth of international trade
• promoting exchange stability
• assisting in the establishment of a multilateral system of payments
• making resources available (with adequate safeguards) to members
experiencing balance of payments difficulties.

IMF Loan Data—2012
• Loans committed (as of 5/21/12): $247 billion, of which $189 billion have
not been drawn
NOTES • Biggest borrowers (amount agreed as of 5/21/12): Greece,
Portugal, Ireland
• Biggest precautionary loans (amount agreed as of 5/21/12): Mexico,
Poland, Colombia
• Surveillance consultations: Consultations concluded for 128 countries
in FY2011 and for 112 countries in FY2012 as of 03/05/12
• Technical assistance: Field delivery in FY2011—198.2 person years
Source: IMF website
Special Drawing Rights

Special Drawing Right (SDR) is an international reserve asset created by IMF in
1969, to add to its member country’s reserves. The special drawing rights are not a
currency or a claim on the IMF but, it is a potential claim on the freely usable
currencies of the IMF’s member countries. The SDR is also used as the unit of
account of the IMF and other international organizations.
Every five years, this composition of SDR is reviewed by the executive board
if IMF feels the changing global scenario demands so and that SDR basket should
correctly reflect the relative importance of currencies in the financial and trading
systems of the world. On the review done on November 2010, there was a revision
in the weights of the currencies based on the value of the exports of goods and
services and also on the amount of reserves denominated in the respective currencies
which the other members of the IMF were holding. These changes came into effect
from 1 January 2011. The next review will be done in 2015.
SDR’s can be exchanged for freely usable currencies. SDRs are allotted to
member countries as per their respective quotas with IMF. If required, members
can also voluntarily exchange SDRs for currencies among themselves.
Resources of IMF
The resources of IMF are provided by the member countries through payment of
quotas which reflect each country’s economic size. In the G-20 summit in April
2009, the world leaders pledged to triple the lending resources of IMF from $250 to
$750 billion. To strengthen global financial and economic stability, again in April
2012, the member countries have announced additional pledges to increase the Fund’s
resources by over $430 billion.
Initially, the annual expenses for running IMF were met by interest receipts
on outstanding loans but now the member countries have agreed to follow a new
income model, which is based on revenue resources which are better suited to the
various activities of the Fund.

Organization and Governance International Organizations
The organizational structure of IMF has the board of governors at the top, comprising
one governor and one alternate governor from each of its member country. A meeting
of the Board of Governors is held once a year at the IMF-World Bank annual
NOTES
meetings. Twenty-four of these governors are a part of International Monetary and
Financial Committee (IMFC) and meet twice each year. There is a 24-member
Executive Board of IMF, alongwith IMFC and the IMF staff, which oversees the
day to day workings of IMF. The IMF staff is headed by the managing director, who
is also the chairman of the executive board and is assisted by four deputy directors.
The International Monetary Fund is accountable to the governments of its
member countries.
Operations
Surveillance: This a formal system designed by IMF to review the regional, national
and global developments of its 188 member countries to maintain stability and prevent
further crisis in the international monetary system. It advises them to reduce
vulnerabilities to economic and financial crisis, foster economic stability and raise
standard of living of people in their respective countries. There are two main aspects
to the IMF’s surveillance work: bilateral surveillance, or the appraisal of and advice
on the policies of each member country; and multilateral surveillance, or oversight
of the world economy.
Financial assistance: The member countries can correct their balance of payment
situations with the help of IMF financing. The national authorities of these countries
develop policy programmes in close cooperation with IMF and the effective
implementation of these programmes determines the continuation of this financial
support. As an early response to the financial crisis, IMF took necessary actions to
increase its lending capacity and went for a major change in its financial support
mechanism and reforms in April 2009, then in August 2010 and November 2011. As
a part of its recent reforms, IMF has improved its lending instruments to provide
‘flexible crisis prevention tools’ to a large number of members who had sound policies,
fundamentals and institutional policy frameworks. For the low income countries of
the world, IMF has not only doubled its lending capacity, loan access limits but has
also charged zero interest rates through end-2012.
Technical assistance: The IMF provides training and technical assistance to help
its member countries increase their capacity to devise and execute effective policies.
This technical assistance is offered in several areas such as monetary and exchange
rate policies, expenditure policies, tax policy and administration, banking and financial
system regulation and supervision and legislative framework and statistics.
Lending by the IMF
A country in severe financial trouble, unable to pay its international bills, poses potential
problems for the stability of the international financial system, which the IMF was
created to prevent. Any member country, whether rich, middle-income, or poor, can

