Theories or Approaches to the Study of International Politics

(The Realist Theory, Systems Theory and Decision Making Theory) "One of the reasons for the wide range of approaches to the study of international affairs and for the absence of an agreed-upon frame of reference is the lack of a basic theory." Morgenthau As noted in the introductory chapter the scope of international relations has greatly expanded over the years and of late scholars have tried to build up certain theories of international politics. Till very recent times scholars studied international politics as it is and paid no attention to the problem of policies as it ought to be. They conceived international relations as a generalised picture of the international scene and did not build up any theories with a view to explain the behaviour on the international scene. However, in recent years scholars under the impact of behavioural sciences have tried to build up theories of international politics and the scope of the subject has undergone great changes. The scholars instead of giving a historical narrative of the world events have preferred to discuss the events with a view to theorise.

Approaches
Scholars have adopted different approaches for the study of international politics. Before we examine these approaches it shall be desirable to understand the meaning of term 'approach'. According to Vernon Van Dyke, an approach "consists of a criteria of selectioncriteria employed in selecting the problems or questions to consider and in selecting the data to bring to bear; it consists of standards governing the inclusion and exclusion of questions and data." In simple words an approach is a set of standards governing the inclusion and exclusion of questions and data for academic purposes. It implies looking at the problem from a particular angle and explaining the phenomenon from the same angle. As different scholars have adopted different criteria for selecting problems and data 54 and adopted different standpoints, this has resulted in different approaches for the study of international relations. The various approaches for the study of international policy have been divided by Hedley Bull into two categories (1) classical approach and (2) scientific approach.

Classical or Traditional Approach

The classical approach is also known as traditional approach. This approach was in vogue till the middle of the present century, even though at present certain writers continue to subscribe to this approach. These writers mainly made descriptive analysis of international relations. The main objective of the scholars adopting traditional approach was "to report and analyse current international problems and to speculate on these sources and outcomes of various policy alternatives for specific states or for international organisation." Accordingly to Hedley Bull the traditional approach is "the approach to theorising that derives from philosophy, history and law, and that is characterised above all by explicit reliance upon the exercise of judgement and by the assumptions that if we confine ourselves to strict standards to verification and proof there is very little of significance that can be said about international relations that general propositions about this subject must therefore derive from a scientifically imperfect process of perception or institution, and that these general propositions cannot be accorded anything more than the tentative and inconclusive status appropriate to their doubtful origin."* In other words the traditional approach is basically normative, qualitative and value judgement approach. According to Grieves, the value of a work based on this approach is "usually measured by the reputation of the scholar, the extent to which his or her judgement is trusted, the evidence of thorough research, the lucidity with which the discussion is presented, or the nerves touched with an eloquent or moving philosophical discourse." The traditional approach was adopted by most of the scholars till the scientific approach made its appearance. It nourished two dominant scholars of international political thought; 'idealism' and 'realism' and greatly contributed to the sophisticated understanding of the nature and determinants of international relations. The traditional approach mainly concerns itself with the historical dimensions and lays emphasis on diplomatic, historical and institutional studies. No wonder, the classical approach had various variants, viz., historical approach; philosophical approach; legal approach and institutional approach. The historical approach focussed on the past or on a selected period of history to find out an explanation of what institutions arehow they came into being and makes an analysis of these institutions as they stand. This approach helped in illuminating the present by drawing on the * Hedley Bull, "International Theory: the Case for a Classical Approach," World Politics, April 1966, p.361. 55 wisdom of the past. The philosophical approach regarded the state as an agent of moral improvement of international relations, and stood for attainment of perpetual peace. But this approach was defective in so far as it was abstract and speculative and far removed from reality The legal approach laid emphasis on the need of having a system of world law to regulate the behaviour of nation-states and insisted on a code of international law to ensure world peace and security. It insisted on evolving some legal machinery for resolving state conflicts through mediation, arbitration or judicial settlement. Finally, the institutional approach focussed on the formal structure for the maintenance of peace and enforcement of principles of international law. It laid special emphasis on the study of the organisational law. It laid special emphasis on the study of the organisation and structure of the League of Nations, the United Nations, and other

specialised agencies like ILO, UNESCO, etc. It is noteworthy that all the above traditional approaches possessed an element of normativism and the scholars adopting these approaches made no effort to convert the study of international relations into a science.

Scientific Approach
On the other hand the scientific or the behavioural approach for the study of international politics, which became popular in the wake of the Second World War, lays more emphasis on the methods of study rather than the subject-matter. This approach is based on the simple proposition that international politics like any other social activity involves people and hence it could be explained by analyzing and explaining the behaviour of people as it is reflected in their activities in the field of international relations. The scientific approach applies scientific method and ignores the boundaries of orthodox disciplines. It insists that central aim of the research should be to study the behaviour of men. A notable feature of this approach is that it is inter-disciplinary and draws from various social sciences like sociology, psychology and anthropology. The scientific approach differs from the traditional approach in so far as there is a definite trend away from description, legal analysis and policy advice ....Its objective has not been to assess the main issues in the cold war or describe current international developments, but to create explanatory theories about international phenomena, and in some cases, even to propose the development of a general and predictive science of international relations."* In short, it can be said that the scholars who are concerned with the substance rather than the method adopt classical approach, while the scholars who are concerned with the method rather than the substance adopt scientific approach. However, it would be wrong to assume that these two approaches are necessarily incomplete. In fact a number of scholars have successfully combined these two approaches and produced fruitful results. * K.J. Holsti, International Politics: A Framework far Analysis, p.9. 56

The Realist and The Idealist Approach

Before we examine the controversy between the classicists and the behaviouralists, it shall be desirable' to examine the two variants of the classical approach, viz., Realists and idealists. (a) The Realist Approach: Realism in international relations does not mean reality as abstract ideas as Ploto expressed to the political expediency which Machiavelly propounded, or the philosophic doctrine of empiricism given by John Locke. "It is rather a set of ideas which take into account the implications of security, and power factors." The ideas emerge out of the individual's belief that others are always trying to destroy him- and therefore, he must be always ready to destroy others whenever need be in order to protect himself. Thus the basic assumption underlying the realist theory is the perpetual existence of conflict among nations in one form or the other. This is taken as a fixed doctrine. It is, therefore, evident that a contest for power is going on in the world and this can neither be controlled nor regulated by international law or

world government or an international organisation. Thus, realism unequivocally accepts as its guiding principle the permanence of the struggle for power. The prominent realists include the classical theorists Thomas Hobbes and Nicolo Machiavelli. In recent years George Kennan and Hans J. Morgenthau, Henry Kissinger etc have been the leading exponents of the realist theory. The best exposition of the realistic theory of international relations has been offered by Morgenthau. He says: "International politics, like all politics, is a struggle for power. Whatever the ultimate aims of international politics, power is always the immediate aim. Statesmen and people may ultimately seek freedom, security, prosperity or power itself. They may define their goals in terms of a religious, philosophic, economic or social ideal. They may hope that this ideal will materalise through its own inner force, through divine intervention, or through the natural development of human affairs. They may also try to further its realisation through non-political means, such as technical co-operation with other nations or international organisations. But whenever they strive to realise their goal by means of international politics, they do so by striving for power." Morgenthau in his Realist Theory laid emphasis on six principles which are as under: Firstly, politics is governed by objective laws which are based on human nature and psychology. We can understand the political phenomena by developing a political theory based on human psychology and reason. He laid emphasis on ascertaining of facts and giving them meaning through reason. Secondly, Morgenthau lays great emphasis on the concept of national interest which he defines in terms of power. He says that politics cannot be understood in moral or religious terms. It can be understood only on 57 rational basis. In other worlds he laid emphasis on presentation of a rational theory rather than indiscriminate description on the political study. Thirdly, Morgenthau holds that interest is not fixed and is moulded by the environments. Thus he assigns important role to environments in the determination of political action. Fourthly, Morgenthau asserts that universal moral principles cannot be applied to state's actions and these must be modified according to the circumstances of time and place. He says that the state is not expected to observe the same standards of morality as are observed by the individual. He argues, the individual may say for himself "Let justice be done even if the world perishes" but the state has no right to say so. The individual may sacrifice himself in defence of moral principles but the state has no right to sacrifice its liberty for moral principles. Realism also holds that prudence is the supreme virtue in poetics; without prudence there cannot be any political morality."

Fifthly, Morgenthau does not find any identity between moral aspirations of nation and the moral law which govern the universe and asserts that all political actors pursue their national interests. It is this concept of interest which saves the nation from political folly and moral excess. Finally, Morgenthau says that political sphere is as autonomous as the spheres of the economist, or the lawyer or the moralist. The political actor think in terms of interest as the economist thinks in terms of utility; the lawyer in terms of conformity of action with moral principles. Though the realist theory admits the relevance of non-political standards of thought, but treats them as subordinate to the standards of politics. Similarly Kennan also asserts that the national interest is a reliable guide to intelligent policy and each state tries to safeguard its national interest. However, Kennan insists on adopting moral approach in the formulation of policy while safeguarding the national interests. On the other hand Morgenthau completely ignores the moral aspect and insists on taking national interests as they are, the real guide to the formulation and understanding of international relations. However, both of them regard the power politics as the basis of world political relations. Criticism: The realist approach has been severely criticised on the following grounds: First, the theory suffers from ambiguity and is inconsistent with reality. No universally acceptable definition of power is offered. For example Morgenthau takes power as 'psychological relationship among states',but' the psychological relations themselves are quite vague and it is not pos sible to measure to study the same. The study of complex psychological relationship among more than 160 nation states of the modern world renders them even more complex. Secondly, the theory wrongly assumes that all men and states seek their national interests in terms of power. If it were so, there would be constant struggle going on between various states and there would be no systematic conduct of international relations. In fact, the element of mutual 58 co-operation among the members of the international community exercises profound influence on the conduct of international relations. Stanley Hoffmann has rightly observed: It is particularly uncomfortable when one's basic postulate about human nature is such that history cannot be anything but a tale full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. For it is a postulate which stresses the inevitability and universality of evil and which assumes that reason far from following its own inherent impulses is driven towards its goal by the irrational forces the end of which it serves. Now, this view makes it almost impossible to understand how there could be a rational theory of rational human behaviour.* Thirdly, the theory wrongly assumes that power is the most important tool which the nations pursue. In fact other considerations like wealth, cultural welfare, security, protection and promotion of ideology also greatly influence the actions of the states.

Fourthly, theory is defective in so far it treats the world as a static unit in which power is a permanent guiding factor. This is against the well-accepted fact that the nations keep on changing from time to time. Fifthly, Dyke has severely criticised the Realist theory. He says "If power were always the end in itself, politics could be likened to a game the object of which is to select the current. It would presumably be a more bloody game than is chess or baseball, but still the outcome would be without moral significance. The victory of one participant in the game would be followed sooner or later by the victory of another, and life would be made up of endless round of meaningless struggle. Each victor would have demonstrated his power and that would be that." Sixthly, the critics point out that Morgenthau's conception that national interest carries its own morality holds good only during the stable periods when accommodation of national objectives is possible, But in the present conditions when different nations are often ready to eliminate on other nations, it would be wrong to assume that national interest carries its own morality. Seventhly, the realist theory is defective in so far it assumes that there is hardly any relationship or activity which does not involve power. Actually there exist a number of non-political relationships and activities which do not involve power, such as international sports events, circulation of books and other reading matter, private letters and telegrams etc. which are not political activities. Morgenthau does not suggest any criteria for the separation of the political activities from the non-political activities. Finally, the realist theory, that of Morgenthau, is defective in so far as it regards the political sphere as autonomous as the spheres of economists, or lawyers moralists, but he is not quite clear about the nature of autonomy. Though he maintained that a political realist should only deal with limited set of variables, yet in his book Dilemmas of Politics he asserts * Stanely Hoffman, Contemporary Theory in International Relations, p.30. 59 that politics must play the roles of the common integrating core. In other words he says that politics must be concerned with all the variables with which the other specialised spheres deal. All this leads to confusion. Despite these shortcomings of the realist approach, it cannot be denied that the approach has three distinct advantages. First, it is persuasive and is supported by historical experience. Secondly, the realist approach has given a jolt to scholars and compelled them to re-evaluate their own assumptions. Thirdly, even those scholars who challenge the bases of realism have tended implicitly to rely on realist perspectives, which is a great compliment to this approach. (b) The Idealist Approach: The other aspect of the classical approach is the Utopian or the idealist approach. It regards the power politics as the passing phase of history and presents the picture of a future international society based on the notion of reformed international system free from power politics, immorality and violence. It aims at bringing 0about a better world with the

help of education and international organisation. This approach is quite old and found its faint echoes in the Declarations of the American War of Independence of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789. The most important writers in whose works the approach found expression include Condorcet, Rousseau, Kant, Woodrow Wilson etc. In 1795 Condorcet wrote a treatise which contained everything considered as the essential basis of idealism in the international relations. He visualised a world order free from war, inequality and tyranny. This new order would be marked by constant progress in human welfare brought about by the use of reason, education and science. Rousseau's idealist views are reflected from Fragment on War. He says: "When thousands of bellicose people have slaughtered their prisoners, when thousands of doctors in the keep of tyrants have justified these crimes, do in truth man's errors matter or their barbarity to justice? Let us not search for what has been done but rather for what should be done and let us dismiss evil and mercenary authorities who end up by marking men slaves, evil and miserable." Similarly, Kant made a strong plea for the prevention of war among states and creation of conditions for perpetual peace. But probably the greatest advocate of the idealist approach was President Wilson of USA who gave a concrete shape to his idealism through the text of the. Treaty of Versailles. He made a strong plea for world peace and international organisation. All the above writers and thinkers visualised a future .system free from power politics, immorality and violence. On account of their optimism the idealists regard the power struggle as nothing but the passing phase of history. The theory proceeds with the assumption that the interests of various groups or nations are likely to be adjusted in the larger interest of mankind as a whole. The difficulty with this approach is that such a system could emerge only be following moral principles in mutual relations in place of power, which is not possible in practice. Secondly, to bring about such an order the totalitarian forces must be crushed by all means through the use of 60 democratic methods and the last necessity is the establishment of the world government. The main criticism against this theory is that it runs short of factual position. The nations do not behave as they are expected. As a result the realism in international relations appears to be more near the truth. A rigid adherence to idealism is likely to lead to frustration. Looking at the glaring defects of the idealist theory a middle course has been adopted by a school of thought called Eclecticism. Eclecticism does not regard either the realist approach Or the idealist approach as completely satisfactory. They offer a synthesis of the pessimism of realists and the optimism of idealists. According to Prof. Quincy Wright the terms 'realism' and 'idealism' are ambiguous. They can at the most be used to distinguish between short run and long run policies. Realism would aim at the fulfillment of the short run national policy aimed at the fulfillment of the immediate necessities and idealism on the other hand represents the long run policy and would aim at the objectives to be realised in the future. Thus realism cannot ignore the immediate needs for a rosy future and idealism cannot leave out the prospective future only to solve the bleak present. In fact neither of these two approaches is wholly correct and both possess respective merits and demerits. For a balanced understanding of international relations it is desirable that realism and idealism must be intermingled. In the conduct of international relations also the statesmen should

neither show total aversion to the norms and values nor complete disregard to reality. Carr has rightly suggested that the combination of realism and idealism is the best solution. He says "Where utopianism has become a hollow and intolerable sham, which serves merely as a disguise for the interests of the privileged, the realist performs an indispensable service in unmasking it. But pure realism can offer nothing but a naked struggle for power which makes any kind of international society impossible. Having demolished the current Utopia with the weapons of realism, we still need to build a new Utopia of our own, which will one day fall to the same weapons."*

The Classicists-Behaviouralists Controversy

In the 1960s controversy started between science and traditionalism. Until the World War II the debate persisted between the two groups belonging to classical schools, viz., idealists and realists. The debate between the scientific school and the classical school centered around the method of study of international relations. The classicists regarded the application of scientific or behavioural method of study of international relations as unwanted. The controversy started with publication of the article by Hedley Bull in 1966.* Earlier several scholars, e.g., E.H. Carr, Alfred Zimmern, George Schwarzenberger * "International Theory: the Case for a Classical Approach" in World Politics, April 1966, pp. 361-367: 61 Hans J. Morgenthau, Martin Wright and Reymond Aron had produced studies in international relations based on the classical approach But it was Bull who brought to the forefront the question of relative merits and demerits of the classical and the scientific approach under two main heads, method and subject matter.

In Defence of Classical Approach

Bull asserted that the scientific approach was not appropriate for the study of international relations for a variety of reasons. He put these reasons in the form of propositions to be examined by other scholars to clarify the real nature of the controversy between the scientific and the classical approach. The first proposition made by Bull is that the nature of the subject-matter of international relations is such that it cannot be examined merely with the help of the modern scientific tools. The questions with which international relations is concerned are eventually moral questions. Secondly, the scholars of scientific approach have not attended to the basic questions arid thus have not been able to contribute much to the development of the theory of international relations.

Thirdly, it is not possible to accept the claim of the scientific theorists that their studies so far have only been in the nature of a beginning and that when they attain maturity they would yield a general, comprehensive and dependable science of the subject. Fourthly the scientific theorists have done a great disservice to the theory of international relations by introducing the so-called method of models. Fifthly, the scientific theorists are so much devoted to the scientific methods that they have made a fetish of them. Sixthly, he maintains that there is a great need for precision in the theory of International Relations and it should cover entire range of subject-matter under study and not precision in the limited field of facts and data only as the scientific theorists view. Lastly, these theorists have cut themselves off from history and phi losophy which alone provides the means of self-criticism. He therefore, concludes that the thinking of the scientific theorists lacks not only the sense of enquiry into the conditions of recent history that have produced the present conditions of international life but also a critical attitude to their own assumptions on the basis of which they have been proceeding with their study of international relations.

In Defence of Scientific Theory

On the other hand the scientific theory has been defended by several scholars. But the most powerful defence came from Morton Kaplan.'* In * Morton Kaplan, "The New Great Debate: Traditionalism vs. Science in International Relations." 62 his article he made a counter attack on traditionalists and argued how scientific method was more helpful in the study of international relations. He first of all takes up the contention of the traditionalists that the human purpose can be understood only by methods other than those of science. This contention is based upon the belief that the human purpose is concerned more with motives than with verifications and the motives could be analysed only by intuition and introspection. Conceding that human purpose is concerned with motives, Kaplan maintains that these motives are often confirmed by careful observation and analysis of the behaviour patterns of people. The traditionalists maintain the scientific methods are inappropriate in political world in which surprises may and do occur. Another attack made by traditionalists against scientific theorists is that they often mistake their models for reality. The reply of the scientists is that this kind of risk is always involved in any

kind of human activity. Further, it should not be forgotten that the psychologists, sociologists and anthropologists also are likely to make this kind of mistakes. Morton Kaplan also denies the charges that the scientific school completely excludes philosophy in its analysis. Kaplan claims that there are several questions which are basically philosophical and with which the systems theory, which is a part of the scientific method, is closely concerned. The scientific approach is based upon the simple proposition that international relations like any other social activity, involves people and hence it can be analysed and explained only by analysing and explaining the behaviour of the people as is reflected in their activities in the field of international relations. The traditionalists do not believe in either the desirability or the possibility of such theoretical formulations. The classical school contends that the general theory of human behaviour, which the behaviouralists are trying to evolve is inconceivable, although it concedes that a theory in the narrower field of international relations is not impossible. Thus the two schools are in a state of constant debate over the subject-matter and the method of study. The scientists concentrate on the collection of all the relevant facts and on the basis of these facts reach the conclusions as the facts speak. The traditionalists say that the facts cannot always speak for themselves and the scholar has to interpret them and give them the real meanings, and for this purpose dependence on individual insight and wisdom is essential which implies dependence on law, history and philosophy. Thus for the traditionalists the judgement is important but for behaviouralists it is not. Behaviouralists stick to the view that real research is possible through the analysis of the facts without interference from the personal likes and dislikes of the researcher.

Conclusion
At present most of the scholars are of the view that both the traditional 63 and the scientific methods can be used for fruitful study of international relations. David Singer realised this and made his observation: "science is not a substitute for insight and methodological rigour is not a substitute for wisdomboth imagination and rigour are necessary but neither is sufficient." David Vital too wrote that classical approach consists of two elements: the method and the subject matter. As a method the classical approach insists on the need for borrowing from history, law and philosophy and on depending upon judgement; and as the subject matter, it is concerned with the general questions of the nature of the study, the role of the use of force, and the significance of diplomacy. The subject matter of international relations is in fact not the same as classicists believe. After the Second World War a great deal of changes have taken place which have made it necessary for looking at it from a different angle. The scientific theorists are deeply involved in their techniques and purposes and it is hardly possible to make any generalisation about them.

The scientific approach suffers from the serious flaw that it puts exclusive reliance on methods and tends to stress that the method itself will determine the nature of the subject matter. The scientific theorists seem to believe that the real crux of the subject matter of international relations would be revealed if they adopted the right methods and techniques. Those who stand for a compromise between the two divergent approaches, Michael Hass proposed 'the bridge building' and Robert North applied for 'pluralistic posture'. But the idea is the same, both scientific and the classical methods are useful in the study of international relations.

The Systems Theory

The systems theory is the result of the behavioural revolution in social sciences. It developed out of the anxiety of the new social scientist to evolve a general body of knowledge by integrating the various disciplines of social sciences. There has been no unanimity among scholars regarding the meaning of a system. Hall and Fagen defined the system as "a set of objects together with relationship between the objects and between the attributes." Colin Cherry defined it as 'a whole which is compounded of many parts in an ensemble of attributes.' The systems theory has been applied in various disciplines and assigned a variety of meaning and definitions.

The Systems or General Systems Theory

The general systems theory is based on the assumption that there are certain features of relationship that are common to systems of all kinds. In other words 'a system connotes relationships between units or its various components.' In the recent years efforts have been made to study international relations in the context of systems analysis. Those who believe in this approach are of the view that a scientific study of international relations 64 can be made only if the relevant material is treated in terms of system action. The study of the actions of the parts of a political system can be made in terms of an analysis of the actions of participating units. Their assumption is that there is a system in international relations. The nations (states) being its parts involved in the process of interaction as each nation (a unit) is in constant contact with 'the whole' or the international environment. It shows therefore, that each system besides being a system can be a sub-system in relation to a larger system. A nation's behaviour is "a two way activity of taking from and giving to the international environment."* It may be noted that international system came into existence with the emergence of the modern European State systems. In the earlier period no doubt, state system existed but these systems were limited to certain well defined areas like, Greece, Italy, China and India and a universal system was absent. The scholars have assigned different meanings to the concept of systems and used it in different senses. Firstly, the system is described as an arrangement of international actors in which interactions could be identified. Secondly, as explanation it is referred to as a particular

arrangement in which the nature of the arrangement itself is considered the most important variable in explaining the behaviour of states, Thirdly, system is used in the sense of application of special types of approaches (methods) to the study of international politics. James N. Rousenau represents the first usage. According to him "a system is considered to exist ir an environment and to be composed of parts which through interaction are in relation to each other." The use of the term in this sense is made to describe the pattern of action among international actors. It does not possess much of theoretical value. In the second sense the term is used to convey that the world is divided into a number of rational entities possessed of severeignty which affects the nature of interpational relations. With no system of law enforceable among these sovereign states, conflicts leading to war are bound to occur. Kenneth Waltz, Kenneth Boulding and Charles McClelland have used the concept in this sense. In the third sense, system is the application of special types of approaches to the study of international relations. The system as method refers to particular approach adopted for bringing about a theoretical order in the vast data of international politics or relations. The system is used as a tool of analysis and focus is upon arrangement of actors, interaction of actors or recurring pattern of individual behaviour. Thus system analysis in terms of method makes international politics to be viewed as a system in the meaning of 'system as explanation'. In other words it means that there can be no use of system as method without prior commitment * Charles A. McClelland, Theory and the International System, p.90. 65 to certain assumptions. Therefore, it is necessary that there should be complete awareness of all the premises, e.g., ideological preferences which involve assumptions about the influence of values on human behaviour. The systems theory or general systems theory was first expounded by McClelland in 1955. Later it was developed by many other scholars but the theory was presented in a most systematic manner by Morton Kaplan who declared that systems approach provides the only possible method which can ensure the development of scientific politics. Therefore, it shall be appropriate to discuss Morton Kaplan's theory in detail.

Morton Kaplan's Systems Theory

Morton Kaplan is one of the best exponents of the systems approach. He is of the opinion that there is some coherence, regularity and order in international relations. International relations or politics implies two things: 'International system, and 'nation state system'. According to him nation state system is political system in the strict sense of the term while international system is not in fact a real political system. He believes that physical force is necessary to keep the system intact and this force is present in the state system which is absent in the case of international system. Nations or states are the main actors in the international politics and the role of the states

changes with the change of international system. Kaplan treats six models of major international systemthe balance of power system, the loose bipolar system, the tight bipolar system, the universal international system, the hierarchical international system and the unit veto system. Let us examine each one in detail. 1. The Balance of Power System. This system prevailed in Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries. It implied a sort of equilibrium of political power favourable to a particular nation at a particular time. Theoretically it means even distribution of power between various nations to prevent any particular nation from imposing its will upon others. The operation of this system has six important rules: (1) Each State may increase its power without war, i.e, through negotiations;(2) the primary object of each state is to protect its national interests even at the risk of war;(3) one should not eliminate an essential national actor; (4) The national actor should prevent others from forming a coalition and disturbing the international system; (5) The national actor should prevent other actors from subscribing to supernational principles; (6) Defeated actor should be permitted re-entry into the system The system worked- well for two centuries but since the beginning of the 20th century these rules are not operating well. 2. The Loose Bipolar System. The balance of power may transform itself into loose bipolar system. In this system each bloc has a leading actor. Both supernational actors as well as national actors participate in the loose bipolar system. Supernational actors are divided into bloc actors like NATO and Warsaw Bloc and universal actors like United Nations. Loose 66 bipolar system is characterised by two bloc actors (USA and USSR), non-member bloc actors (non-aligned states) and universal actor (U.N). All of them perform a unique and distinctive role within the system, but the rules of the system are not uniform for all the actors. The loose bipolar system has a considerable degree of inherent instability because the actors, or the non-member actors, or the universal actor is rarely of decisive importance in the matter of policy formulation. 3. The Tight Bipolar System. The loose bipolar system may be transformed either into a number of other systems or else into a tight bipolar system. In this system non-aligned states or nonmember national actors would either disappear or shall have little importance. Even universal actor shall not be in a position to mediate between the two bloc actors, as after the disappearance of uncommitted national actors the universal actor will not have sufficiently wide frame of preference. 4. The Universal International System. This system could be equated to world Federation. It would be possible when the United Nations or such other international agency becomes sufficiently strong to check war and maintain perpetual peace and the bipolar system would cease to exist. This agency would perform judicial, economic, political and administrative functions. However, the nation state would be left with sufficient autonomy.

5. The Hierarchical International System. This is another Utopian model. It may come into existence when a universal actor absorbs the whole world and only one nation is left as the universal actor. In this system the state would become territorial sub-divisions of the international system rather remaining .sovereign, independent, political units. The system would be directive if found by world conquest and non-directive when power would be distributed among units according to hierarchy under the domination of a single national actor. The nondirective system would be based on will while the directive system will be based on force. 6. The Veto System. The essence of this system would be that all states would have equal potentialities to destroy each other. Each state would possess the weapons for others' destruction. The unit veto system would remain stable only if all the actors are prepared to resist threats and retaliate in case of an attack. Conclusion. Though Kaplan's theory has relevance to the present international system yet it has been subjected to severe criticism. In the first place it is pointed out that the first two systems in the scheme of Kaplan belong to realm of the actual. The third system is losing its possibility as there is a growing trend in favour of stability and non-aligned nations and, dissensions in the bipolar system. Regarding the fourth, we find that a partial international system is growing. The fifth system has no possibility of being realised. The emergence of the sixth system is very much doubtful in the wake of the nonproliferation treaty. The six model scheme of international system has only limited merit. Any theory of behaviour of state must deaf with the dynamics of value 67 formation. Kaplan does not discuss this dynamics of the forces which determine the scale of nation's behaviour. This is his serious omission. The study of international relations in terms of international system is the study of the behaviour of states as units. No doubt, Kaplan devotes attention to the concepts of national interests which he concedes cannot be separated from national values. But how nation's interest and national values are formed and how they affect the collective behaviour of state has been ignored by him. He also overlooks the facts that the concept of national interest has already undergone a change. In order to control the international system and transform it in accordance with the demands of peace one will have to know the source through which the international system mostly changes.

THE DECISION MAKING APPROACH

Another important approach for the study of international politics which has been developed during the past few decades is the decision-making approach. This aproach is associated with the names of Richard C. Synder, H.W Bruck and Borton Spain. These writers tried to provide a theoretical explanation of the behaviour of the actors in international relations. On the basis of decision making analysis they tried to find out as to why and how do the actors behave. It may be

observed that "Decision making is a process or a sequence of activities involving stages of problem recognition, search or information, definition of alternatives consistent with the ranked preferences identified in the first three stages that will maximise or satisfy the actors' goals." The object of the decision making approach is to devise a conceptional framework that could help us in the reconstruction of the situation as defined by the decision makers. Thus, the facts and data for our study should be selected on the basis of what explains the behaviour of decision makers. The setting in which the foreign policy decisions are made is the one which is perceived by the decision makers. The setting consists of internal and external parts. The internal settings include domestic politics, public opinion personalities and organisations. The external setting implies all the relevant factors in the total situation of the international system existing at a particular time e.g., the factors beyond the territorial boundaries of the state, the decision of other states and the nature of their society. There is difference of opinion among the theorists of this approach and different lines are followed by them. The first line places emphasis on enviornmental factor which mean how the environments influence the decision-making. The environment has two aspectsone which the decision-makers can see and the other which is beyond their perception or estimate. This aspect was emphasised by Harold Sprout and Margaret Sprout. They assert that decision-making "is a process which results in the selection from a socially defined, limited number of problematical, alternative projects of one project intended to bring about the particular future 68 state of affairs envisaged by the decision-makers." The second includes the personality factor. The line seeks to study this behaviour of the decision makers by studying their personality. The study of the personality of decision maker can be helpful in explaining things at least so long as the same decision makers continue to control the foreign policy. This factor was emphasised by Alexander George and Juliettee George. They emphasised the important role played by President Wilson in the determination of international relations during his Presidency. Third line of approach is related to a study of those actors who actually participate in the formulation of foreign policy. There are at least five elements which influence the foreign policy making: the public opinion, interests groups, the media of mass communication, specific agents in the executive branch and specific committees of a legislature. James Robinson says that 'the organisation and internal process of the legislature determines the actual foreign policy.' The above discussions indicate that the basic idea of the decision making approach is that international politics should be taken as the interaction of foreign policies and that for the understanding of the interaction the only useful approach can be to study it in the context of foreign policy decisions. Defects. This approach suffers from several shortcomings. In the first place it is too emperical. It completely ignores the norms, values or high principles which exercise profound influence on international politics. In fact the ethical principles of foreign policy formulators inadvertently influence the formulation of the policy. Secondly, the approach is based on the principles of indeterminism in so far it fails to show how the various factors like situation, environment,

personality etc. influence the decision. Thirdly, the approach offers a 'statecentric' model of international politics. It merely tries to prove that the decision makers tend to fit incoming information into their existing theories and images. No wonder, this theory lacks the essentials of a theory. As Young has put it, this approach "has been used so imprecisely and indiscriminately by social scientists that it is in danger of losing any meaningful content." Fourthly, the theory mainly focusses on the motives and actions of the decision makers and completely ignores the role of other factors which influence the pattern of international politics. Finally, it ignores the objective nature of international developments. It does not supply any criteria either to explain the patterns of power politics or to prescribe the rules of international behaviour. Importance. However, the decision making framework is intended to show how and why a nation acts in international politics. Since the direct method of acquiring knowledge is not available the choice of decision making as a focus is wise. The place of greatest convergence after all is government organisation, therefore a great deal of factual details can become available from the examination of the activities of such organisations and their decisions. The knowledge acquired by various disciplines like 69 economics, psychology, and sociology can be fruitfully utilised in the study of international relations only by the decision making approach Conclusion. Thus it would be incorrect to say that tne decision making approach is absolutely useless in the study of international relations. It helps us in a comparative study of various foreign policies However, a general study of international relations cannot be fruitfully made with the exclusive help of the decision-making approach even though it is very useful as a tool in the foreign policy analysis. 70

7 Foreign Policy and its Determinants

"Foreign policy is the key element in the process by which a state translates its broadly conceived goals and interests into concrete courses of action to attain these objectives and preserve interests." Padelford and Lincoln In modern times no state can avoid involvement in the international sphere. This involvement must be systematic and based on some well-defined principles. The principles and the purpose of a state is reflected in the foreign policy. The importance of the foreign policy has been highlighted by scholars in various ways. According to one scholar, a state without a foreign policy is like a ship without a radar which drifts aimlessly without any direction by every storm and sweep of events. According to Prof. Taylor "Foreign Policy of a sort will go on so long as there are sovereign states."

Meaning of Foreign Policy

There is no unanimity amongst scholars regarding the meaning of foreign policy and various definitions have been offered. According to Padelford and Lincoln: "A state's foreign policy is the totality of its dealings with the external environment. Foreign policy is more than a collection of official documents, formal records of actions and public statements. A foreign policy statement can be simple and succinct... or it may be complicated and imprecise... Policy is the overall result of the process by which a state translates its broadly conceived goals and interests into specific courses of action in order to achieve its objective and preserve its interest."* Prof. F. S. Northedge says that foreign policy implies The use of political influence in order to induce other states to exercise their law making power in a manner desired by the state concerned: it is an interaction between forces originating outside the country's borders and those working within them." Prof. Joseph Frankel says that "foreign policy consists of decisions * Norman J. Padelford and George A. Lincoln, The Dynamics of International Politics, p.195. 71 and actions which involve to some appreciable extent relations between one state and others."* Huge Gibson defines foreign policy 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 nations. This calls for a clear understanding of what those interests are and how far we hope to go with the means at our disposal. Anything less than this falls short of being a foreign policy."** George Modelski says that foreign policy is "the system of activities evolved by communities for changing the behaviour of other states and for adjusting their own activities to the international environment."*** According to Rodee "Foreign policy involves the formulation and implementation of a group of principles which shape the behaviour pattern of a state while negotiating with other states to protect or further its interests." The Brookings Institution in its book Major Problems of United States Foreign Policy 1952-53, used the term foreign policy to refer to the complex and dynamic political course that a nation follows in relation to other states. According to it the foreign policy of a nation is more than the sum total of its foreign policy (thought out courses of action for achieving objectives), for it also includes its commitment, the current forms of its interests and objectives and the principles of right conduct that it professes. Crabb has offered a simple yet very effective definition of foreign policy. He says "Reduced to its most fundamental ingredients, foreign policy consists of two elements, national objectives to be achieved, and means for achieving them."

Charles Burton Marshall defines foreign policy as "the course of action undertaken by authority of state and intended to affect situations beyond the span of its jurisdiction." This definition emphasises two points. First, foreign policy generates inaction. Secondly the things acted upon in foreign policy are beyond the jurisdiction of the state. A perusal of the above definitions of foreign policy shows that scholars have laid emphasis either on the plan of action or policy as executed. However, they all agree that the foreign policy is concerned with the behaviour of a state towards other states. Objectives of Foreign Policy. The main objectives which the foreign policy of country seeks to achieve are as follows : Firstly, it seeks to protect the territorial integrity of the country and protect the interests of its citizens, both within and outside the country. Generally for this purpose the states prefer to follow policy of status quo. If a state pursues a policy which seeks to upset the status quo it is branded as revisionist -and arouses the suspicion of other members of the international *Joseph Frankel, The Making of Foreign Policy, p.l. **Huge Gibson, The Road to Foreign Policy, p.9. ***George Modelski, A Theory of Foreign Policy, pp. 6-7. 72 community. It has to protect the interests of its citizens both inside and outside the state, for the maintenance of its prestige. Secondly, the objective of foreign policy is maintenance of links with other members of international community and adoption of policy of conflict or cooperation towards them with a view to promote its own interests. It is well known that India has deliberately avoided exchange of diplomatic relations with Israel so that its relations with the Arab countries do not get strained, primarily because of close trade relations with Arab countries. Thirdly, the foreign policy of a country seeks to promote and further the national interests of the country. The primary interest of each state is self-preservation, security and well being of its citizens. Often the interests of various states come in clash and the states have to protect their interests bearing in mind this factor. Fourthly, the foreign policy aims at promotion of economic interests of the country. As the status of a state in 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 in turn to play a more effective role in international politics. Most of the treaties and agreements concluded by the states with other members of international community are essentially designed to protect and promote the economic interests of these states. The importance of this factor is evident from the fact that India opted to keep out of two power blocs, which had come into existence when she

gained independence, and adopted policy of non-alignment chiefly because she was keen to concentrate on her economic development. Further, she hoped to get every possible help and assistance from both the superpowers to accelerate the process of economic development. Similarly USA and China were obliged to patch up their differences, despite their ideological differences, due to economic considerations. Fifthly, the foreign policy aims at enhancement of the influence of the state either by expanding its area of influence or reducing that of other states to the position of dependency. The policy of United States and Soviet Union in the post World War II period have been largely motivated by these considerations.

DETERMINANTS OF FOREIGN POLICY (FACTORS INFLUENCING FOREIGN POLICY)

The foreign policy of a country is influenced by so many factors that it is not possible to enumerate all of them here. Some of the important factors which influence the foreign policy of a country or constitute the inputs of the foreign policy are given hereunder. Broadly speaking these factors fall into two categories, viz., internal and external.