International Organizations turn to the IMF for financing if it has a balance of payments need—that is, if it
cannot find sufficient financing on affordable terms in the capital markets to make
its international payments and maintain a safe level of reserves.
IMF loans are meant to help member countries tackle balance of payments
NOTES problems, stabilize their economies, and restore sustainable economic growth. This
crisis resolution role is at the core of IMF lending. At the same time, the global
financial crisis has highlighted the need for effective global financial safety nets to
help countries cope with adverse shocks. A key objective of recent lending reforms
has therefore been to complement the traditional crisis resolution role of the IMF
with more effective tools for crisis prevention.
The IMF is not a development bank and, unlike the World Bank and other
developmental agencies, it does not finance projects.
The changing nature of lending
About four out of five member countries have used IMF credit at least once. But
the amount of loans outstanding and the number of borrowers have fluctuated
significantly over time.
In the first two decades of the IMF’s existence, more than half of its lending
went to industrial countries. But since the late 1970s, these countries have been able
to meet their financing needs in the capital markets.
The oil shock of the 1970s and the debt crisis of the 1980s led many lower-
and lower-middle-income countries to borrow from the IMF.
In the 1990s, the transition process in central and eastern Europe and the
crises in emerging market economies led to a further increase in the demand for
IMF resources.
In 2004, benign economic conditions worldwide meant that many countries
began to repay their loans to the IMF. As a consequence, the demand for the Fund’s
resources dropped sharply.
But in 2008, the IMF began granting loans to countries hit by the global financial
crisis. The IMF currently has programmes with more than fifty countries around the
world and has committed more than $325 billion in resources to its member countries
since the start of the global financial crisis.
While the financial crisis has sparked renewed demand for IMF financing,
the decline in lending that preceded the financial crisis also reflected a need to adapt
the IMF’s lending instruments to the changing needs of member countries. In
response, the IMF conducted a wide-ranging review of its lending facilities and
terms on which it provides loans.
In March 2009, the Fund announced a major overhaul of its lending framework,
including modernizing conditionality, introducing a new flexible credit line, enhancing
the flexibility of the Fund’s regular stand-by lending arrangement, doubling access
limits on loans, adapting its cost structures for high-access and precautionary lending,
and streamlining instruments that were seldom used. More reforms have since been
undertaken, most recently in November 2011.
Lending to preserve financial stability International Organizations
The purpose of the IMF’s lending has changed dramatically since the organization
was created. Over time, the IMF’s financial assistance has evolved from helping
countries deal with short-term trade fluctuations to supporting adjustment and
NOTES
addressing a wide range of balance of payments problems resulting from terms of
trade shocks, natural disasters, post-conflict situations, broad economic transition,
poverty reduction and economic development, sovereign debt restructuring, and
confidence-driven banking and currency crises.
Today, IMF lending serves three main purposes:
• It can smooth adjustment to various shocks, helping a member country
avoid disruptive economic adjustment or sovereign default, something
that would be extremely costly, both for the country itself and possibly
for other countries through economic and financial ripple effects (known
as contagion).
• IMF programmes can help unlock other financing, acting as a catalyst
for other lenders. This is because the programme can serve as a signal
that the country has adopted sound policies, reinforcing policy credibility
and increasing investors’ confidence.
• IMF lending can help prevent crisis. The experience is clear: capital
account crises typically inflict substantial costs on countries themselves
and on other countries through contagion. The best way to deal with
capital account problems is to nip them in the bud before they develop
into a full-blown crisis.
Conditions for lending
When a member country approaches the IMF for financing, it may be in or near a
state of economic crisis, with its currency under attack in foreign exchange markets
and its international reserves depleted, economic activity stagnant or falling, and a
large number of firms and households going bankrupt. In difficult economic times,
the IMF helps countries to protect the most vulnerable in a crisis.
The IMF aims to ensure that conditions linked to IMF loan disbursements are
focused and adequately tailored to the varying strengths of members’ policies and
fundamentals. To this end, the IMF discusses with the country the economic policies
that may be expected to address the problems most effectively. The IMF and the
government agree on a programme of policies aimed at achieving specific, quantified
goals in support of the overall objectives of the authorities’ economic programme.
For example, the country may commit itself to fiscal or foreign exchange reserve
targets.
Loans are typically disbursed in a number of installments over the life of the
programme, with each installment conditional on targets being met. Programmes
typically last up to three years, depending on the nature of the country’s problems,
but can be followed by another programme if needed. The government outlines the
details of its economic programme in a ‘letter of intent’ to the managing director of
the IMF. Such letters may be revised if circumstances change.
International Organizations For countries in crisis, IMF loans usually provide only a small portion of the
resources needed to finance their balance of payments. But, IMF loans also signal
that a country’s economic policies are on the right track, which reassures investors.
NOTES Main lending facilities

Since its creation in June 1952, the IMF’s Stand-By Arrangement (SBA) has been
used time and again by member countries; it is the IMF’s workhorse lending instrument
for emerging market countries. Rates are non-concessional, although they are almost
always lower than what countries would pay to raise financing from private markets.
The SBA was upgraded in 2009 to be more flexible and responsive to member
countries’ needs. Borrowing limits were doubled with more funds available up front,
and conditions were streamlined and simplified. The new framework also enables
broader high-access borrowing on a precautionary basis.
The Flexible Credit Line (FCL) is for countries with very strong fundamentals,
policies, and track records of policy implementation. It represents a significant shift
in how the IMF delivers Fund financial assistance, particularly with
recent enhancements, as it has no ongoing (ex post) situation and no caps on the
size of the credit line. The FCL is a renewable credit line, which at the country’s
judgment could be for 1-2 years, with a review of eligibility after the first year.
There is the flexibility to either treat the credit line as defensive or draw on it at any
time after the FCL is approved. Once a country qualifies (according to pre-set
criteria), it can tap all resources available under the credit line at any time, as
disbursements would not be phased and conditioned on particular policies as with
traditional IMF-supported programmes. This is justified by the very strong track
records of countries that qualify to the FCL, which give assurance that their economic
policies will remain strong or that remedial measures will be taken in the face of
shocks.
The Precautionary and Liquidity Line (PLL) builds on the strengths and
broadens the scope of the Precautionary Credit Line (PCL). The PLL provides
financing to meet actual or potential balance of payments needs of countries with
sound policies, and is intended to serve as insurance and help resolve crises. It
combines a qualification process (similar to that for the FCL) with focused ex-post
conditionality aimed at addressing vulnerabilities identified during qualification. Its
qualification requirements signal the strength of qualifying countries’ fundamentals
and policies, thus contributing to consolidation of market confidence in the country’s
policy plans. The PLL is designed to provide liquidity to countries with sound policies
under broad circumstances, including countries affected by regional or global
economic and financial stress.
The Rapid Financing Instrument (RFI) provides rapid and low-access financial
assistance to member countries facing an urgent balance of payments need, without
the need for a full-fledged programme. It can provide support to meet a broad range
of vital needs, including those arising from commodity price shocks, natural disasters,
post-conflict situations and emergencies resulting from weakness.