Internal Factors
1. Size. In the first place the size of a state's territory as well as its 73 population greatly influences its foreign policy. Generally the leaders and people of countries with small territory and population do not expect their country to carry great weight in international affairs. On the other hand the leaders and people of large countries are ready to assume special responsibilities. However, sometimes even small states which have rich resources also leave a deep impact on world politics. For example Britain, a small country, played leading role in world politics in the nineteenth and early twentieth century. In our own times the oil-rich countries of the Middle East, though small in size are playing a significant role in international politics. On the other hand large states like Canada and Australia have not been able to pursue effective foreign policy. Commonwealth of Independent states (CIS) which came into existence after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, though quite large in size, is not able to play an effective role in contemporary international relations. 2. Geography. The geography of a country, including its fertility, climate, location in relation to other land masses, and water-ways etc. also influence the country's foreign policy. It is a major factor in determining self-sufficiency of a country. Generally land-locked countries, nations in the tropics and those bordering a superpower are less self-sufficient in comparison to the countries which have access to warm-water ports or are located in the temperate zones and far removed from superpowers. For example in the nineteenth century USA adopted isolationist policy chiefly on account of its geographical location. Though the importance of geographic factors is acknowledged almost at all hands, its importance has considerably declined due to

technological and scientific developments. For example, due to improvement in the means of transport and communication the world has greatly shrunk and the perception of large bodies of water as natural barriers to military attack has greatly diminished. But still geographical location of a country has a deep impact on the determination of its foreign policy. India adopted policy of non-alignment because of geographical location. The presence of two major powers on its borders (USSR and China) deterred it from joining power blocs. 3. Culture and History. The cultural and historical traditions of a country also deeply influence the foreign policy. Generally people 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. According to Prof. Rosenau "the influence of cultural factors is not limited to the impact of societal unity upon the formulation and implementation of foreign policy. Equally important are the processes through which the contents of Shared norms and practices of society, as distinguished from the degree of unity that supports them shape the plans that are made and the activities that are undertaken with respect to the external world."* * James N. Rosenau in Rosenau, Thompson and Boyd (Eds ), World Politicsan Introduction, pp. 21-22. 74 4. Economic Development. The stage of economic development which a country has attained also has its impact on its foreign policy. Generally the industrially advanced countries feel more deeply involved in relations with other countries because they have to import different kinds of raw materials and commodities from other countries. They are also on the look out of latest knowledge and technical know-how. Therefore they maintain intimate trade relations with their trading partners. All this leads to intimate links between the groups and people of one country with their counterparts in the other country. Again, an industrial country is expected to have a higher gross national product (GNP) and can devote greater funds for external purpose, viz., 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. In recent years United States has been able to pursue more vigorous foreign policy and secure its national objectives, mainly on account of its high degree of economic development. It has made liberal use of foreign aid as an instrument for the promotion of its foreign policy goals. It is a matter of common knowledge that in our times the industrially developed countries (popularly known as G-7) are playing an effective role in international politics as compared to other developed or under-developed countries. This is but natural in view of fact that economically developed countries possess greater military capability than the less developed countries, and can exert greater influence on international relations. In our own times the decline of Russia's economic power has considerably undermined her political role in the international arena.

5. Technology. Advancement in technology, which effects the military and economic capabilities of a state, also exercises profound influence on the foreign policy. However, this factor influences the foreign policy only in an indirect manner, viz., by influencing other sources of foreign policy. It has been observed that countries which possess advance technology are able to provide technical know-how to less developed and developing nations and thus exert necessary influence on their foreign policies. Rosenau has rightly observed 'Technological changes can alter the military and economic capabilities of a society and thus its status and role in the international system'. The dominant role which countries like France, China, Germany and Japan have been able to play in recent years is largely due to excellent technological developments in these countries. 6. National Capacity. The national capacity of a state also exercises profound influence on the foreign policy of a state. National capacity of a state depends on its military preparedness, its technological advancement and economic development. It is well known that United States which continued to pursue policy of isolation till the beginning of the present century got deeply involved in the international arena in the present century mainly due to tremendous increase in her national capacity due to rapid economic 75 development. Similarly, the foreign policy of Britain underwent great transformation in the post World War II period, mainly due to decline in her national capacity. 7. Social Structure. The social structure of a society also exercises profound influence on its foreign policy. A society which is sharply divided on the basis of wealth, religion, regional imbalances, etc. cannot pursue effective foreign policy on account of division and lack of cooperation among various groups. On the other hand a homogeneous society possessing strong sense of national unity can pursue a more effective foreign policy. It is well known that Britain stood as one person under the leadership of Churchill during the Second World War and the people gladly suffered all kinds of hardships to preserve their unity because of social solidarity. No doubt, it is not easy to trace the impact of social structure on the foreign policy plan and behaviour, because of the involved subtleties, but no student of foreign policy can "afford to ignore the external consequences of the internal social structure and the slow changes it may be undergoing."* 8. Public Mood, public mood is another important determinant of a country's foreign policy. Though it is generally held that the public mood usually follows rather than guides the foreign policy making process, it can exercise lot of influence on the determination of a foreign policy if basic realignment in the prevailing great power structure takes place and the state becomes more involved or more isolated from the world affairs. It may be noted that generally in an authoritarian system the public mood does not influence the foreign policy, but in a democratic system based on political accountability considerable weight has to be accorded to the changing public mood and sentiments. 9. Political Organisation. The political organisation found in a country also greatly influences the foreign policy. Generally under authoritarian system quick foreign policy decision are possible

because the decision making power rests with an individual assisted by his clique. But as the leaders under this system are isolated from the operational environments and the subordinate policy makers provide the information which is perceived by the superiors, there is every possibility of a discrepancy between the psychological and operational aspects of the foreign policy. Further, under this system undesirable opposition can be suppressed through censorship and promulgation of regulations. On the other hand in a country possessing a democratic structure the citizens can freely express their opinion on the domestic as well as foreign policy which naturally leaves its impact on the foreign policy of the country. Under democratic system there is very little discrepancy between what the officials want to believe about the state of world politics and the actual position because the subordinate policy makers make available critical and detached information. Within the democratic system itself the difference in a political structure has its impact on foreign policy. For example, under a parliamentary * Rosenau, of. cit., p.24. 76 system of government based on co-operation between the Legislature and the Executive, the cordial relations between the two wings have an impact on country's foreign policy. On the other hand under presidential system based on the principle of separation of powers, the relation between the two wings are likely to be more strained, which affect the ambiguity or continuity of foreign policy. Similarly, different foreign policy is likely to emerge under bi-party system and multi-party systems. Generally under bi-party system the government is likely to have a clear-cut majority and conduct itself in a more decisive manner regarding the conduct of foreign relations. In contrast of this, under multi-party system conflicting view points and interests may have to be reconciled. This may lead either to the avoidance or postponement of the decision. 10. Role of Press. The press also plays a vital role in the foreign policy formulation process. The press contributes to this process by supplying factual information on the basis of which the people take decision by publishing specialised articles on current international developments which enable the people to understand the significance of developments in their country in relation to the past developments and by analysing the policy of the government in regard to foreign affairs. The press also plays an important role in publicising the foreign policy of the country. The role of the press, however, depends on the political system prevailing in the country, the rate of literacy as well as the attitude of government. 11. Political Accountability. The nature of political accountability prevailing in a system also greatly influences the foreign policy of the country. Generally in an open political system, the demands of citizen and groups get articulated and transmitted to foreign policy formulators. The framers of foreign policy cannot ignore these demands. In fact quite often the policy formulators anticipate these demands while formulating the foreign policy. On the other hand under a closed system the public reactions are neither available nor given much importance.

12. Leadership. The leadership also plays a vital role in the shaping of a country's foreign policy. According to Rosenau: "A leader's beliefs about the nature of international arena and the goals that ought to be pursued therein, his or her peculiar intellectual strength and weakness for analysing information and making decisions, his or her past background and the extent of its relevance to the requirements of the role, his or her emotional needs and most of other personality traitsthese are but a few of the idiosyncratic factors that can influence the planning and execution of foreign policy."* No doubt, the qualities of leadership have a deep impact on the country's foreign policy but their role is greatly constrained by the governmental and social structure. Further the role of leadership is not identical in all countries. In less developed countries their role is greater as compared to industrialised societies. In industrialised societies the individuals enjoy * Rosenau, op. cit., p.28. 77 very limited discretion in high governmental and non-governmental positions.

EXTERNAL FACTORS
In addition to the internal factors which influence a country's foreign polity discussed above, a number of external factors also exercise considerable influence on the foreign policy of a country . In our times the world has become so interlinked that incidents in other countries have their immediate impact on other countries. Thus a coup d'etat in a neighbouring country or nationalisation of oil companies in middle east or release of a proposed arms control agreements are events which influence the actions of leaders in other countries. 1. Power-Structure. The great power structure prevailing in the world politics also greatly influences the policy of a country. In this regard three possibilities can be envisaged. First, a number of powers may enjoy great power status and their relations may be based on balance of power system. Secondly, there may be only two powers which dominate the world scene and the other states are compelled to side with one or the other. Thirdly, more than two states attain great power status and the two powers at the poles are less able to command strict allegiance of those in the orbit (the system is known as loose-bipolar). The nature of power structure prevailing in the world has a substantial impact on the foreign policy of a country. Highlighting this point Prof. Rosenau says: "wherever a nation is located in the prevailing hierarchy of world politics, rules governing the conduct of its foreign relations tend to be embedded in the arrangements whereby the great powers cope with their conflicts or otherwise interact to frame and shape the major issue of an era. These rules may not be explicitly identified and their operation as inputs may take many forms, but their relevance to the deliberations of foreign policy officials is likely to be pervasive."* 2. International Organisation. The contemporary international organisation also greatly influences the foreign policy of a country. While formulating its foreign policy the country has to take note of the inter-national law treaties and contracts. No country can ignore these factors

without jeopardising its own interests. Apart from the structure at the global level, the structure at the regional and sub-regional levels also greatly influence the foreign policy of a country. 3. Reliction of Other States. While formulating its foreign policy a country has to take note of the reaction of other states to its various actions. No country can afford to pursue interests which are fundamentally against the interests of the other states because any policy based on narrow national interests is likely to evoke strong reaction from the concerned state and produced disastrous consequences. It is well known that in 1939 Hitler embarked upon invasion of Poland unmindful of the British reaction with * Rosenau, of. cit., p.23. 78 disastrous consequences. Similarly Japan's attack on Pearl Harbour, unmindful of the strong American sentiments, produced disastrous effects for her. 4. Alliances. Alliances concluded by various states also greatly influence the foreign policy. The states parties to alliance have to respond to the requests and demands of their allies and refrain from formulating policies or taking actions which are offensive to them. It is true that generally the alliances give great amount of independence with regard to the plans and actions, yet they operate implicitly and explicitly as important elements in the process through which foreign policy is formulated and implemented. 5. World Public Opinion. The world public opinion also exercises profound influence on the foreign policy of a country. It is true that the world public opinion influences the foreign policy of a country only occasionally and is not a factor. Further, it is able to exercise influence on the foreign policy of a state only if it is supported by the domestic public opinion. It is well known that U.S. Government was made to effect changes in its Vietnam policy largely due to hostile world opinion. Thus it can be said that the foreign policy of a country is determined by domestic factors as well as the international environments. 79

8 The Role of Ideology

"The middle of the twentieth century may be witnessing the epoch making shift in the foundation of international policies from the nationalistic balance of power to ideology, evidence of which we shall ignore at our peril." W. G. Carleton

One of the features which distinguishes the contemporary world policies from the classic pattern is the central role of mass beliefs and popular ideas in the affairs of states. In the twentieth century Nazism and Fascism in Germany and Italy respectively led to War in 1939. Communism from its base in Russia has become one of the major force of the present age. Democracy has opened new and exciting vistas of individual worth and free societies to much of the human race. Anti-colonialism has transformed the political map of the world and drastically changed the conditions of international politics. It can be very well said that the 20th century is an ideological era.

Meaning
The ideology has been defined by Charles P. Schleicher as "a system of abstract ideas held by an individual which purports to explain reality, express value goals and contain programmes of action for the retention or attainment of the kind of social order in which its proponents believe the goals can be best realised." It follows that a particular individual may and ordinarily does adhere to several ideologiesnationalism, socialism, neutralism, and Gandhism etc. According to another definition of the ideology it "is a cluster of ideas, about life, society or government which originate in most cases as consciously advocated or dogmatically asserted social, political or religious slogans or battle cries and which through continuous usage and preachment gradually became the characteristic beliefs for dogmas of particular groups, party or nationality." Padelford and Lincoln defines ideology as "a body of ideas concerning economic, social and political values and goals with positive action programmes for attaining those goals." Martin Seliger has offered a detailed definition of ideology. He says: "An ideology is a group of beliefs and disbeliefs expressed in value sentences, 80 appeal sentences and explanatory statements. These sentences refer to moral and technical norms and are related to the descriptive and analytical statements of fact with which they are arranged and together interpreted as a doctrine bearing the imprint of centrality of morally founded prescribes. A doctrine, which is to say an ideology, presents a not entirely self-consistent, not fully verified and verifiable, but not merely distorted body of views. These views relate in the main to forms of human relationships and socio-political organisation as they should and could be and refer from this perspective to the existing order and vice versa. Ideologies share with others some morally and factually based views and thus attest ideological pluralism without thereby losing their distinctiveness." Snyder and Wilson define ideology as "a cluster of ideas about life, society or government, which originate in most cases as consciously advocated or dogmatically asserted social, political or religious slogans or battle cries and which through continuous usage and peachment gradually become the characteristic beliefs or dogmas of particular group, party or nationality." Thus scholars have defined and interpreted ideology in different senses. In the first instance it has been defined as a "Self-contained and self-justifying belief system based on a definite world view. It claims to provide a basis for explaining the whole reality. In the second instance,

ideology has been described as a cloak for real foreign policy objective. Used in this sense, ideology is concerned with the achievement of power as its immediate goal of foreign policy, while explaining the action in legal, ethical or humanitarian terms. Karl Mannheim uses ideology in this sense. Despite difference in interpretation, it is admitted at all hands that ideology constitutes the backbone of the foreign policy of a state and strives for its effective implementation. Prof. Holsti has rightly observed that "ideologies not only establish foreign policy goals, evaluate criteria and justifications, for actions but have important effect on perceptual process as well." He says that ideology affects the political goals and actions in five ways. First, it establishes the intellectual framework through which policy makers observe reality. Secondly, it prescribes for policy makers the long-range goals of state's external behaviour to be promoted by them. Thirdly, it serves as a justification for choice of more specific foreign policy decisions. Fourthly, it defines for policy-makers the main stages in historical development within which specific foreign policy strategies can be enunciated. Finally, it posits a moral and ethical system that helps prescribe the correct attitudes and evaluative criteria for judging one's own actions and those of others. Kind of Ideologies. Countries have followed different ideologies at different periods of time, which have been classified by Morgenthau in three different categories. 1. Ideologies of Status Quo. If a state pursues policy designed to preserve the status quo it is regarded as the adherent of status quo ideology. 81 Usually such states hold great faith in international law and peace and are opposed to all types of imperialism. They also hold faith in system of collective security and mutual assistance to ensure that the world peace is not disturbed. The states adhering to this ideology seek to protect the interests of smaller states so that status quo is not disturbed. It is noteworthy that a state which has acquired significant portion of territory of other states through force cannot be regarded as adherent of the ideology of status quo because all the time these states have to face resentment of other states. 2. Ideologies of Imperialism. As opposed to the ideologies of status quo there are ideologies of imperialism which seek to overthrow the status quo and create an international system which redistributes the power in their favour. These ideologies do not hold faith in international law and seek to disturb the status quo to promote their own interests. Hitler of Germany adhered to this ideology. He severely condemned Treaty of Versailles which sought to preserve the status quo and advocated imperialist policies. 3. Ambiguous Ideologies. This refers to ideologies whose premises are not clear and are used by various states for their respective purposes. One of the best examples of this ideology is offered by 'principle of national-self-determination' advocated by President Wilson during the First World War. While on the one hand this principle was used to dismember the Austria-Hungarian empire by the Allies, on the other hand Hitler used it to swallow Austria and a part Czechoslovakia.

Interest and Ideology

There is ordinarily a close relationship between interest and ideology. Each seems to be influenced by other. The interest may shape the ideology and be shaped by it. The history is rampant with such examples where the national interests were served by shaping ideology according to the goals. The annexation of India by Great Britain as its colony was described as educating, civilising and humanitarian mission, a sort of 'white man's burden' while the real objective was economic exploitation of the backward countries. The ideology was used to rationalise the action. Annexation was an act of imperialism but to disguise it humanitarian ideology was advanced. Similarly, when U.S.A. annexed Philippines for trade and military purpose, she explained her imperialistic action as a humanitarian mission. Likewise ideology can also influence the national interests. American involvement in Europe was essentially directed by her desire to 'contain communism' and save democracies. Schleicher has rightly observed that both interest and ideology shape and are shaped by the other. They tend to converge although they are entirely compatible. The relative influence of each where they are not mutually reinforcing, seems to depend on the intensity of attachment to the interest and ideology."

Important Ideologies
There are so many ideologies that it is not possible to deal with all 82 of them. We shall therefore concentrate only on some of the important ideologies: Liberalism. This is also known as ideology of freedom and world peace. It is not a new ideology and was quite popular during the seventeenth century. In fact it formed the basis of the western social, religious, economic and political system. It regarded the individual as supreme and laid emphasis on development of his talents and capacities to the maximum. It laid emphasis on free competition and paid great attention to the welfare of the individual. When extended to the international sphere this ideology emphasizes the principles of peace, friendship, freedom, cooperation, justices etc. It is opposed to intervention in the domestic affairs of other states and holds faith in peaceful co-existence of all states irrespective of their position or status. Vernon Van Dyke highlights the chief features of this ideology thus: "Faced with a choice between guns and butter, the liberal is inclined to choose butter, perhaps to the peril of his nation. Faced with a choice between appeasement and resistance to a foreign threat at the risk of war, the liberal may be inclined towards appeasement, for war threatens most of the values he holds dear. In recent decades, particularly, the liberal democracies have been very reluctant to engage in military preparations and to participate in war." Prof. Schleicher has highlighted following salient characteristics of Liberalism. (1) It is conducive to the practices which promote the welfare of men regardless of their social, economic, racial or national status.