The extended fund facility is used to help countries address balance of International Organizations
payments difficulties related partly to structural problems that may take longer to
correct than macroeconomic imbalances. A programme supported by an extended
arrangement usually includes measures to improve the way markets and institutions
function, such as tax and financial sector reforms, privatization of public enterprises. NOTES
The trade integration mechanism allows the IMF to provide loans under one
of its facilities to a developing country whose balance of payments is suffering
because of multilateral trade liberalization, either because its export earnings decline
when it loses preferential access to certain markets or because prices for food
imports go up when agricultural subsidies are eliminated.
Current Challenges
The global economic mess created by the subprime crisis, almost led to a worst
recession, similar to the Great Depression of 1930s. The crisis originating in the
United States in 2007 affected almost all the countries and institutions across the
world .The IMF tried to support and sustain its member countries on many fronts
such as advising on policy solutions using its cross-cultural experience, increasing
lending and introducing reforms to modernize its operations. Now, as the direction of
the crisis has shifted to Europe, IMF has increased its activity in that region and is
also working with G-20 side-by-side to adopt a multilateral approach.
Some of the pressing issues that top’s IMF’s agenda at the moment are:
1. Partnering Europe: The common currency euro, after its successful creation
in 1999, has not been able to meet its purpose due to a lot of problems being
faced by the member countries of European Union. Since the emergence of
the Euro zone debt crisis, IMF has been actively involved in providing technical
assistance, financing and policy advice. It is working independently as well as
in cooperation with European Central Bank (ECB) and European Commission
(EC). The present IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde has laid
emphasis on three key issues which are to be addressed such as need for
greater integration, reduced competitiveness and lack of growth. She has
also stressed that it is very important at this time for euro zone to restore
confidence in its members and to protect them with the right policy actions.
2. Reinforcing multilateralism: The crisis faced by the world since 2007 has
shown the great benefits from international cooperation. Had it not been for
the support and cooperation of the G-20 group of countries comprising the
industrialized and emerging market economies, this crisis would have taken a
very bad shape. In 2009, at the Pittsburgh Summit, the G-20 nations had
pledged to adopt policies and framework for ensuring a brighter economic
future and lasting recovery of the affected countries and launched the
‘framework for strong, sustainable, and balanced growth’. The backbone of
this framework is a multilateral process where the G-20 nations have formed
shared objectives and policies and also periodically check their progress to
meet those objectives. This is done through the Mutual Assessment Process
(MAP). The IMF provides technical analysis to evaluate how the policies of
member countries fit together and whether they will be able to meet their
International Organizations desired goals collectively and whether their policies fit together. A series of
options have been considered by the IMF executive board to increase bilateral,
multilateral and financial surveillance and how the three can be integrated.
For the five most important economies – the United States, the United
NOTES Kingdom, Japan, euro zone and China — IMF has launched ‘spillover report’
to assess the effect of policies taken by one area or country on rest of the
world.
The list of G-20 countries is given below:
1. Argentina
2. Australia
3. Brazil
4. Canada
5. China
6. France
7. Germany
8. India
9. Indonesia
10. Italy
11. Japan
12. Mexico
13. Russia
14. Saudi Arabia
15. South Africa
16. Republic of Korea
17. Turkey
18. United Kingdom
19. United States of America
The European Union, who is represented by the rotating Council presidency
and the European Central Bank, is the 20th member of the G-20.
3. Rethinking macroeconomic principles: The depth of the crisis and the
misery and hardship caused by it worldwide, has forced policy makers and
IMF to rethink and re-examine the macroeconomic principles followed by
countries to avoid a repeat of similar events. On 7-8 March 2011, the IMF
held a conference to discuss the future of the macroeconomic policy and
these policy questions. The agenda of the conference was on six key areas
such as: fiscal policy, monetary policy, capital account management,
international monetary system, growth strategies and financial intermediation
and regulations. The main aim of the conference was to provide an open
floor for discussion and ongoing dialogue that extends beyond IMF’s domain.
4. Stepping up crisis lending: In order to support the countries during the
global crisis, the IMF has increased its lending capacity. The IMF not only
offered higher amounts, but also loan terms were tailor made as per the
individual countries’ economic circumstances and economic strength. International Organizations
Moreover, more reforms were introduced to strengthen IMF’s capacity to
prevent future crisis.
Some of these reforms were:
NOTES
• Lending limits were doubled and procedures were streamlined.
• A flexible credit line (FCL) was introduced for countries with sound
policy framework and strong track record of economic performance. A
precautionary credit line (PCL) was introduced for countries facing
weaknesses while having sound economic policies and fundamentals.
• To provide focused and tailor made loan disbursement conditions as per
the strengths of members’ policies.
• Focusing on more concessional terms of lending for low income countries
and also on social spending. It has also stepped up lending to these
countries to reduce the impact of the present crisis on their economic
gains and also to facilitate in eradication of poverty.
• IMF has supported countries in the euro zone like Ireland, Greece,
Portugal, Ukraine and Romania with almost $280 billion and has extended
credit under a new flexible credit line to countries such as Poland,
Mexico and Columbia.
5. Strengthening the international monetary system: The international
monetary system is a set of internationally agreed conventions rules, and
supporting institutions that facilitate cross border investments and international
trade and also the flow of capital among countries. Although this system has
delivered a lot, yet it suffers from a number of weaknesses such as lack of an
orderly and automatic mechanism to check volatile capital flows and exchange
rate that have disastrous effects on economy, real and financial imbalances,
and an accumulation of international reserves which are concentrated on a
narrow supply.
It is very important that the IMF addresses these issues to achieve global
financial stability and focus on rebalancing demand growth which is necessary
for a strong and sustained recovery and for reducing systemic risk. It has
recently reviewed its lending toolkit and surveillance but still further reforms
are the need of the hour.
6. Supporting low-income countries: The IMF has increased its support and
focus to the low income countries after analyzing on their changing economic
conditions and increased vulnerabilities to the global economic crisis. It has
stepped up its lending instruments to address emergency and short term needs
of these countries.
IMF and World Trade Organization
One of the functions of the IMF is to support the expansion and growth of international
trade; therefore, the IMF works with the World Trade Organization (WTO) to create
a sound system of global trade and payments. In fact, the functions of both WTO
and the IMF are complimentary and, therefore, a cooperative agreement between
International Organizations them, covering various aspects has also been signed between them. According to
the agreement, WTO has to consult the IMF on issues of balance of payment,
monetary reserves and foreign exchange arrangements. The IMF has an observership
status at WTO and actively participates in many of the WTO meetings. The WTO
NOTES secretariat also attends meetings of the IMF executive board.
The WTO secretariat and the IMF staff consult each other regularly on trade
policy developments and advice for individual countries.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