(2) It seeks to promote individual dignity not only of its own nationals but of all people in general. (3) It does not permit sovereignty to stay in the way of protection and promotion of human rights and other democratic values. (4) It favours international institutions where men shall have right to take part in important decisions affecting them and find peaceful solutions. (5) It favours pacific settlement of disputes and peaceful changes in accordance with the will of the majority. Though the above principles are emphasized by all those who believe in liberal ideology, they considerably differ in the actual application of these principles. Further, they have conveniently used these principles to justify their acts of omission and commission. Even the formation of various military alliances has been justified on the ground that this aims at the preservation of democracy which is threatened by the Communists. In fact, the adherents of liberal ideology attach equal importance to the economic interests and security of their country and are not willing to sacrifice the same for the sake of above principles. 2. Totalitarianism. This ideology is opposite of liberalism and attaches more importance to the state rather than the individual. It draw a clear line of demarcation between the ruler and the ruled and asserts the right of the elites to government. It does not attach any importance to the freedom 83 of speech and association as instruments of popular welfare and holds that state alone can promote the welfare of people. The other important features emphasised by this ideology are one-party government, constant expansion of state, omnipotence of state, war as an instrument for settlement of disputes etc. Some of the important totalitarian ideologies have been Fascism, National Socialism, and Communism. The Fascist under Mussolini attached a mystical equality to the state, they wanted the power to be left in the hands of an elite led by a single superman; regimentation of social, economic, political and intellectual activities of people; territorial expansion and war as an instrument for settlement of international disputes; subordination of individual to state, etc. Likewise Socialism under Hitler not only emphasised the above principles but also put forth principle of racial superiority of the Nordic people. Communism which is also a variety of totalitarian ideology differs from Fascism and National Socialism, in so far as it stands for a free and dignified life of the individual through elimination of system of exploitation of man by man. The ideology is, however, different from both Liberalism and other Totalitarian ideologies in so far as it stands for a world revolution. Communism views state as a class organisation, an instrument of the domination of one class by the other. Communists anticipate a stage when the state will 'wither away' and the principle for each according to ability, to each according to his need will be realised. Marxism predicts two stages of socialismfirst phase in which production is socialised under proletarian dictatorship

and a final phase when stateless society would usher in. That is why Marxism-Leninism insists on the destruction of the bourgeois state machinery through a violent revolution and establishment of the proletarian dictatorship. It asserts that the present system of capitalism has lost its usefulness in the national sphere; in the international sphere it has led to the system of imperialism which possess inherent contradiction which shall manifest themselves in the form of struggle for national emancipation. The ultimate aim of Communism is to see triumph of world Socialism. Ideological Confrontation. A conflict ensured between Liberalism (Democracy) and Communism (Totalitarianism) in post World War II period and both aimed at destroying each other. However, in course of time both these ideologies underwent a change and abandoned their intention to destroy each other. Failure to bring about proletarian revolution in advanced industrial state greatly undermined the Communist ideology and need was felt for major revision. On the other hand the unsuccessful attempts by the capitalists to destroy the Bolshevik edifice compelled them to reconcile with the changed situation. In short both the ideologies underwent great transformation. The Capitalist states, due to fear of losing ground to Communists, started dismantling their colonial empires. Internally they embarked upon socialist policies and carried out far reaching social reforms. This trend of reforms in capitalist states induced the Communists to introduce reciprocal changes speically after 1953. Thus both Communism 84 and Democracy ceased to be orthodox doctrines and were involved in competetive co-existence rather than peaceful existence. In this regard the Communists had certain advantages over the capitalist system, specially in the newly emerging states. The principles of freedom and economic development emphasised by the Communists had great appeal with the newly emerged states. The Communists also promoted anti-colonial feeling and contributed to the liquidation of the colonies. On the other hand the Democratic ideology emphasised the superiority of the evolutionary methods of change and development and asserted that the resolution of existing social and economic problem through revolutionary methods was bound to produce disappointing results. In support of their contention they argued that the historical experience confirms that no revolution, except the American Revolution, succeeded in establishing a stable and efficient government. The experience of the Americans was different from other countries which witnessed revolution because this revolution took place under quite different conditions viz., the people enjoyed relative prosperity rather than mass poverty. The newly emerged countries of Asia and Africa, however, showed preference for the Socialist ideology because it assured them quick results. The practical experience of Soviet Union and China, two leading Communist countries, also attracted the newly independent countries towards Communist ideology. They were greatly -impressed with the enormous progress made by these two countries. No wonder the underdeveloped states were attracted towards Communist ideology which held the prospect of quick development which they ardously desired.

In recent years the ideological tension has virtually come to an end with the Communist states embarking upon more open policies and adopting good features of the capitalist system.

Impact of Ideology
There is difference of opinion among scholars regarding the impact of ideology on international relations. On the one hand Prof. Hill says that it is a simplifying mechanism that "offers to individual ready-packaged ideas and therefore, obviates the necessity for him to work out answers for himself. The easiest course is to accept without question the package handed to him to become a Communist if he lives in Russia where Communism is the approved system, to uphold the ideas of democracy if he has been raised in the Western world, to be a German militarist if he has been brought up in Germany or a French nationalist if his background has been French. Whatever a person may be, he is surrounded by isms to which he rather naturally succumbs without much, if anything, in the way of mental effort. To be sure, some people are sufficiently assertive intellectually to work out for themselves something other than paackage ideas but the rank and file take the easier course."* * Norman Hill, Contemporary World Politics, pp.429-30. 85 On the other hand certain other scholars have contended that ideology does not play that effective role in international politics. If certain powers are able to move men and destroy and create society, it is more on account of their power rather than their ideology. The ideologies merely give direction to the physical resources of the countries. The truth lies between these two extreme views. While it may be too much to say that ideology plays a vital role in international politics, but it cannot be denied that it exercises considerable influence on international relations. For example during the inter-war period Fascism in Italy and National Socialism in Germany considerably influenced their foreign policies and influenced their relations with other countries. In the modern times ideology has become more important because large number of people have begun to play an effective role in the formulation of foreign policy at decision making level. No doubt, the general public does not exert a continuous, direct and positive influence over decision-making, yet the public opinion limits the scope of alternatives available to the decision-makers. The policy makers on their part try to mould the public opinion in support of their policies. They do this by not allowing the information to reach the people and indoctrinating them with the ideas favourable to them. This is particularly true of totalitarian states. Even in democratic states effort is made to control the thought. E.H. Carr has highlighted this point thus: "Prior to 1914 the conduct of international relations was the concern of the person professionally engaged in it. In democratic countries, foreign policy was traditionally regarded as outside the scope of party politics, representative organs did not feel themselves competent to exercise any close control over mysterious operation of foreign offices." 2. Ideology provides justification and rationale to the policy of a country by providing goals for political actions and concealing all manifestations of a struggle for power.

3. Again, ideology plays both cooperative and oppositional role. While common ideology unites the states, the opposite ideologies divide them sharply. Again, the ideology of nationalism has divided the mankind into small groups opposing each other. Nationalism impels a country to assert that its cause is absolutely just while that of the opponent is unjust. The states are not willing to concede a remote possibility that there can be a measure of justice and a measure of injustice on both sides. 4. Ideology provides a rigid framework for the foreign policy makers which results in "faulty thinking characterised by assumptions of doubtful validity, disregard for the meaning of words and definitions, misrepresentations of facts, ommissions of facts, general conclusions drawn from specific premises or conclusions based on only one premise, predictions on the basis of insufficient data, conclusions drawn per analogiam without due regard for differences impairing the overall validity of the analogy, disregard for the time elements and disregard for the laws of thinking in general." 5. There exist a definite relationship between the ideologies and struggle for power. In the words of Prof. Morgenthau "all politics 86 domestic or international is nothing but struggle for power and the true nature of the policy is concealed by ideological justifications and rationalisations." Therefore, instead of using the ideology in explaining objectives for the realisation of which political power is needed, the ideology merely provides a mark behind which the ulterior motives are concealed. The significance of ideology in international politics has been brought out by Prof. Palmer and Perkins thus: "the significance of ideologies in world politics today lies in the fact that in some instances they have become linked to national power. Just as power became the instrument of ambitious nationalism it has now become the tool of ideologies. Without power of some kind ideologyeven one which aspires to universalismis a passive harmless pattern of related ideas. What makes Communism the dread of the world is not the gospel of Marx and Lenin, it is Soviet (and Chinese) power associated with and sustaining the Communist ideology. Without power Communism would be an important psychosis."* They further assert Ideologies, in fact are futile source of international conflict, and they greatly complicate the task of the peaceful solution of all conflicts." Further "Ideologies are essentially irrational, they have a considerable emotional content, they can be used to obscure the real facts of a situation or the real motives of ambitious leaders; they can be appealed to by extremists and then can make reasonable approaches and compromises difficult or even impossible; they frustrate efforts to find areas of agreement, they make it hard to deal with international problems without undue sacrifice of national honour or prestige; they turn international conferences into propaganda forums instead of opportunities for the accommodation of diplomacy."

Decline of Ideology
Some scholars have taken the view that there has been decline of ideology in recent years. For example Prof. Daniel Bell holds that the ideological fires in the western world have cooled down

and 'idology' which was once the road to action, has become a dead end. In fact most of the disputes which still persist between different countries such as dispute between India and Pakistan, the Arab states and Israel etc. are not ideological in character, even though they may be projected in ideological terms. Likewise the dispute between Russia and China can hardly be described as an ideological dispute. However, Prof. Palmer and Perkins do not agree with this view. They argue that "in many countries it may be true that political ideas and ideologies have lost their old appeal, but in international politics this seems to be less true." In the changed conditions at present the above view of Palmer and Perkins does not seem to be valid. The growing co-operation between states with ideological differences is a clear proof that in recent times ideology has lost its relevance. * Palmer and Perkins, International Relations, p.84. 87 Most of the East European countries which earlier held faith in Communist ideology have moved towards democracy and liberalisation, symbolising the end of the ideological conflict. States like East and West Germany, which were divided on ideological basis, have since united which is a further proof that the ideology no longer plays the vital role. In view of the above, it can be safely said that ideology no longer plays that important role in international relations which it played a few years back. 88

9 Foreign Policy Choices

States are involved in international relations in different proportions. While some are deeply involved in the world and regional affairs and make large commitments to achieve or protect their interests, the others prefer to keep aloof from the rest of the world and concentrate mainly on their internal problems. In making a choice with regard to foreign policy, the states are generally influenced by a number of considerations such as the structure of the international system and the pattern of its dominance; the nature of domestic social and economic needs; the perception of the leaders regarding external threat to their values and interests and the geographical location, topographical characteristics and natural resources etc. which have been discussed in an earlier chapter. Accordingly a variety of foreign policy strategies have been adopted by different states, with a view to increase their power, gain security and attain their set objectives. In this chapter we shall deal with the various choices open to the states with regard to foreign policy.

IMPERIALISM
The term imperialism with reference to the foreign policy has been used by different scholars in different senses. While in the past the scholars treated it as a specific historical phenomenon, it was used for a highly centralised government enjoying dictatorial powers. After 1870 the term began to be used as equivalent of colonialism, based on extension of political sovereignty of the

nation, on alien people and territories. In the present century it was further extended to include economic penetration and domination of markets, sources of supply and investment outlets. Thus Michael Barratt Brown defined imperialism as "a complex of economic, political and military relations by which the less economically developed lands are subjected to the more economically developed...." It is a policy which aims at creating, organising and maintaining an empire. Charles A.Beard also describes imperialism as "employment of the engine of government and diplomacy to acquire territories, protectorates, and or spheres of influence, occupied totally by other races or people, and to promote industrial, trade and investment opportunities." Morgenthau defines imperialism as "the expansion of a state's power beyond its borders." Schuman defines it as "the imposition by force and violence of alien rule 89 upon subject people." Charles Hodges has offered an elaborate definition of imperialism. He says it is "a projection externally, directly or indirectly of the alien political, economic or cultural power of one nation into the internal life or another people.... it involves the imposition of control open or covert, direct or indirect on people by another." To Palmer and Perkins "imperialism pertains to relationship in which one area and its people are subordinate to another area and its government. Imperialism in essence always involves subordination; it is a powerrelationship without moral implications of any kind." In simple words we can say that imperialism is a policy pursued by a state by which it tries to extend its political or economic power, or both, over another region. It also involves exploitation of the weaker by the stronger.

Motives Behind Imperialist Policy

Imperialist policy is pursued on account of several reasons. Firstly, a state may pursue an imperialist policy on account of the material gains which may accrue to it in the form of precious objects, crops, natural resources etc. It is well known that the European powers pursued imperialist policies during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to secure raw materials. As European countries lacked necessary raw materials to meet the requirements of their industries, they moved to backward countries of Asia and Africa where raw materials like rubber, petroleum, cotton, silk, vegetable oils, tin and other minerals were available in plenty, and carved out colonies there. Secondly, the massive production due to industrial revolution obliged the industrialised countries of Europe viz. England, France, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal etc. to look up for markets for their finished goods. This provided a fillip to search for overseas markets and conquest of colonies. Thirdly, the industrial countries were keen to invest the surplus capital, which became available as a result of industrialisation. As this surplus capital could not be profitably invested in Europe they thought of carving out colonies where the surplus capital could be gainfully invested. This led to race for colonies amongst various industrial powers of Europe.

Fourthly, a state may pursue imperialist policy to enhance its national prestige and power. Acquisition of vast territories outside its boundaries not only gives a boost to the prestige of a state but also considerably adds to its power. It is well known that the British always prided in the fact that they possessed one of the most extensive empires in the world and boasted that "the sun never sets on the British Empire." Fifthly, an imperialist policy may be pursued for the purpose of national defence. A state may acquire control over border areas or convert them into buffer states to protect its interests against a powerful neighbour. Thus, Britain made Afghan and Tibet as buffer states to protect its Indian Empire. Further, these territories can greatly contribute to the defence 90 of the country by providing necessary recruits for defence forces. It is well known that Britain raised nearly 4,00,000 troops from India during the war which greatly contributed to her ultimate victory in the Second World War. Sixthly, a state may embark on imperialist policies to provide an outlet for its surplus population. During the 19th century a number of European powers like Italy, Germany etc. embarked on imperialist policies to settle their surplus population. Seventhly, the religious, humanitarian and ideological considerations also motivate a state to pursue imperialist policy. The Western nations justified their imperialist policies on the ground that they were ordained by God to civilise the backward people and pass on the blessings of their religion to them. It is well known that the activities undertaken by the Christian missionaries to popularise their religion and culture provided a fillip to the imperialist ventures. Eighthly, the writing of thinkers like Macheavelli, Hegel, Nietzsche, Gobineau etc. also provided an impetus to imperialism by glorifying war. The states under the impact of these writings were convinced that the white races were destined to rule over the black and brown races of Africa and Asia, and embarked upon the policy of imperialism. Finally, the states may resort to imperial policy to divert the attention of the people from domestic problems and unrest.

Techniques
As regards the techniques of imperialism, the imperialist states have resorted to different techniques ranging from complete military conquest to obtaining of concessions through treaties, fraud, economic penetration, etc. These methods were adopted by the different European States to carve out extensive colonial empires and advance their interests in distant regions. For example states like Britain, France, Germany, Russia and Japan tried to promote their interests by acquiring lease-holds in China, similarly, in Turkey, Britain, France, Germany and Italy established their sphere of influence. In Africa, however, these states followed the policy of annexation. To maintain their control the imperialist powers also resorted to tariff regulation, financial supervision or military occupation.

In modern times states have made use of more subtle and sophisticated techniques of imperialism. It shall be desirable to know about the various techniques of imperialism in some details. 1. Aggression and Annexation. This technique was used by the imperialist powers like Britain, France and Spain in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. They sent powerful armies which defeated the native people and annexed their territories to the empire. This technique was used by Britain in India and Italy in Ethiopia. 2. Economic Concessions. The imperialist power secured certain concessions from the backward countries in the field of trade and commerce and utilised these concessions to further exploit them. It is well known that 91 the English came to India as traders, acquired certain trade concessions and gradually established their control over major part of the country. Likewise German bankers and engineers secured certain concessions in the form of building of Berlin Baghdad Railway. Again both France and Britain secured concessions from Egypt in return for building of Suez Canal. 3. Leasehold. Under this technique an imperialist power obtains a pan of territory of a weaker nation, with right to govern it and exploit its economic resources for a fixed period. Thus Britain obtained Hong Kong on lease from China for 99 years in 1898, while Germany acquired lease for the same duration over part of Shantung Peninsula of China in 1898. USA also secured lease over Panama Canal. 4. Sphere of Influence. Under this technique an imperialist country acquires exclusive right to exploit and develop a backward region economically to the exclusion of other countries, with no right to establish any form of control over it. In 1907 Russia and England divided Persia into their sphere of influence. While South Persia was placed under Great Britain, Russia was assigned North Persia. Likewise in 1904 France and England reached an understanding whereby Egypt was placed under British sphere of influence while Morocco was to be under French sphere of influence. 5. Protectorate. Under this technique though the territory remains under the control of a nominal suzerain, who is free to conduct the internal administration as he likes, but the foreign affairs are regulated by the imperialist state. Thus France established protectorate over Morocco in 1912 and Britain established protectorate over Egypt in 1914. 6. Economic Control. This is yet another imperialist technique under which the imperialist power tries to control the domestic and foreign policy of economically weaker nations through economic investment and economic assistance. This does not involve any change in power relations through conquest of territory. Both Britain and France established their control over large number of states through their policies. In the present times USA exercises considerable control over the states of Central America through regulation of their trade etc.

7. Mandate System. This technique of imperialism was evolved at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Under this system the former German colonies and other weaker territories were entrusted to the League of Nations who in turn handed over these territories to various European powers for administration. These powers, known as Mandate Powers, were expected to carry out reforms and create conditions for self-government in these territories. They were also required to submit an annual report to the League regarding the moral, material, social and political development in these colonies. 8. Cultural and Ideological Imperialism. Finally, an imperialist power can exercise control over other states through control of minds of men by imposing its own ideology. This is more effective than military or economic techniques. Morgenthau describes it as more subtle and 'successful' technique 92 of imperialism. In the post world war II period Soviet Union made-effective use of this technique to control the countries of Eastern Europe.

Imperialism in Modern Times

In modern times the nature of imperialism has undergone changes. In place of the military imperialism, the economic and cultural imperialism have gained ground. In the economic imperialism the imperialist countries instead of conquering the territory try to establish their control over those who control the territory. Though the states subjected to do this type of imperialism retain sovereignty but their economic life is completely dominated by the imperialist country. This method is an indirect but quite effective method of gaining and maintaining domination over other nations. A more subtle form of imperialism is cultural imperialism. The imperialist powers try to control the minds of the people with a view to change the power relations between two countries. The techniques applied by the Soviet Union in the countries of Eastern Europe to extend its control is the best example of operation of cultural imperialism. Similarly the competition between the Soviet Union and People's Republic of China to dominate the world communist movement and to acquire influence in the uncommitted nations, is another example of this type of imperialism. It may, however, be noted that cultural imperialism play a role only subsidiary to the military and economic imperialism. It is noteworthy that in modern times the economic and cultural imperialism are playing more effective role in the foreign policies of the imperialist powers, and the use of military imperialism has consistently declined. This is due to the fact that military imperialism carries within itself the risk of escalation into self destructive nuclear war. On the other hand the growing dependence of the former colonies on outside assistance has provided fresh opportunities to the powers to expand their power through economic and cultural means. Both the superpowers as well as China made liberal use of these types of imperialism to increase their influence and power in the Third World. As Prof. Morgenthau has observed: The weakness of

the new nations offers them (Soviet Union, United States of America and China) the opportunity and the acceptable risk of nuclear war has transformed that opportunity into a rational necessity.

Effects of Imperialist Policy

The imperialist policy is invariably injurious for the native people. As it is based on the principle of superior-subordinate relationship, it gives rise to feeling of inferiority among the native people. They are subjected to several types of discrimination and treated as inferior creatures in their own territory. Further, the indigenous culture suffers a great set back because the imperialist power tries to impose its own culture and philosophy on the people of dependent countries. Quite often the imperialist powers 93 also encourage practices like opium eating, smoking, gambling etc. to obtain extra revenues unmindful of all the ill-effects of these practices on common people. It is well known that British encouraged gambling and opium smoking, in the Far East chiefly with a view to obtain extra revenues. Another evil effect of the imperialist policy is that it is fraught with the risk of war. The war may be resorted to either to establish an empire or to thwart the imperialist designs, but it always results in enormous loss of life and property. Both the world wars were largely the result of imperialist rivalries among the big powers. Above all, imperialist policy leads to economic exploitation of the dependent people. The imperialist powers not only fully exploit the raw materials and markets of the dependent countries but try to make maximum profits by resorting to systematic exploitation of its resources and markets. As a result of this policy the wealth tends to flow to the imperialist country and the dependent countries grow poor. It is well known that the poverty of India is largely the result of the exploitative policies followed by the British imperialists. It would be however, wrong to assume that the imperialist policies are entirely harmful to the native people and do not benefit them in any way. The imperialist policy proves beneficial to the native people in several ways. Firstly, it exposes the native people to superior civilisation and culture of the imperialist power. It is well known that the backward people of Asia and Africa greatly benefited by their exposure to the Western culture and civilisation. Secondly, imperialist policies have created sense of unity among people of Asia and Africa which they completely lacked before the advent of imperialist powers. It is admitted at all hands that the British provided a sense of unity to the Indian people by uniting several small states under their control and carving out an Empire. Thirdly, the imperialist policies have contributed to development of backward areas of Asia and Africa and brought the advantages of industrialisation to the people of these countries. Imperialist policies have proved beneficial to the people of native countries on account of facilities of modern education made available to the people, though on a very limited scale. The people of these territories were also given training in the art of self government. All this

contributed to their awakening and encouraged them to fight for their independence. In certain cases the former imperialist powers voluntarily granted independence to these people.

ALLIANCES AND ALLEGIANCES

These are new methods of foreign policy which have been adopted by imperialist powers in modern times. The alliances are used as an instrument of foreign policy primarily with a view to maintain balance of power within the multi-state system and promote national interest of the country. Generally the states resort to alliances as a matter of expediency. If a state is strong enough to hold its own without any assistance, it will prefer 94 to shun alliances. Similarly if a state is reluctant to assume commitments resulting from an alliance are likely to be less than the commitments involved, the state may avoid alliances. In short, the alliances are formed, by a country only in national interest. Meaning of Alliance. The concept of 'Alliance' is quite complex and hence not easy to define. No wonder scholars have used the term alliance interchangeably with terms like coalition, pact and bloc. But alliance is different from other regional organisations (both cooperative and functional) in so far as it lays emphasis on the military and security aspect while the other functional organisations lay emphasis on economic aspects. In fact alliance lays emphasis on two aspects viz. formality of regionalship and military aspect of relationship. Hence alliance can be described as a formal agreement between two or more than two nations to collaborate among themselves on national security issues. Statesmen and diplomats have tended to describe alliance as 'provision of mutual military assistance between two or more sovereign states. The alliances are concluded to supplement the national armed forces. Generally the states concluding the alliance formally promise to join each other in fighting a common enemy. Sometimes the alliance may not involve actual military assistance and may merely mean grant of permission to deploy forces on its territory or right to move forces across the territory. Again the alliances may be concluded for the promotion of co-operation in other fields, but generally the military considerations underlie this co-operation. In fact such alliance have no chance of being successful if the military reasons disappear. Before World War I, the alliances were generally of non-aggressive nature. The alliances usually contained a clause which obliged the signatory states to indulge in aggression, and if a state party to alliance provoked a war, the other ally was relieved of the obligation to help the former. Development of Alliances. Alliances have an accepted technique of foreign policy since earliest times. We get plenty of references in Ancient India, Ancient China, and Ancient Greece to show that alliances were concluded by different states to promote their national interest. Only during the Roman rule when the Roman Empire spread over vast territories and was dominated by a single power, the Alliances were not popular. In the medieval period also the Alliances continued to be a feature of inter-state relations. The allied states often concluded alliances to check some state which aimed at establishing its hegemony. This gave rise to counter alliances and coalitions. Towards the closing years of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the present

century the world was divided into two groups of alliances known as Triple Alliance and Triple Entente. It is said that the First World War was largely due to the formation of these alliances which divided the world into two hostile camps. In the inter-war period France vigorously pursued the policy of forming alliances. It concluded a number of alliances with different countries 95 with a view to secure itself against possible German threat. However, despite these alliances France failed to keep Nazi Germany under check. In the post World War II period the policy of formation of alliances was again revived. The lead in the formation of alliances was provided by the United States of America (which had so far followed policy of isolationalism). USA evolved a global system of alliances in which more than forty non-communist countries of Europe, Asia and Latin America were involved. On the other hand, the Soviet Union also formed counter alliances with the communist countries. Later on even Communist China concluded alliances with a number of Communist countries. As a result in the post World War II period, the world came to be divided into two opposing military blocs which nursed upon hostility towards each other, even though both the blocs claimed that their alliances were purely defensive in nature. Some of the prominent alliances concluded after Second World War included NATO, Warsaw Pact, SEATO, CENTO etc. The modern alliances differ from the earlier alliances in several ways. Firstly, the modern alliances are political rather than military in nature and the members of the alliances are keen to avoid war. Secondly, ideology plays an important role in the formation of the modern-day alliances. Thirdly, the modern alliances have been formed during the peace times, as against the classical alliances, which were formed only during times of war. Fourthly, the modern alliance system is less flexible as compared to the earlier alliance system, in so far as there are lesser chances for the members of an alliance to shift loyalty to the opposite group. The alliance is both an asset and a liability. It is an asset in so far as it has the prospect of military assistance in case of need as a deterrent against the enemy country. It adds to the prestige of the smaller countries by bringing it closer to the powerful allies. On the other hand the Alliance is also a liability. It can be more of a drain on a country's strength. The states concluding an alliance have an obligation to come to the assistance of an ally, even though the national interests of the state may demand abstension from involvement in the conflict.

Kinds of Alliances
According to Morgenthau the alliances can be of the following kinds: 1. Alliances Serving Identical or Complementary Interests. The alliances may be concluded by the states to serve their identical interests. The Anglo-American interest is an alliance of this kind. Its main objective is to preserve the balance of power in Europe. On the other hand the alliance between USA and Pakistan is an example of alliance designed to promote

complementary interest. This alliance was conducive to the Amercian Policy of containment, while it increased the political, military and economical potentialities of Pakistan in relation to India. 2. Ideological Alliances. Some alliances are of an ideological nature which lay down certain general moral principles and the signatories to 96 these alliances pledge to observe these principles and work for the realisation of the objectives of the alliance. The treaty of Holy Alliance of 1815 and Atlantic Charter of 1941 were alliances of this category. The Treaty of Arab League concluded in 1954 was also an ideological alliance in so far as it pledged the Arab States to show solidarity against Israel. In our own times most of the alliances formed by the Anglo-American group were ideological alliances which were formed to fight communist threat and subversions. 3. Mutual and One-Sided Alliances. Some alliances are mutual in the sense that the services rendered by a party to alliance are commensurate with the benefits received by it. Generally alliances concluded by states with equal power and serving identical interests are mutual alliances. On the other hand if the major benefits of an alliance accrue to only one party while the other have to bear the main burden, the alliance is branded as one-sided. 4. General and Limited Alliances. The alliances which try to protect the total interests of the contracting parties both during the war as well as peace are general alliances. Generally the wartime alliances are general alliances. On the other hand the alliances concluded during the peace time are limited in so far as they are concerned only with a fraction of the total interests of the signatory states. 5. Temporary and Permanent Alliances. The alliances can be either temporary or permanent. A temporary alliance is generally formed during the war-time with the objective of winning the war and securing through peace settlement the interests for which the war was waged. On the other hand the alliances concluded during peace times for the promotion of limited interests are of more durable nature. 6. Operative and Inoperative Alliances. Finally, there are alliances which are either operative or inoperative. An alliance is considered operative if it coordinates the general policies and concrete measures of the signatories. The members of the alliance must also agree on the general objectives as well as policies and measures. On the other hand certain alliances are concluded by states because they agree on general objectives. But these alliances remain inoperative because the members do not agree on the concrete policies and measures.

Impact of the Alliances

An alliance is both an asset and a liability. It is an asset in so far as it holds the prospect of military assistance in case of need and acts as a deterrent on the enemy country. It adds to the prestige of the smaller countries by bringing them closer to the powerful allies. On the other

hand the Alliance is also a liability. It can be more of a drain on a country's strength. The states concluding an alliance have an obligation to come to the assistance of an ally, even though the national interests of the states may demand abstention from involvement in this conflict. 97 The alliances have a mixed impact on international peace and international relations. In the first place they have been responsible for the power struggle among the nations. Though the alliance may be the symptoms rather than the cause of struggle among powers, they certainly contribute to the intensification of the conflict by dividing the world into two antagonistic blocs. Secondly, the alliances play a positive role in the preservation of world peace by contributing to the process of balance of power. They muster adequate counter power and as a deterrent against aggression. Thirdly, it has been argued that the alliances also help in the growth of confederation or some sort of a federal unity among the sovereign states. For example, both in Germany and Switzerland, the unification of the country was the result of the war time alliances. The sense of solidarity and affinity created among the members of the alliance proved so strong that they forged themselves into new nations. But generally the alliance concluded during war break up as soon as the common danger disappears or even earlier if one of the ally to the alliance sees no other way of saving itself except by recapitulating to the enemy. Finally, all alliances give rise to strains among the allies because in the course of time conflicts develop among them which undermine their solidarity. For example, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which was organised by the USA in the post World War II period was faced with strains on account of differences amongst the members regarding the possession of strategic nuclear forces, mainly because the global interests of USA are difficult to harmonise with the purely, local or regional interests and perspectives of the partners.

Allegiance
Allegiance is comparatively a new concept of foreign policy and quite different from alliance. The policy has been adopted by certain countries of Third World. Under this policy the countries became allies of one of the two superpowers in the hope of certain advantages. They felt that their ties with the superpowers would not only enhance their sense of national security but also help them to obtain foreign aid needed for internal development and promise of arms to deal with enemies at home and abroad. Generally the countries following policy of allegiance extend full support to the philosophy and viewpoint of the big power and extend full allegiance to it unmindful of the fact whether they have entered into an alliance with it or not. Not only this, they also look to such power for guidance, support and assistance. It may be noted that the big powers also encourage allegiance and provide huge funds and other facilities to win over the small powers to their side. For the attainment of this objective they try to win over the support of political parties, trade unions, pressure groups, business and other outstanding leaders who can influence the national policy. In case they find the allegiance of the government lagging

98 they try to bring about change in government and bring a group into power which owes allegiance to them. It is true that the policy of allegiance leads to loss of a political freedom still the states pursue this policy because of the material and political benefits they hope to get as an ally of a big power. Generally, the power owing allegiance to the leading power follows the hints given by the leading power because refusal to do so would lead to denial of certain benefits and cause inconvenience. Quite often the weaker states give preference to the wishes of the senior partner without bothering about its sovereign rights. In short it can be said that the policy of allegiance possesses following features: First, the states involved in this arrangement are of an equal strength. Secondly, though a formal equality exists among the states, actually the bigger power dominates. In other words the degree of autonomy left to the weaker states is inconclusive for strong leadership and in its own interest it may be asked to submit to the stronger power. Thirdly, allegiance to a Great Power automatically involves recognition of the fact by all concerned that the small power has the ability to commit its ally and that the latter presumably cannot accept the losses attendant upon its weaker partners' defeat.

ISOLATIONISM
The policy of isolation implies low level of involvement in the political, military, diplomatic and commercial transactions with other states. It is based on the assumption that security and independence can be best secured by cutting of most transactions with other states and by maintaining diplomatic and commercial contacts with other states while handling all perceived or potential threats by building deterrents at the home front. Obviously, the policy of isolationism is possible only in a system with reasonably diffused structure of power, military, economic or ideological threats do not exist and the other states are regularly shirting allegiances. Again this policy is generally adopted by states which are self-sufficient in their economic and social needs and the activities of other states do not leave much impact on the internal developments of the isolated state. The policy of isolationism does not mean that the state following it does not maintain commercial or diplomatic relations with other states. The state can maintain commercial or diplomatic relations to the extent that they do not lead to unpleasant military consequences or military threats from aborad. Features of Isolationism. The policy of Isolationism has following features. (i) firstly, the policy involves diplomatic and military non-in-volvemtnv. Ever since President Jefferson's admonition in 1801 against 99

'entangling alliances', US avoided unnecessary alliances and preferred to follow policy of isolationism. It avoided entanglement in European struggle. (ii) Secondly, the policy aims at preserving national sovereignty and independence in decision making. President Munroe of US put forth Munroe doctrine primarily to ensure security and independence of United States. He even refused to issue joint declaration with Britain in this regard, fearing that this would reduce United States to secondary position. (iii) Thirdly, isolationism implies faith in principle of unilateralism. This implies that the state pursuing policy of isolationism prefers to follow an independent policy and keep away from alliances and supranational agreements. (iv) Fourthly, policy of isolationism followed by US implied non-participation in foreign wars. Highlighting this point President Munroe observed "In the wars of the European powers in matters relating to themselves, we have never taken any part, nor does it comfort with our policy to do so. It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparation for our defence." America continued to follow this principle of noninvolvement in foreign wars right upto the second world war. This was done to ensure that the more powerful states do not infringe upon country's independent decision-making.

Reasons for Adoption of Policy of Isolation

The states may adopt policy of isolation due to geographical reasons or with a view to meet the actural or potential threat by withdrawing behind the frontiers and erecting defences to make the state impermeable to military attack or cultural infiltration. High mountains, wide seas or deserts can afford protection to the political units provided the other states do not possess the necessary means to bypass these. For example in the nineteenth century Nepal could follow policy of isolation because of the presence of high mountain barriers and not so easily accessible routes. Though Nepal was located quite close to the centre of British military, economic and political influence in the Indian sub-continent, they could not make intrusion into Nepal on account of its natural barriers. However, on account of the recent technological and military advancements which has enabled China to build roads in the Himalayan valleys the natural barriers are no more able to protect the isolation of Nepal, and the country has been thrown open to the external influences. A country may also deliberately adopt policy of isolation in the face of a perceived threat. Japan adopted this policy after it came in contact with the Europeans. The Japanese emperor sealed off the Japanese islands to prevent its conquest by Europeans or to prevent the infiltration of their culture into Japan. It maintained only limited trade relations with some of the Europeans. However, Japan could not persist with this policy after the middle of nineteenth century when the Western powers in the Pacific had increased their naval power tremendously. As a result after some time Japan not 100

only abandoned policy of isolation but also entered into active commercial and military coalitions with Great Britain, the United States and other European countries, and began to take active part in the conflicts in Far East. The United States adopted policy of isolation from the very beginning on account of different reasons. Though America was a part of the European system in terms of commercial and cultural contacts, it was not directly involved in the various ideological, national and dynastic issues which separated the various European powers. Therefore the American leaders tried to avoid entangling alliances with countries of Europe. Justifying this policy Adam said: "It is obvious that all powers of Europe will be continually manouvring with us, to work us into their real or imaginary balance of power...But I think, it ought to be our role not to meddle, and that of all the powers of Europe, not to desire us, or perhaps even to permit us to interfere if they can help it." Likewise George Washington also held that in view of America's geographical location; the policy of isolationism, was best suited to USA. He asserted that the young Republic would only waste its energies if it engaged, in struggle abroad, which it could not control. It may be noted that the policy of isolationism pursued by America was isolationist only in the military and the political sense and she maintained commercial and intellectual intercourse with other states. The United States could pursue policy of isolationism on account of its peculiar geographical location and number of other factors. The broad expanse of the Atlantic Ocean which separated United States from Europe served as great barrier to communication and protected her against any potential naval invasion from the continent. On the other hand the British navy offered protection against any incursions by other European powers. Secondly, the high degree of selfsufficiency in land, raw materials and natural resources also greatly contributed to the adoption of the isolationist policy by USA. The vast tracts of land available with USA enabled her to attain self-sufficiency in agriculture and obtain manufactured goods from other European countries through trade. Finally, most of the conflicts of the ninteenth century were confined to the continent, the Mediterranean Sea and the Balkans and the Americans did not feel much concerned about them. Even the rivalry among the various European powers, viz., Spain, France and England, with regard to the New World were resolved by the end of the Ncpolconic wars. As Norman A. Graebner has observed "the gradual intensification of American security with the Atlantic Ocean, rather than with a British dominated European balance of power created the foundations of twentieth century American isolationism, which viewed less involvement in European affairs as the essence of sound policy." Thus the Americans adopted policy of isolationism on account of geographical, political as well as economic considerations in the hope that this would ensure security of the country and enable them to concentrate on internal expansion and development. 101 America's policy of isolation underwent a marked change with the dawn of the twentieth century even though it was not able to completely shake off isolationist habits and thoughts. Though it adopted expansionist policies in Latin America and Western Pacific without involving much military or financial expenditure, it by and large avoided involvement in European affairs. USA abondoned this policy for a while on account of serious threat from Germany to democracy and extended support and help to European democracies, but reverted back to policy of isolationism

soon after the war. The American Senate refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles which committed USA to membership of League of Nations and involved the country in undefined and unforeseenable contingencies. This return to isolationism was to the Americans "largely an expression of the nation's democratic idealism. Its purpose was to protect the uniqueness of American society against the corrupting influence of European politics." United States by and large continued to follow policy of isolationism in the inter war period. She decided to take part in the Second World War only after the Japanese attacked the Pearl Harbour. In the post World War II period, America's isolationist policy underwent a great change and it began to play an active role in the international sphere. Senator Robert A.Taft, one of the strong proponents of isolationist policy in the pre-World War II period said in 1950 "I don't know what they mean by isolationism; nobody is an isolationist today." Even President Eisenhover said in 1952 "I have long insistedand do now insist, that isolationism is dead as a political issue." In view of the growing threat from Communism to the American society, the isolationist policy of USA assumed a new Character. As Norman A. Graebner has observed "Anchored to such assumptions of omnipotence, American isolationism in the twentieth century became identified with a primary concern for the domestic economy, an overestimation of American power and a belief in the nation's moral superiority, all of which encouraged the tendency towards unilateralism in diplomacy. Isolationism, though a logical consequence of geography and the national experience, was in fact the creation of several generations of writers, editors and politicians. It triumphed as a political programme and achieved a predominant place in American thought simply because no other course of national action would promise so much at such negligible cost. World War II and the events that followed destroyed only the illusion of geographical insulation. The traditional belief that the United States would achieve security at the expense of itself than nation with few physical advantages was not destroyed." On the basis of the above survey of the policy of isolation adopted by different countries it can be said that the countries may adopt this policy on account of different reasons. The states which adopt this policy are essentially not indifferent to the developments taking place in the world around. They are quite watchful of the international conditions and potential threats. Generally, this policy is adopted by states which are relatively 102 independent economically and militarily and percieve that involvement would only jeopardise their social, economic and political values.

Critical Evaluation of Policy of Isolationism

Scholars are sharply divided over the merits and demerits of the isolationist policy. The supporters of the isolationist policy have argued that on account of this policy USA was able to considerably reduce her military expenditure and concentrate on her domestic problems. The rulers of USA instead of involving themselves in foreign relations with European powers, preferred to concentrate on problems of internal unity, political stability and social development which proved quite beneficial for the country. Further, the various ethnic minorities which had settled down in America between 1880 and 1920 also fully supported this policy.