8. Mention the seven founding members of SAARC.
9. In which year did WTO replace the GATT?
10. What does a member’s quota in IMF determine?
11. Define the Precautionary and Liquidity Line (PLL).
12. What is the objective of OPEC?
4.5 SUMMARY
• League of Nations was the first stable worldwide security organization whose
major aim was to uphold world peace. It was an intergovernmental association.
It was established as a result of the Paris Peace Conference. The League of
Nations had its maximum extent from 28 September 1934 to 23 February
1935. It comprised 58 members.
• The principle constitutional organs of the league were : The assembly, the
council and the permanent secretariat.
• Other institutions like the Permanent Court of International Justice, International
Labour Organization, Health Organization, Committee on Intellectual
Cooperation, Slavery Commission and the Committee for the study of the
legal status of women were constituted under the League.
• The United Nations was founded in 1945 after World War II to substitute the
League of Nations, to end wars between nations and to offer a platform for
dialogue. It contains manifold subsidiary organizations to complete its missions.
• The aims of the United Nations are: Facilitating cooperation in international
law, international security, economic development, social progress, human
rights and achievement of world peace.
• The six principle organs of the United Nations are the General Assembly, the
Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Secretariat, the
International Court of Justice and the United Nations Trusteeship Council.
• The General Assembly is the only major organ in which all members are
presented. It is the apex body of the United Nations.