On the other hand the opponents of America's isolationist policy have argued that the policy of isolationism, though quite justified during the initial years of the existence of USA, was stretched too far and continued to be the basis of America's foreign policy even after it emerged as a major power. This naturally resulted in the neglect of country's national security. It is true that in the post world war II period US somewhat deviated from this policy and got involved in ideological controversies, which culminated in US intervention in Vietnam. The set-backs and losses suffered by USA in Vietnam made critics doubt the wisdom of American leadership in deviating from the traditional isolationist policy. It is true that at present majority of the American people are not in favour of following isolationist policy, yet still there is a sizeable section of people who are in favour of following traditional isolationist policy.

NATIONALISTIC UNIVERSALISM (Pax Britannica, Pax Americana, Pax Sovietica)

The foreign policy of every country is primarily designed to promote national interests but certain universal principles like promotion of world peace, maintenance of justice among all the nations, advancement of liberty of the people, development of general human welfare are also given due weightage in the formation of the foreign policy. The policy of Nationalistic Universalism is in complete contrast with the policy of isolation. The policy of Nationalistic Universalism implies that it tries to impose its own way of life and principles on other states. This policy was initiated by President Wilson of USA during the first world war when he projected the struggle being waged by the Allies against the Axis power as an attempt to make the world safe for democracy. Likewise Soviet Union after the Russian Revolution of 1917 projected itself as the champion of principles of peace and justice. But truly speaking the policy of nationalistic Universalism emerged only after second world war when two super-powers emerged and they tried to impose their way of life on the 103 rest of the countries viz. USA projected itself as the champion of democracy, while Soviet Union projected itself as the champion of socialism and communism. It may be noted that the policy of nationalistic universalism is in direct contrast with the policy of isolation, because here the state is keen to play a leading role in the international arena with a view to impose its own principles. According to Schwarzenberger, the successful realisation of the this policy depends on three conditions. First, the state aiming at universal domination must possess overwhelming superiority, especially in the military field. Secondly, it must have an ideology which gives it the necessary impetus and self-confidence to carry out its world mission. Finally, it must have at its disposal the technical means of organisation that are required not only to conquer a world empire, but also to hold it together. It is noteworthy that the nationalism of late twentieth century greatly differs from the nationalism of the nineteenth and early twentieth century. Whereas the nationalism of nineteenth and early twentieth century, regarded the nation as the ultimate goal, the nationalistic universalism of the late twentieth century assumes the nation as the starting point for the universal mission. Prof. Morgenthau has brought out the difference between the nationalism and universal nationalism

thus Tor the nationalism of the nineteenth century the nation is the ultimate goal of politics, the end point of political development beyond which there are other nationalisms with similar and equally justifiable goals. For the nationalistic universalism of the late twentieth century the nation is but the starting point of a universal mission whose ultimate goal reaches to the confines of the political world. While nationalism wants one nation in one state and nothing else, the nationalistic universalism of our age claims for one nation and one state the right to impose its own valuation and standards of action upon all the other nations." In this chapter we shall examine how far the nationlistic principles were projected in universal terms by Britain, U.S.A. and Soviet Union

PAX BRITANNICA
The terms Pax implies a period of international history characterised by general stability and lack of wars due to predominance of a particular political authority. Viewed in this context, history has witnessed Pax Britannica (The Peace of Britain), Pax Americana (The Peace of America) and Pax Sovietica (The Peace of Soviet Union). The period between the Congress of Vienna and the First World War (1815-1915) is popularly known as period of Pax Britannica. During this period Britain played a dominant role in European politics and preserved the balance of power system in Europe. Only on two occasions the supremacy of Britain was threatened during this period. First in 1854-56 during the Crimean War when the Russians threatened to dominate the Constantinople. Second in 1870-71 during the Franco-Prussian War, which led to displacement of 104 France by Germany as a leading power on the Continent. This however did not disturb the balance of power in the European system. According to Prof. Palmer and Perkins this dominant position of Britain was "made possible by a favourable combination of circumstances at home and abroad: England's leadership in the Industrial Revolution, in international finance, and in world trade; her navy, which gave her control of the seas and free access to her widespread possessions and to the markets of the world; and the post-Napoleonic situation in Europe which gave Britain no formidable challenger to her unique position until the rise of Germany."* Towards the close of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century with the rise of United States, Japan and Germany, England's dominant position in the political as well as industrial field began to show a decline. Germany started competing for markets and underdeveloped areas of the world and even posed a challenge to naval supremacy of Britain. Similarly Japan and USA began to compete with Britain in the economic sphere. All this greatly undermined the position of Britain and posed a serious threat to the Pax Britannica. No wonder, Britain ceased to play the role of a balancer and became member of one of the rival alliances. In the post World War I period, Britain lost her dominant position and could no longer play an effective role on the world stage. A serious challenge was posed to the British authority by the

rising nationalism in Near East, Middle East as well as India. The Russian Revolution of 1917, which left a deep impact on the people of Asia, gave a further impetus to anti-British movements in different parts of the British Empire and posed a serious threat to its very existence. However, Britain succeeded in maintaining a semblance of its authority for some time, even though it had lost the dominant position of the earlier years. In the post World War II period the international balance of power in Far East was greatly disturbed. Britain, in view of her weakened position, could not play its historical role in the area. As a result some sort of power vacuum was created in the region and soon the two rival giants Soviet Union and USA, rushed in to fill this vacuum. Thus we find that there was a sharp decline in the power and influence of Great Britain in the present century, specially after the First World War. This was partly due to her internal difficulties and partly due to competition with other states possessing larger populations and resources. The rising tide of nationalism in their former colonial possessions of Britain also made a large contribution in this regard. Though the British power continued to gradually decline after First World War, it could be clearly perceived only after Second World War. Thereafter even the British statesmen ceased to boast of Pox Britannica and became conscious of the weak position of Britain. It is a different matter that even now they tried to * Palmer and Perkins, International Relations p. 123. 105 capitalise as much as possible on Britain's past influence and prestige. However, they also made necessary readjustments in their foreign as well as domestic policies. Though the age of Pax Britannica is over Britain still occupies a prominent position among the world powers. She is still a significant sea power even though she has lost the command of the seas. Her exports in the post World War II period have shown an increase, even though for this the people had to make heavy sacrifices. At the same time we cannot lose sight of the fact that now Britain has lost most of the income from overseas investment which were the main source of her economic strength in the nineteenth century; her basic industries like coal, steel, textile etc. which made Britain the workshop of the world have also considerably declined. Quite conscious of the weakened position of Britain, Prime Minister Harold Wilson announced in January 1968 the decisions of his government to reduce Britain's military expenditure, and withdraw British forces from East of Suez by 1971. Justifying this change of policy Wilson said that for the past several years "we have been living beyond our means." But few who listened could honestly believe that what was happening was other than the tide of history. "By making the final decision to relinquish her role as world keeper of peace, Britain was only recognising the disappearance of empire and the power it once gave this tiny island." Similarly Roy Jenkins, the British Chancellor of Exchequer said in a TV address, "We are recognising that we are no longer a superpower." Thereafter, Britain has been playing quite a different role.

PAX AMERICANA

The term Pax Americana is used to describe the dominant role which United States of America came to play in the post World War II period. This role was in complete contrast with isolationalist role which United States had played since its establishment. Soon after the establishment of the Republic, President Washington asserted that USA could play a great role in the foreign affairs by extending commercial relations with the European countries and having as little political connection as possible with Europe. He advocated the policy of keeping clear of the permanent alliances with other foreign powers. In 1823 President Monroe reiterated this policy and said: "In the wars of European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comfort with our policy so to do. It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparations for our defence." USA continued to adhere to this policy of non-intervention with regard to Europe right up to 1945. This policy is popularly known as policy of isolationism even though Charles A. Beard prefers to describe it as 'continentalism'. It may be noted that though America generally adhered to the policy of non-intervention until the Second World War, it did depart from this policy at least on two occasions viz., during the First World War (1914106 1918) and the Second World War (1939-45) and intervened massively in the conflict between the coalitions of European powers. This deviation however went a long way in post World War II period. In the words of Scotsman D.W Brogan it created the 'illusion of American Omnipotence'. America came to believe that the American power was everywhere and always decisive and it was within the capacity of the United States to resolve any international issue. However, while pursuing its foreign policy the United States tried to express faith in principles of nationalistic universalism. For example in 1963 the U.S. Secretary of State (Dean Rusk) said America's goal is to achieve "a free community of nations independent but interdependentunited North and South, East and West, in one great family of man, outgrowing and transcending the great antagonism that rend our age." In 1964 a State Department publication described America's goals in world affairs as national security through strength; progress through partnership; supporting the post-war revolution of freedom; promoting the concept of international community under law and peace through perseverance. Though these objectives of foreign policy have been modified in the light of the circumstances yet by and large USA has tried to adhere to these principles. Even while professing faith in the above noted principles of foreign policy, USA in the post World War II period, tried to claim dominant position in the world affairs. In Europe it felt concerned over the Russian attempts to bring the whole of eastern Europe under its grip, unmindful of the commitment to establish democratic government there. This resulted in the pronouncement of the 'Truman Doctrine' and USA helped Greece and Turkey to check the Communist encroachments. America also launched a comprehensive European Recovery Programme to check the growing menace of Communism in Europe. It also provided economic and technical assistance to the Afro-Asian nations under the Four-Point Programme. Above all, it sponsored or concluded a number of military alliances to meet the Communist threat in various

regions. These included the Organisation of the American States (OAS) in the Western Hemisphere; North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO); the South East Asia Treaty Organisaion (SEATO), the Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO) and ANZUS. U.S.A. also showed determination to resist the encroachments by the Communist through actual use of military force, viz., Korea, Berlin, Vietnam, etc. In Europe also United States tried to increase its influence by providing emergency aid to a number of countries in the months following the end of hostilities of Second World War; undertaking European reconstruction through the European Recovery Programme (Marshall Plan); organising NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) etc. In the course of time some of the West European countries began to challenge the dominant position of USA in the region. The emergence of the European Economic Community, a new trading and industrial complex dedicated to 107 maximum economic unity among the members also posed a challenge to the hegemony of United States in Europe. In fact during the past few years the community has not only expanded from 6 to 15, its activities have also considerably widened. As a result the European Union has emerged as the biggest and richest supranational bloc. Though still America continues to play an important role in Europe it has certainly lost the dominant position which it enjoyed there earlier. With regard to Latin America, United States did not pursue isolationist policies, instead it tried to act as hemispheric policeman. During the thirties the countries of the hemisphere felt dissatisfied with the Washington policies. The growing power of the Axis powers also greatly contributed to this dissatisfaction. As a result President Roosevelt tried to create harmonious and truly cooperative inter-American relations. In the post World War II period, United States tried to develop very close relations with countries of Latin America because they could provide good markets for the American goods. America tried to bring these countries under its control. In 1974 it concluded the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance by which the member states agreed to treat an attack against any American state as an attack against them. America also made available enormous economic assistance to these countries. As the years rolled by and the Communist threat to the region increased, USA began to interfere in the affairs of the Latin American States to check the growing influence of communists. Thus, USA intervened in Gautemala, Nicaragua etc. to protect the democratic government. The most serious threat to American position in the hemisphere was posed by Fidel Castro of Cuba, who not only refused to call popular election but also nationalised billion dollars worth of property owned by the American firms in the country. The relations between Cuba and United States deteriorated so much that they virtually reached a shooting point. However the situation was saved due to decision of Soviet Union to demolish the Soviet bases in Cuba. Thereafter, United States started paying more attention to this region and sought to preserve and extend its hegemony over Latin America through gun boat diplomacy, military occupation and rigged elections. Further changes were affected under Reagan in American policy towards Latin America. It adopted the doctrine of 'low intensity warfare' which subordinates military goals per se with the aim of gradually isolating the enemy economically and politically at minimal cost in U.S. casualties. The policy rested on the principle that sufficient damage and disruption should be inflicted on the opponent

to compel him to negotiate. The economic dimensions of this strategy call for large but selective injections of aid to consolidate and extend client-state support challenging where necessary the economic power of entrenched oligarchies by building new alliances, particularly within the military. United States also took keen interest in other regions of the world and tried to play a dominant role in these regions. In Far East, during the Second World War USA tried to preserve the integrity of China with a view to checkmate the designs of Japan. In post World War II period 108 USA failed to check the emergence of Communist power in China. However, it tried to build up Taiwan as an independent state and managed to keep China out of the United Nations for a long time. Ultimately, USA improved relations with China in 1970, which paved way for the grant of permament seat in Security Council to people's Rupublic of China. Another country in the Far East where USA got actively involved was Korea. USA provided every possible military assistance to South Korea and ultimately succeeded in pushing the forces of North Korea. USA succeeded in checking the growth of Communist influence. In South East Asia also though USA did not have any direct interest, it sought to check the growth of Communist influence. In the beginning, USA offered every possible assistance to France for the control of Indo-China. Subsequently when France withdrew, the United States assumed direct responsibility. United States also encouraged formation of SEATO (South East Asia Treaty Organisation) on the pattern of NATO, to check communist expansion. America also extended liberal aid to Laos with a view to make it an anti-communist bastion. Later on when the possibility of conflict with Soviet Union on Loas issue increased America sought to resolve the issue through amicable settlement and ultimately succeeded in getting Laos' neutrality recognised at the Geneva Conference of 1961. But the deepest involvement of USA in this region was in Vietnam, which cost United States heavily in terms of men and money. After prolonged intervention USA was obliged to pull out its troops from Vietnam. In the Middle East also USA evinced keen interest in the post World War II period. It provided large financial assistance to the countries of this region to ensure stability in this part of the world. It sponsored the Baghdad Pact to check the Communist threat. During the Suez Crisis of 1956 United States supported the Arab demand and asked for withdrawal of Anglo-French forces from Egypt. Unites States also maintained intimate relations with the countries of Middle East. The position of USA in Middle East underwent a change in 1973 as a result of Arab Israel War. The Arab countries used oil as weapon to compel United States and other Western countries to adopt more constructive attitude in the Arab-Israel conflict. But soon after the American administration, through active diplomacy, stole initiative and played a leading role in bringing about a negotiated settlement between Egypt and Israel which culminated in Camp David Agreement. The downfall of the Shah in the beginning of 1979 and the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan towards the end of the year, enhanced the importance of area in international politics and increased the possibility of confrontation between the big powers. This also gave a serious

setback to Pax Americana in Middle East where Iran and Saudi Arabia were two reliable pillars of this policy. With the Marxist revolution in Afghanistan and the Islamic upheaveal in Iran the Pax Americana suffered a setback, even though thereafter also America continued to maintain her predominant position in the area. It is thus evident that the United States acquired a dominant position 109 in the international sphere on account of its military, political and economic position. In the military sphere it kept the lead for quite sometime till it was caught and overtaken by the Soviet Union. In the political sphere U.S. projected itself as champion of democracy and interfered in the affairs of other countries. Above all it was its economic position as world's major source of capital equipments, foodstuffs, and aid etc. which accorded it a pre-eminent position. However, there was considerable loss in the power and influence of United States during the next few years as is evident from its failure to prevent Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, forestall Iranian Revolution or resolve quickly the hostage crisis or preserve U.S. sovereignty over Panama Canal. Even European allies of USA defied the ban on the sale of U.S. originated pipeline technology to USSR. The main factors which contributed to loss of hegemony by United States were loss of productive superiority, passing of organisational advantage, high mass standard of living, underinvestment in research and development and persistence of free trade policies. We shall deal with these factors in some details. In the first instance there was considerable decline in the productive superiority of United States. Whereas in the 1950's United States produced half the world's steel by the end of 1970's it produced only one-fifth. In the field of automobile production also Japan surpassed USA and posed a formidable competition in electronic. In the production of aircrafts western Europe made great stride. Secondly, the decline in productivity led to organisation advantage passing to rising economic powerJapan and European countries, which are integrating state planning and banking agencies. Thirdly desire for high standards has led to high level of emigration to regions of recent settlement. Migration of capital from north-east to Sun belt in USA and out of the country is proof of this. Fourthly, the under investment in education, research and development and over investment in military sector also undermined the position of United States. In recent years the government of USA has low budget in all sectors except military. Finally, persistance with free trade ideology at a time when protectionism was spreading elsewhere also undermined the position of United States. USA persisted with this policy because big banks and multinational corporations, who play an increasing role in USA, are a major free-

trade lobby. It is very much in their interest to allow foreign products with low per unit labour costs in USA with minimal tariffs.

NEW HEGEMONY OF USA

The victory scored by America (along with her allies) over Iraq in the Gulf War in 1991 has been interpreted by some scholars as restoration of American hegemony over international system. They have contended that on the Gulf issue U.S.A. went beyond the UN mandate and the other 110 great powers like Soviet Union and China could not exercise any restraint on her. Likewise, USA used UN to impose sanctions against Libya in April 1992 which is indicative of the fact that US is trying to establish global hegemony. However, this contention has been challenged by others. They assert that the American power has suffered considerable decline during the past two decades and it would be erroneous to interpret the recent American victory in the Gulf war as restoration of her hegemony. If at all there was Pax Americana, it was at the end of Second World War when America reigned supreme, while European powers and Japan lay exhausted. As a result, America was able to lay down rules of the post-war international economic and trading systems. Its industrial and technological prowess, overwhelming military power and nuclear monopoly further enabled America to dominate the world. But since 1970's the strains on the international economic system, the technological challenge from Western Europe and Japan and military power of Soviet Union have posed a serious challenge to American hegemony. It is true that as a result of detente between Soviet Union and Washington and disintegration of Soviet Union, the position of America has considerably improved in the international arena, but it cannot be denied that she faces serious economic and technological challenges from Europe and Japan. In fact at present no single country enjoys economic, political and military hegemony. While Germany and Japan are economic giants they are strategically quite weak. Likewise Russia and China are strong military powers but their economies are very weak. It is US alone which can claim to be most balanced power, but it is not in a position to unilaterally determine the structure of new world order. There are serious internal and external limitations on the power of USA. For taking any major decision in the international arena, it has to secure widespread international support.

PAX SOVIETICA
Pax Sovietica means the policy of extending the Soviet influence and culture in other parts of the world. This expansionist impulse has been ever present in Russia. Even during the Czarist rule Russia made a probe in all directions and advanced in the direction where it encountered least resistance. Thus, it expanded its territory towards Finland and the Baltic, towards Poland, towards the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea and Central Asia; towards Siberia and Pacific. Russia also nourished ambitions to expand in certain other areas like the Balkans, the Turkish Straits, Afghanistan, Tibet and China. However, these ambitions were thwarted by other powers.