• The security Council is often described as the enforcement wing of the United International Organizations
Nations, its primary responsibility is to maintain international peace and security
among countries.
• The Economic and Social Council has been established to coordinate the
economic and social work of the United Nations along with the specialized NOTES
agencies and institutions to assist the General Assembly in promoting
international economic and social cooperation and development.
• The Trusteeship Council works as an auxiliary organ of the General Assembly
in so far as it supervises the administration of the non-strategic trust territories
and an auxiliary organ of the Security Council with regard to strategic areas.
• The International Court of Justice’s purpose is to adjudicate disputes among
states. The court has heard cases related to war crimes, illegal state
interference and ethnic cleansing, among others, and continues to hear cases.
• The Secretariat comprises of the Secretary General and such other staff as
the organization may require. It provides services to the other organs of the
United Nations.
• The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is an
organization of the South Asian nations. It was founded in 1985 dedicating to
the economic, technological, social and cultural development and emphasizing
of collective self-reliance.
• The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade is a multilateral agreement
regulating trade among 153 nations. It was set up after the World War I. In
1995, it was replaced by the World Trade Organization.
• International Monetary Fund is an international organization set up for
standardizing global financial relations and exchange rates.
4.6 KEY TERMS
• The League of Nations: It was the first stable worldwide intergovernmental

association whose major aim was to uphold world peace.
• SAARC: South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation is an organization
of the South Asian nations dedicated to the economic, technological, social
and cultural development and emphasizing of collective self-reliance.
• GATT: The General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) is a multilateral
agreement regulating trade among 153 nations. It was set up after World
War II to promote economic cooperation of nations. It was replaced by WTO
in the year 1995.
• Special Drawing Rights: It is an international reserve asset created by
IMF. It is a potential claim on the freely usable currencies of the IMF’s
member countries.

International Organizations • OPEC: It is an association of oil and petroleum exporting countries in order
to co-ordinate and unify petroleum policies, prices, returns etc. among member
countries.
NOTES
1. The Paris Peace Conference was summoned to build a permanent peace

after the World War I.
2. Part XIII of the Treaty of Versailles specified the setting up of the International
Labour Organization in the year 1919.
3. When the General Assembly votes on significant questions, a two-thirds
majority of those present and voting is needed.
4. The six principal organs of the United Nations are the General Assembly, the
Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Secretariat, the
International Court of Justice and the United Nations Trusteeship Council.
5. The supervisory functions of the General Assembly include the power to
exert control and regulate working of other organs and agencies of the United
Nations.
6. The International Court of Justice is located in The Hague, Netherland.
7. The Secretary-General’s duties include helping resolve international disputes,
administering peacekeeping operations, organizing international conferences,
gathering information on the implementation of Security Council decisions,
and consulting with member governments regarding various initiatives.
8. Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka are
the seven founding members of the SAARC.
9. World Trade Organization (WTO) replaced the original GATT on 1 January
1995.
10. A member’s quota in IMF determines its organizational and financial
relationship with IMF such as special drawing rights (SDR) allocation, voting
power, its capital subscription and its access to IMF financing.
11. The Precautionary and Liquidity Line (PLL) is a lending tool of the IMF
which provides financing to meet actual or potential balance of payments
needs of the countries with sound policies, and is intended to serve as insurance
and helps resolve crises.
12. OPEC’s objective is to co-ordinate and unify petroleum policies among Member
Countries, in order to secure fair and stable prices for petroleum producers;
an efficient, economic and regular supply of petroleum to consuming nations;
and a fair return on capital to those investing in the industry.

NOTES
1. What were the goals of the League Covenant?
2. Write a short note on the establishment of the United Nations conference.
3. What are the deliberative functions of the Security Council?
4. List the six standing committees of the Economic and Social Council.
5. State the objectives of SAARC.
6. Briefly discuss the changing functions of OPEC over the years.
7. What were the limitations of GATT?
8. What are Special Drawing Rights?
1. Explain the composition, functions and powers of the General Assembly.
2. Discuss the functions of the Economic and Social Council.
3. What kind of powers and functions does the International Court of Justice
enjoy?
4. Critically evaluate the functioning of the United Nations.
5. Discuss the different political issues which has been present in SAARC.
6. Compare The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the
World Trade Organisation.
7. Discuss the current challenges of the IMF.
4.9 FURTHER READING
Kumar, Mahendra. 1967. Theoretical Aspects of International Politics. Agra:

Shiva Lal Agarwala.
Jaitely, Anam. 1986. International Politics: Major Contemporary Trends and
Issues. New York: Apt Books, Inc.
Friedman. 1965. An Introduction to World Politics. New York: Macmillan.
Samir, A. 1976. Unequal Development: An Essay on the Social Formations of
Peripheral Capitalism, New York: Monthly Review Press.
Baylis, J., Smith, S. 2005. The Globalization of World Politics- An Introduction
to International Relations. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
World Trade Organization. 2000. From GATT to the WTO: The Multilateral Trading
System in the New Millennium. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
Chwieroth, M.J. 2009. Capital Ideas: The IMF and the Rise of Financial
Liberalization. US: Princeton University Press.

International Relation and Organization - BAPol Science VTH Sem English - 21072017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

International Relation and Organization - BAPol Science VTH Sem English - 21072017

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Relation and Organization - BAPol Science VTH Sem English - 21072017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERNATIONAL RELATION

Directorate of Distance Education

Vikas® is the registered trademark of Vikas® Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.

Unit-I Introduction to International Relations Unit 1: Introduction to

Unit-II Foreign Policies of Various Countries Unit 2: Foreign Policies of

Unit-III Neocolonialism Unit 3: Neocolonialism

Unit-IV International Organizations Unit 4: International

UNIT 1 INTRODUCTION TO INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 3-35

UNIT 2 FOREIGN POLICIES OF VARIOUS COUNTRIES 37-156

UNIT 3 NEOCOLONIALISM 157-203

UNIT 4 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS 205-257

UNIT 1 INTRODUCTION TO International Relations

In an increasingly globalized world, the study of international relations becomes a

1.1 UNIT OBJECTIVES

After going through this unit, you will be able to:

CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

THE STATE AND THE NON-STATE ACTORS—

However, with the changing nature of politics at the domestic as well as at

Source: UNCTAD/Erasmus University database

International Organizations as Political Actors

Non-legitimate Groups as Strong Political Actors

CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

1.4 CONCEPT OF NATIONAL POWER—

CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

• The nature of international relations is dynamic especially in these times of

1.6 KEY TERMS

• State: It refers to a sovereign, independent state which has a clearly

1.7 ANSWERS TO ‘CHECK YOUR PROGRESS’

1.8 QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES

Appadorai, A. 2005. Dilemma in Foreign Policy in the Modern World. New

UNIT 2 FOREIGN POLICIES OF Various Countries

After going through this unit, you will be able to:

2.2 DEFINITION OF FOREIGN POLICY—VARIOUS

2.3 DETERMINANTS OF FOREIGN POLICY:

Formulating a foreign policy is a dynamic process. Normally, a change of government

CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

2.4 NATIONAL INTEREST-ROLE OF NATIONAL

2.5 INSTRUMENTS AND TECHNIQUES OF STATE

CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

2.6 FOREIGN POLICY: INDIA, UK, USA AND

2.6.3 USA’s Foreign Policy

NOTES The Truman period (1945–53)

Self-Instructional Material 103

106 Self-Instructional Material

Self-Instructional Material 109

110 Self-Instructional Material

Self-Instructional Material 111

112 Self-Instructional Material

Self-Instructional Material 113

114 Self-Instructional Material

Self-Instructional Material 115

116 Self-Instructional Material

118 Self-Instructional Material

Self-Instructional Material 119

120 Self-Instructional Material

Self-Instructional Material 123

124 Self-Instructional Material

126 Self-Instructional Material