Soviet Russia (which came into being as a result of Revolution of 1917) could not play any effective role in the international sphere from 1917 to the second World War, because of preoccupation with the internal affairs and the existence of powerful countries like Britain, France, Germany, etc. The main opponents of Russia were Britain in the nineteenth century; Imperial Japan in early twentieth century and Axis Powers in 1930's and early forties. 111 In the post Second World War period Soviet Union tried to extend her influence in Poland, Yugoslavia, Albania, East Germany, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Outer Mongolia, Manchuria, North Korea, etc. by promoting communist governments in these countries and itself assumed the leadership of the Communist bloc. Soviet Union tried to establish communist government in Greece and Turkey but its design were thwarted by United States. Russia also concluded a number of treaties and agreements with countries of Eastern Europe and took a lead in the establishment of a Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON) with Poland, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Rumania and Albania. In 1950 Russia concluded a Treaty of Friendship Alliance and Mutual Assistance with Communist Government of China. In 1955 Russia took a lead in the conclusion of the Warsaw Pact with Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, East Germany, Poland, Rumania and Czechoslovokia. The signatory states agreed to set up a joint command for their forces and the Soviet Marshal I.S. Koniev appointed Commander of the Unified Command. Thus, Soviet Union emerged as the undisputed leader of the communist countries. However, during this period certain cracks also appeared in the communist bloc. Tito led Yugoslavia out of the Soviet satellite system. China also developed differences with Soviet Union over economic aid and trade questions; ideological issues; and on border issues and asserted its own. China emerged as a dominant power of Asia and began to compete with Soviet Union for leadership of the Communist Movement. The break of Albania with USSR gave a further setback to Soviet leadership. Despite these setbacks Soviet Union continued to enjoy a dominant position in Eastern Europe and even made efforts to increase its influence in the Third World. For this purpose it not only provided greater aid but also stepped up its cultural activities. At the UN also Soviet Union consistently championed and actively supported the anti-colonial cause (it supported Indoneasia's struggle against the Dutch; Egypt's revolt against British hegemony; and Algeria's revolution against France) which improved its image with the Afro-Asian countries and contributed to its increasing influence in the Third World. However, here also Soviet Union suffered certain setbacks and a number of countries of Asia and Africa (viz., Ghana, Egypt etc.) bluntly told the Soviet leaders that the rejection of the Western capitalism should not be interpreted as acceptance of Soviet mastery and they tried to assert their diplomatic and military independence. In short we can say that despite the fact that Soviet Union provided enormous aid to the Third World countries, it has not been able to retain its dominance in these countries and they have shown a tendency to assert themselves.

Soviet Union took keen interest in the Middle East and tried to increase its influence in the region. It indicated its interest in the region by refusing to withdraw the Soviet troops from Iran after the war. However, 112 ultimately Soviet Union was obliged to withdraw its troops in the face of growing international pressure. Thereafter Soviet Union tried to increase its influence in the region by extending support to the revolutionary movements of the countries in Middle East. Thus, it supported the expulsion of British from Iraq and Egypt and ouster of France from Levant and North Africa. In addition Soviet Union also made available military and economic assistance to the countries of region. Soviet Union's offer to underwrite the cost of the proposed dam at Aswan (following the cancellation of promised American aid) and its offer to send 'volunteers' to assist Nasser during the British-French and Israeli attack, further contributed to the improvement of Soviet image in the region. Soviet Union also succeeded in winning over Algeria by supporting revolt against the French. However, this Soviet influence in the region could not last long because the countries of Middle East began to suspect Soviet Union of fostering troubles in their countries. The failure of the Soviet Union to render active military assistance to the Arab countries during the Arab Israel War of 1967 (which resulted in the victory of Israel) gave a serious setback to Soviet influence in the region. In the course of time this influence continued to show a further decline. However towards the close of the 1970's Soviet Union was once again able to assert its dominant position following Marxist revolution in Afghanistan in April 1978. On the other hand the Islamic upheavel in Iran during 1978-79, which gave a serious setback to American influence in the region, also greatly contributed to the increase in the influence of Soviet Union. The above discussion shows that Soviet Union greatly increased its influence in the post World War II period and established its dominance over Eastern Europe and certain other regions despite tough opposition from the western democracies. However, the Soviet dominance received a setback due to attempt by countries of Third World to act independent of the two super powers. The policy of liberalisation adopted by countries of Eastern Europe and the decision of the Soviet leaders to make a retreat from the international scene gave a further setback to Soviet hegemony. The winding off of the Warsaw Pact is clear evidence of the loss of Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe. In the Middle East also the failure of Soviet Union to play an active role during the Gulf War of 1991, in contrast with the dominant role of USA, was interpreted as loss of Soviet influence. The disintegration of the Soviet Union towards the close of 1991 virtually put an end to Pax Sovietica.

MIDDLE KINGDOM COMPLEX OF CHINA

The concept of 'Middle Kingdom complex' or 'intermediate zone' occupies an important place in China's foreign policy. This principle was evolved by Mao Tse Tung during the critical years of 1946-47 when the Chinese Communists were engaged in a civil war against the nationalist forces of Chiang Kai Shek. It may be noted that after the Allied victory over Japan in August 1945, while the Chinese Communists entrenched 113

themselves in north China and Manchuria, the Chiang Kai Shek forces occupied a dominant position in central and southern Chinese hinterland. There was every possibility of the outbreak of a civil war. At this juncture most of the countries of the world including United States, and Soviet Union recognised Nationalist Government under Chiang Kai Shek as the legitimate government of China. Though United States made a bid to mediate in the Chinese political imbroglio but they contributed towards the improvement of the position of Chiang Kai Shek by agreeing to transport his troops to Manchuria. Between November 1945 and January 1947 United States made fresh bid to mediate in the dispute and find a mutually acceptable solution, however these efforts failed, and the country was gripped in a civil war which culminated in the victory of the Communist and fleeing of Chiang Kai Shek to the island of Formosa (Taiwan). The attitude of the Soviet Union was also quite disappointing to the Communist leaders of China. No doubt, Soviet forces permitted substantial quantities of captured Japanese arms to pass into the Communist hands in north China, but the Soviet leader had no confidence in the political future of Mao's cause. Further, unmindful of China's economic welfare, they looted the industrial installations at Manchuria. The conduct of United States convinced Mao that while it professed to be neutral, in reality its policy was highly discriminatory in favour of Chiang Kai Shek. Similarly, the Soviet Union not only harmed the Communist interests by looting the industrial installations at Manchuria but also advised them to avoid a war, because it feared that the war would disturb the equilibrium between the two post-war power blocs. Therefore Mao pleaded for keeping the revolution alive and said: The arms of the people, every gun and every bullet must all be kept, must not be handed over. He offered a new analysis of the international situation in which the Soviet Union was playing a relatively passive role and subsequently there was no possibility of a conflict between the two superpowers." He asserted that under the situation, the third bloc, including China and whole of the Capitalist world outside United States and its dependencies could play a more positive and dynamic role. Thus, he threw the concept of Middle Kingdom complex. The concept of 'intermediate zone' or 'middle kingdom' was further elaborated by Mao in his World's Eye View from a yenan Cave. He said that the American talk of war with Soviet Union was a smoke-screen behind which it was trying to dominate all the countries which lay between the two great powers. He argued that America's global network of bases could be used against the Soviet Union but only after it had mastered the rest of the world. Actually, it was the policy of the American imperialists to attack through peaceful means and oppress all capitalist colonial and semi colonial countries. Mao said that the complex system of military bases and alliances such as SEATO, NATO and CENTO were in reality directed at the very countries which they incorporated. He argued that these countries, including China, formed the real battle ground for the 114 fight with imperialism. He, therefore, pleaded that all the democratic forces which found themselves in contradiciton with the United States should join hands to form a united front against it.

By the end of 1950's Mao adopted dual strategy for the implementation of his Middle Kingdom concept. On the one hand he tried to improve the economic and military strength of China so that it could play an effective role in the world affairs and on the other hand he actively supported the struggles of the intermediate zone because he was convinced that here alone the worldwide offensive of imperialism could be blunted. Accordingly, throughout the 1960's China projected an image among the Third World countries that it was revolutionary power which committed to support nationalist movement elsewhere.

Further Modification in the Concept

After the Sino-Soviet conflict, Mao made further modification, in the 'intermediate zone concept. The splits in the capitalist camp also influenced his views in this regard. In 1964 Mao said: "At present time there exist two intermediate zones in the world. Asia, Africa and Latin America constitute the first intermediate zone. Europe, North America and Oceania constitute the second." It may be noted that Mao did not include the Eastern European countries in their opposition to the Soviet hegemony as forming part of the second intermediate zone. Mao offered a further and more authoritative elucidation of the concept of intermediate zone in 1972 and said: "the two superpowers Soviet revisionism and U.S. imperialismare trying to sandwitch other countries in various parts of the world. They not only plunder the small and medium-sized countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America but also practise the 'jungle law' policy towards their allies in Europe, Asia, North America and Oceania. The Soviet revisionists are sparing no effort to extend their sphere of influence to Western Europe. Thus, between these two overlords and the socialist countries there exist two broad intermediate zones... The second intermediate zone includes the major capitalist powers both in the West and the East except the two superpowers. These countries too are subjected to the control, intervention and bullying of two overlords to varying degrees and the contradictions between these countries and the two superpowers are daily developing." Thus, we find that in Mao's concept intermediate zone countries were placed between two superpowers on the one hand and the socialist countries on the other. The concept of second intermediate zone also differed from the concept of first intermediate zone in so far as it also included the Eastern European countries. Since 1968 at least the Chinese have regarded the Soviet Union as a military threat and therefore welcomed the formation of the Common Market on the ground that it constituted a new step by the West European countries in joining forces against the hegemony of the super powers specially against the control and interference in Western Europe. They also saw in this combination a possible check against Soviet Union. 115 United Nations and economic development. In short, the movement still has a vital role to play.

Non-Aligned Movement&the New International Economic Order

Another question which deserves consideration is as to what role the non-aligned movement has played in evolving the New International Economic Order. The basic principles of nonalignment include "struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, apartheid, racism, Zionism and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference of hegemony as well as against great power and bloc politics." This clearly shows that the movement is opposed to all kinds of oppression, exploitation and injustice. In the economic sphere the nonaligned movement has worked for the achievement of a New International Economic Order (NIEO). The movement for NIEO did not originate with the UN resolution of 1 May 1974 but is intimately linked with the struggle for the liquidation of colonialism. In a way the struggle for NIEO is intimately linked with the non-aligned movement's wider struggle for the elimination of colonialism-imperialism and neo-colonialism in all their manifestation. In this respect the nonaligned movement and the struggle for the NIEO were contemporary and they have been intimately linked from the very beginning. During the initial stages the non-aligned countries worked through the United Nations to get the principle of state sovereignty over natural resources accepted. At the Bandung Conference of the Afro-Asian countries held in 1955 they laid emphasis on the need of diversification of the export of the non-aligned countries. However, at this stage as the non-aligned movement was chiefly occupied with political aspects of decolonisation and preservation of peace, independence and national sovereignty etc." it did not lay much emphasis on the economic issues. It was only in the 1960's that the non-aligned movement started thinking in terms of the NIEO because by this time the process of decolonisation had made further progress and it began to be emphasised that economic emancipation was an essential ingredient of the political decolonisation. By this time they were also convinced that the economic system evolved at Bretton Woods was not helpful in realising their economic objectives. In 1961 the non-aligned summit at Belgrade called for efforts to remove "economic imbalances inherited from colonialism and imperialism.." It was emphasised that the ever widening gap in the standards of the people living in advanced countries and the less developed countries could be bridged only through accelerated economic, industrial and agricultural development. The very next year at the Cairo Conference the attempts to perpetuate past structure of international economic relations" was denounced and it was asserted that this was obstructing the economic development of the developing countries. Concerted efforts were also made at the United Nations, which culminated in the establishment of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). The UNCTAD and the Group of 77 ultimately became the principal instruments for carrying on struggle for an NIEO. 171 The second non-aligned summit at its Cairo meet in October 1964 laid emphasis on economic development and cooperation and urged "all the countries to contribute to the rapid evolution of a new and just economic order under which all nations can live without fear or want or despair and rise to their full stature in the family of nations (because) the structure of world economy and the existing international institutions of international trade and development have failed either to reduce the disparity or to rectify serious and growing imbalances between developing countries." The Cairo declaration thus emphasised the same principles which were emphasised by the UN in its resolution of 1 May 1974 concerning New International Economic Order. However, in actual

practice the third world countries became increasingly dependent on the developed countries due to "deteriorating terms of their trade and economic relations with the developed countries." Therefore the non-aligned countries emphasised the need of greater mobilisation, particularly in the preparation for the Second UN Development Decade and future activities of the UNCTAD. After the Cairo Conference the non-aligned countries played a leading role in the evolution of the New International Economic Order and adopted a number of resolutions and declarations. The important steps taken in this regard include the Algiers Charter (1967) and the Second UNCTAD Resolution and Declaration. (New Delhi, 1968). It was only in 1970s that the non-aligned movement made a determined bid to establish an NIEO. A blueprint for the NIEO was prepared at the Lusaka meet and specific guidelines for policies and action programme for economic progress were prepared. The Lusaka Declaration held the structural weakness of the present world order responsible for the distressing economic condition of developing countries and asserted that the "rapid transformation of the world economic system requires achieving implementation of concerted and coordinated policies and the measures so as to build a partnership between the developing and developed countries on the foundations of equal and mutual advantages and for the common goals of peace, progress and prosperity." The impact of the Lusaka Declaration was evident in the debate on international strategy for the Second United Nations Development Decade. , The Algiers Conference made more forceful plea for fundamental changes in the existing inequitable international economic relations and the need for a new international economic order. The Conference emphasised that self-reliance and collective reliance were pre-requisites for the attainment of international economic development goals. Above all, it asked the UN General Assembly "to draw up a charter on economic rights and duties of states." The idea was developed further at the non-aligned meet held at Colombo (1976) and Havana (1979). The Colombo Summit paid special attention to the Economic Action Programme. It expressed regret that the capitalist countries were not responding to and implementing the decisions of the UN and suggested an Action Programme to achieve New 172 International Economic Order. One of the outstanding feature of this action programme was emphasis on a new universal and equitable monetary order. The Havana Conference in its Declaration also asserted that "the establishment of the New International Economic Order is one of the most important and most urgent tasks facing the non-aligned movement and the democratisation of international economic relations constitute its political substance." The Seventh Non-aligned Conference (New Delhi, 1983) again emphasised the need of establishing a New International Economic Order and emphasised that "the prevailing, international system which runs counter to the basic interests of the developing countries was profoundly unjust and incompatible with the accelerated development of the non-aligned and other developing countries and warned that failure to establish the NIEO based on equality and

justice would have serious adverse economic and political consequences for all." The conference asserted that "The Movement of Non-Aligned countries has played and will continue to play an important role in the struggle for the political and economic independence of all the developing countries and their people, for the attainment of full and permanent sovereignty and control over all types of natural resources and economic activities; and for the promotion of a fundamental restructuring by the establishment of NIEO. It is thus evident from the above developments that the demand for NIEO was put forward by the non-aligned countries on account of their growing frustration and helplessness in dealing with the developed countries. By their efforts through UNCTAD, the UNIDO and the Regional Economic Commissions of the United Nations, the non-aligned countries have defined in clear term the New International Economic Order. At the same time they tried to impress on the developing countries the need of greater accommodation and cooperation with the developing countries, even though in this respect they failed to secure the desired objectives. In view of the widening gulf between the developed and developing countries North-South dialogue was initiated with a view to establish a New International Economic Order. The nonaligned countries acted with remarkable unity at UNCTAD I and passed a unanimous resolution emphasising the responsibility of the international community with regard to stabilisation of commodity prices, volume and terms aid and preferences. Effort to protect the interests of the developing countries continued at the subsequent UNCTAD meetings. At the UNCTAD IV meeting held at Nairobi in 1976 the non-aligned countries extended full support to the sharp rise in oil prices by OPEC (Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries). The developing countries felt that they could emulate the example of OPEC in the use of commodity power. However, soon they discovered that there were limits to the use of commodity power and the success of OPEC could not be repeated in the case of other commodities. 173 At the UNCTAD IV meeting at Nairobi the idea of Integrated Programme of Commodities based on establishment of buffer stocks for a wide range of commodities including tea, coffee, cocoa, cotton, iron-ore etc. and a Common Fund for ensuring stability of prices of these key commodities. Though initially the problem of finances for fund posed a serious problem but ultimately the non-aligned countries were successful in floating this fund. With a view to reduce the burden of debt on the developing countries the UNCTAD IV demanded cancellation of debts for the least developed, land-locked and island developing countries. A demand for rescheduling of debts over a 25 years period was also made. However, most of the developed countries were opposed to cancellation of debts or a moratorium on debt service payments. As a result no concrete success could be achieved in this direction. Yet another proposal for evolution of the NIEO was taken in 1979 when UNCTAD insisted on the establishment of a Common Fund to finance buffer stocks in a price stabilisation scheme. It urged the developed countries to reduce and eliminate protectionism, specially with regard to

imports from the developing countries. It also insisted on doubling of the targets of official development assistance. Thus, we can say that the non-aligned and developing countries have been consistently working for the evolution of a New International Economic Order with a view to gain greater share in the world economy for the developing countries of the Third World. The progress was jeopardised because of the unhelpful attitude of the affluent countries. However, due to persistent efforts of the nonaligned countries the attitude of the affluent countries has somewhat softened and an atmosphere has been created in which we can expect that the developing countries may get sufficient quantity of assistance from the developed countries. But it would certainly be too much to expect that the advanced countries, who are facing the problem of energy, inflation and recession, would be willing to make any major concessions of the developing countries. Fully conscious of this fact, the non-aligned countries at the Havana summit held in September 1979 recommended promotion of collective self-reliance among the non-aligned and other developing countries. It urged co-ordinated action in the field of raw materials, trade, transport, industrialisation, food and agriculture, fisheries, insurance, health, tourism, sports, telecommunication, currency and finance and other areas. It also called on richer non-aligned member countries to increase financial assistance to the poorer non-aligned countries and make more foreign investments in other non-aligned countries. This clearly shows that the nondeveloped countries have now come to realise that the major responsibility for their development lies with themselves and they must try to achieve development through mutual co-operation. 174

14 Decolonization and Expansion of International Community

"The issue of colonialism has become more and more explosive since the end of World War II. The war itself shook centuries old colonial system to their foundations. The Japanese surrender in 1945 signalled the beginning, not the end of the real vital strugglethe struggle for freedom from foreign domination for over half the people of the world." Goodspeed Colonialism was one of the dominant features of international politics during the past three centuries. Its origin can be traced back to the discovery of India by Vasco-da-Gama. The Portuguese and the Spanish were the first to establish their dominations overseas. Soon they were joined by other European powers like English, French, Dutch etc. However, Britain because of her mastery over the seas and industrial head-start emerged as the most powerful colonial power. The British steadily extended her sway over India, while France made encroachments in Algeria and Indo-China. The other European powers like the Dutch and the Spaniards also set up some colonies. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century the imperialist powers embarked on ruthless colonialisation and divided the whole world between themselves. They not only consolidated their hold over the existing colonies but also carved out new colonies

in Africa and Asia. Germany, Italy, Japan and U.S.A also joined the fray for colonies. Thus colonialism reached its height in the closing years of the nineteenth century and the first decade of the present century. Before we examine the process of Decolonisation it shall be desirable to know about the meaning of colonialism and policies followed by some of the colonial powers.

Meaning of Colonialism
Various definitions of colonialism based on the value and emotions, have been offered. According to the Western concept Colonialism is the establishment and maintenance for an extended time, of rule over an alien people that is separate and subordinate to the ruling power. It implies rule 175 over people of different race inhabiting lands separated by salt waters from the imperial centre. More particularly it signifies direct political control of European States or state settled by Europeans, over people of other race notably over Asians and Africans. The main features of colonialism according to the Western concept include dominations of an alien minority asserting racial and cultural superiority over a materially inferior native majority, contact between a machine oriented civilization with Christian civilisation, that lacks machine and is marked by the backward economy and a slow rhythm of life, and the imposition of the first civilisation upon the second. The leftist scholars, who consider colonialism as an evil, define it as "the military or economic enslavement of any dependent country" and see it as accompanied by bestial exploitation and extermination of the indigenous. The African and Asian scholars also tend to agree with the leftist definition of Colonialism. For example, President Sukarno of Indonesia defined colonialism in the course of his opening address to the Bandung Conference of 1955 thus: "I beg of you not to think of colonialism in the classic form which we know. Colonialism has also its modern dress in the form of economic control, intellectual control and actual physical control by a small but alien community within the nation." Another definition of colonialism which was accepted for a long time was offered by J.A. Hob-son in his book Imperialism: A study. He says "Colonialism, in its best sense is a natural overflow of nationality; its test is the power of colonialists to transplant the civilisation they represent to the new natural and social environments in which they find themselves." Varying Colonial Policies. There has been a wide variation in the policy pursued by various colonial powers towards their colonies. It is not possible to deal with the policies of all the colonial powers here. However, we may deal with the policies of some of the major colonial powers, viz., Britain, France, Belgium and Portugal, to form an idea about the attitude of the colonial powers towards the colonies.

British Policy. Great Britain adopted a very flexible policy towards her colonies. She did not treat the colonies merely as integral part of the mother country but as countries with their own distinctive ways of life and facilitated their autonomous development. She provided increasing share to the people of the land in the governing councils, civil services and judiciary to give them training in self-government and to prepare them for ultimate independence. Starting with India in 1947 and West Indies, the British transformed most of the colonies into independent states inkeeping with their long-established policy. However she had to face some difficulties in colonies like Rhodesia, Kenya, and British Guinea because of presence of large number of white settlers in these colonies. French Policy. France followed quite a different colonial policy. Though she extended enormous aid to her colonies and introduced a number of reforms after Second World War, she was not willing to grant 176 independence to these colonies. As a result of this policy the French colonies of Indo-China and Algeria had to wage violent struggle for their independence. In case of Guinea also the French leadership did not approve of its decision to opt out in 1958 and treated her as an outlaw. However, in subsequent years the French leaders effected certain changes in their attitude. They granted freedom to a number of African colonies and tried to cultivate intimate relations with them after grant of independence.

Belgian Policy
The colonial policy of Belgium was quite at variance with the policy pursued by Britain and France. She did not associate the people of her colony (Congo) either with the local administration (as was done by the British) nor with imperial centre (as was done by the French). She took no steps to create an elite class which could take over the reins of power once she decided to withdraw. As a result, when in 1959 in wake of riots in Leopoldville Belgium hastily severed her ties with Congo and left the country, the people were in lurch because they neither possessed trained leaders and officials nor an army manned by the African officer.

Portuguese Policy
The Portuguese, the oldest colonial power, followed a colonial policy which was quite different from the one followed by Britain, France and Belgium. She did not provide education to the people in her colonies and kept them away from modernity. In 1961 in the wake of Angolan rising, the Portuguese government introduced a number of reforms and provided the colonial people an equal status within the Portuguese domain. She deliberately encouraged the Portuguese peasants and workers to emigrate to Portuguese Africa to solve the problem of poverty and to strengthen her hold on the African territory. In fact because of her own backwardness she had hardly any capacity to secure the advancement of millions of people overseas.

DECOLONISATION
It is commonly held that the idea of decolonisation is the product of the twentieth century and particularly of the post World War II period. However, this is not correct. The feeling of anticolonialism first manifested itself in the eighteenth century when the thirteen American colonies revolted against the colonial rule of Britain and set themselves as an independent country. Subsequently, the Latin American countries also waged anticolonial struggle and attained independence. Philosophers like Bentham also strongly pleaded that Britain and France should rid themselves of their dependencies. But it was only after the First World War that the problem of colonies received serious attention. The peace-makers at Versailles, who were confronted with the problem of the territories of the defeated powers, thought it proper to pay due attention to the well-being 177 and development of these territories. Accordingly, they incorporated certain provisions in the Covenant of the League of Nations to deal with this problem. The Covenant laid down that "the well-being and development" of the people of these territories was "a sacred trust of civilisation" and entrusted these territories to various Allied and Associated powers as mandatories on behalf of the League. However, these powers were not genuinely concerned with the welfare of the people of these territories and treated these territories merely as a status symbol. In the post-World War I period the spread of nationalism in the colonial areas of Asia and elsewhere posed a serious challenge to the colonial rule. Though the process of decolonisation did not start during this period but no further colonies were established. The only notable exceptions were the seizure of Ethiopia by Italy and drive of Japan on China and South-East Asia. It was only in the post World War II period that the process of Decolonisation was greatly speeded up. According to Rupert Emerson "After 1945 the flood-tide of anti-colonialism swept away the colonial system with a speed and thoroughness that matched colonialism's advance at the close of the 19th century. The possession of colonies, so long a matter of pride and prestige, now became a sin to be expiated only, if at all, by the granting of immediate independence. The League of Nations' indifference to the problem was replaced by the profound involvement of the United Nations in the process of decolonisation."*

UN Charter and the Colonial People

In view of the rising tide of nationalism in the colonial areas the delegates to the San Francisco Conference made elaborate provisions concerning the colonial people which constituted an advance over the League Covenant. They incorporate a Declaration Regarding Non-SelfGoverning Territories in the UN charter which imposed an obligation on the members regarding the administration of territories whose people had not yet reached a full measure of selfGovernment. The Declaration, contained in Article 73, is of great significance and deserves to be quoted in full. It states: "Members of the United Nations which have to assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose people have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the

principle that the interests of inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept, as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the Present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories and to this end: (a) to ensure with due respect for the culture of the people concerned, their political, economic, social and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses; (b) to develop self-government, to take up due account of the * Internationol Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences, Vol.3, p.3. 178 political aspirations of the people, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages, of development; (c) to further international peace and security; (d) to promote constructive measures of development, to encourage research and to co-operate with one another and, when and where appropriate, with specialised international bodies with a view to the practical achievement of the social, economic, and scientific purposes set forth in the Article; and (e) to transmit regularly to the Secretary General for information purposes, subject to such limitations as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social and educational conditions in the territories for which they are respectively responsible. Article 74 of the Charter asserted that the other members of the UN have interests in the colonial territories. If the administering powers adopt arbitrary policies with regard to immigration, trade and commerce etc., the non-administering countries can complain. In short, the UN Charter held out hopes of self-government for the colonial areas. Commenting on the significance of the Declaration Regarding Non Self-Governing Territories of UN Charter, Ball and Killough say "it represents perhaps a great advance in international responsibility for the welfare of the dependent people than does the trusteeship system. In the Declaration on Non-Self-Governing Territories the...powers recognised for the first time as international instrument that the welfare of the dependent peoples was the paramount consideration in the administration of all dependent areas. The declaration in the Charter goes further and carries with it an obligation also undertaken for the first time for all dependencies to report to an international agency on the steps taken to implement the basic principles."* It is true that the provisions of the UN Charter provided a new impetus to the decolonization movement but it would certainly be wrong to assert that all decolonisation in the post World War

II period has been solely due to the UN efforts. David W. Wainhouse who has made a special study of the role of the United Nations in ending colonialism, says, "Whereas the Charter enshrined the principle of self-government and the U.N. bodies have provided the main arena of the colonial debate, the direct role of the Organisation itself in the process of decolonisation has been a limited one. In some countries such as India, Burma and Syria the nationalistic movements had developed before it was founded. In others, such as Indo-China, Morocco and Algeria, decisions were deliberately kept outside of United Nations by the states concerned notably France." The United Nations did play an important role, however, in the ending * Ball and Killough, International Relations, p.297. 179 of colonial rule in Indonesia and in certain African trust territories, and it was very much involved in the disposition of the former mandated territory of Palestine. A special case in which the Organisation had a decisive role was that of the Italian colonies of Libya, Eritrea and Somaliland, for which the General Assembly provided a solution when the four foreign Minsters of the Allied Powers were unable to settle the problem after several years of efforts." However, he asserts that the most important contribution of the U.N. has been "the creation of a climate of opinion which has given the decolonisation movement a considerable impetus. This it has done merely by being a world forum where claims, demands and protests inevitably have had a hearing and by providing organised channels for the making of resolutions and decisions bearing the stamp of the world organisation. Through the Trusteeship Council and the subsidiary organs of the General Assembly, the United Nations has spurred the Colonial power to improve the lot of their dependent peoples. The widespread concern for their welfare it has helped to arouse and has in turn served as a forum of pressure on the imperial powers to speed up the process of decolonisation."* From the very beginning the United Nations started playing an important role in speeding up the process of decolonisation. Though in the first few years the discussion on Non-Self-Governing Territories were mainly concerned with establishing procedure for the transmission and examination of information, but the basic issue underlying this whole discussion was the question of the competence of the General Assembly regarding the political and constitutional progress in the non-self governing territories. Soon the General Assembly was able to assert its right to examine the information transmitted by the administering powers and to make recommendations on the conditions in the territories. It also asserted its competence to determine whether a territory should be classified as Non-self government or not. In 1946 the General Assembly listed 74 territories in respect of which the administering powers were to transmit information. Subsequently it added some more territories, which were under the administration of Spain and Portugal, to this list. In 1947 the General Assembly set up a Committee of 16 members equal representation being given to the colonial and non-colonial powers. This Committee was to assist the Assembly in dealing with the reports submitted by the administering power. The Colonial powers objected to the setting up of the Committee on the plea that they were merely expected to send report for the

information of the General Assembly. They further contended that they were expected to send reports only with regard to the areas which had not yet become self-governing in the social, economic and educational fields, and that the right to determine whether a territory was selfgoverning or not rested with them. The * David W Wainhouse, Remnants of Empire: The United Nations and the Colonialism, p.4. 180 non-colonial powers on the other hand asserted that the administering powers were expected to send reports until the territory attained political self-government. As regards the question whether a territory was a self-governing or not the decision should rest with the General Assembly. In view of the rigid stand taken by the colonial and non-colonial powers on these issues lot of tension was generated. Ultimately, the non-colonial powers succeeded in pushing through the General Assembly a number of resolutions, in the face of protests from colonial powers, asserting that the non-self-governing territories were a matter of international concern. Despite this tension the U.N. was able to secure independence for a number of colonies during the first fifteen years of its life. It laid down the conditions for the eventual independence of Libya, Eritrea and So-maliland and secured their independence. On the surrender of mandate over Palestine by Great Britain, United Nations took a decision regarding the partition of the territory and created the independent state of Israel. It also played an important role in securing independence of Indonesia from the Dutch rule. It may be noted that the independence of the colonies was not solely due to the policy and efforts of the UN, it was also largely due to the liberal policy adopted by some of the colonial powers. For example, Britain granted independence to India, Pakistan, Burma, Ceylon, Malaya etc., on her own. Similarly, France voluntarily granted independence to most of her colonies except Algeria. U.S.A. also granted independence to Philippines on her own.

Bandung Conference
The countries which gained independence from the colonial rule organised themselves and tried to exert pressure for speeding up the process of decolonisation. At the Bandung Conference of 1955 they mounted a diplomatic offensive for ending the colonialism. They declared that "colonialism in all its manifestations is an evil which should speedily be brought to an end." They argued that the subjection of people to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation." What is more significant is that they tried to cover all the colonial territories regardless of the degree of enlightenment with which the people were ruled or of their readiness for independence.

Declaration on the granting of Independence to colonial countries and people

A new era of decolonisation set in with the adoption of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to the colonial countries and people. By 1960 a number of Afro-Asian countries had again gained independence and were admitted as members to the United Nations. Their

strength had increased so much that they came to acquire virtually a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly. Fully aware of their strength 181 these Afro-Asian countries sought to take more effective steps to speed up the process of decolonisation and ensure emancipation of the rest of the colonies. After prolonged negotiations forty-three African and Asian delegates introduced a draft which was adopted after a long and momentous debate by the General Assembly on 14 December 1960. This resolution was adopted by a vote of ninety to zero with nine abstentions. The members who abstained were all important colonial powers. This resolution was in the shape of a Declaration, which has been described as Charter of Independence for dependent people. The Declaration stated: 1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation. 2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. 3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence. 4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent people shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of other national territory shall be respected. 5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in trust and non-self-governing territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence to transfer all powers to the people of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence to freedom. 6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the National unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. 7. All states shall observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of all states and respect for the sovereign rights of all people and their territorial integrity.

Follow-up Action
Ever since the adoption of the Declaration on decolonisation the General Assembly has repeatedly called upon the administering powers to implement the Declaration and to take all

necessary steps to enable the dependent peoples of the territories concerned to exercise without further delay their right to self determination and independence. It has asserted that the continuation of colonialism in all its forms and manifestations, including racism, apartheid, the exploitation by foreign and other interests of economic and human resources and the waging of the colonial wars to 182 suppress the national liberation movement of the colonial territories in Africa, is incompatible with the Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Declaration on decolonisation and poses a serious threat to the international peace and security. While recognising the legitimacy of the struggle of the colonial people by all the means at their disposal, it has urged the other states to render moral and material assistance to the people. It also impressed on the specialist agencies and international institutions to withhold assistance from South Africa and Southern Rhodesia till they renounce their policy of colonial domination and racial discrimination. Above all it condemned the practice of using mercenaries in these territories and has prohibited the nationals from serving as mercenaries. It has appealed to the colonial powers to withdraw their military bases and installations from the colonial territories and to refrain from establishing new ones. Above all the Assembly has repeatedly reaffirmed the. importance of ensuring the widest possible dissemination of information on colonialism on the efforts of the colonial people to achieve liberation and on the assistance being provided by the international community to eliminate the remaining vestiges of colonialism.

Special Committee on Decolonisation

With a view to ensure the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and people, the General Assembly set up a Special Committee on Decolonisation in 1961. While adopting the resolution for the creation of Special Committee in November 1961 the General Assembly noted with regret that with few exceptions, the provisions of the Declaration had not been carried out and in particular that armed action and repressive measures continued to be taken against dependent peoples. The Assembly called on all the concerned states to take action without further delay with a view to faithful application and implementation of the Declaration. It set up a Special Committee consisting of 17 members (it was enlarged to 24 at the end of 1962). These members were to be appointed by the President of the Assembly and were expected to examine the application of the Declaration as well as to make suggestions and recommendations on the progress and extent of its application. The Special Committee was also entrusted with the functions of three other Committees before it started working in 1962. Thereafter, it has remained the main United Nations body concerned with the matter relating to the progress towards self-determination and independence, of peoples in the dependent Territories. In 1962 the General Assembly requested the Special Committee to propose specific measures for expediting the process of decolonisation. It also requested the Committee to appraise the Security Council of developments in the Territories covered by the Declaration which posed a threat to international peace. In 1965 the General Assembly made a request to the Special Committee to

pay special attention to the small Territories and to recommend necessary steps to enable the people of 183 these Territories to exercise fully their rights to self-determination and independence. It asked the Special Committee to recommend, wherever appropriate, deadline for independence in each Territory in accordance with the wishes of the people. Thus the Special Committee continued to work actively, in co-operation with the General Assembly and the Security Council to expedite the process of decolonisation. In addition the Special Committee also sought to secure the co-operation of the administering powers. It despatched a number of visiting missions to some of the non-self-governing territories to obtain first information on the situation in these territories as well as to ascertain the wishes of the inhabitants regarding their future. Some of the territories which were visited by these missions included Aden (1967), Niue (1972), Cocos (Keeling) Islands and Gilbert the Ellice Islands (1974), Cape Verde, Montserrat and Spanish Saharanow Western Sahara (1975); the British Virgin Islands and Tokelan Islands (1976); and the Cayman Islands and the United States Virgin Islands (1977). In 1972 a Special Mission visited the liberated areas of the independent State of Guinea-Bissau. The Special Committee also held meetings at the African capitals in 1966, 1967, 1969, and 1972, and in Portugal in 1975 in connection with the examination of the colonial territories in Southern Africa. The special Committee set up a sub-committee on petitions for looking into complaints of the people from the non-self-governing territories and on the basis of these petitions made necessary recommendations to the General Assembly. The Committee in its recommendations to the Assembly impressed that the "colonial conflicts constitute a serious threat to the world peace" and "all the peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom." Probably the most outstanding accomplishment of the Special Committee was that it succeeded in getting a special resolution adopted by the General Assembly in 1970 concerning the "programme of Action for the Full Implementation of the Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and people." By virtue of this resolution, the General Assembly acknowledged the right of self-determination of the colonial people as well as the right to carry struggle against colonial powers with all the means at their disposal. For effective implementation of the objectives laid down in the Declaration it impressed on the members states to render every possible moral and material assistance to the people in their struggle. It asked the Security Council to impose sanctions against South Africa and Portugal and to widen the scope of sanctions against the illegal regime of Southern Rhodesia. In subsequent years also the General Assembly adopted a number of resolutions on the recommendation of the Special Committee in which it asserted that foreign economic, financial and other interests operating in Colonial territories constitute a major obstacle to the political independence and to the enjoyment of the natural resources of those territories by the indigenous inhabitants. It asserted that this constituted 184

a violation of the obligations under the UN Charter. It called upon the administering powers to abolish all discriminatory and unjust practice applied to the inhabitants of the territories under the administration and in all other Territories under colonial and racial regimes notably in Southern Africa. It appealed to the Colonial Powers and other concerned states to prevail upon those nationals who were operating enterprises in the colonial territories to abandon such activities which were detrimental to the interests of the inhabitants of the territories. It further requested them to stop supply of funds and other forms of assistance to colonial regimes which used such assistance for the suppression of liberation movement. Both the Special Committee and the General Assembly have felt concerned over the growing military activities of the Powers in the colonial territories which greatly impeded the implementation of the Declaration. In 1975 the Special Committee reported to the General Assembly that the colonial powers and minority racist regimes had continued to defy Assembly resolution calling for immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all military bases and installations from colonial territories. The Committee expressed the view that such activities were aimed at subjugating the colonial peoples and repressing their liberation movement. It considered that strategic military considerations were an important factor in prolonging the colonial rule in many parts of the world, particularly in smaller territories. According, in 1976 and 1977 the General Assembly renewed its call to the Colonial Powers to withdraw immediately and unconditionally their bases and installations from colonial territories and to refrain from establishing new ones. In 1978 the UN General Assembly adopted a declaration of Namibia containing programme of action in support of self-determination and national independence for Namibia. The Declaration stressed the commitment to end South Africa's illegal occupation and right of self-determination and independence for the Namibian people. It appealed to the member states to render increased and sustain support and assistance to SWAPO and to resist from all kinds of direct and indirect co-operation or collaboration with South Africa. In April 1979 the Special Committee of 24 on Decolonisation met in Yugoslavia and adopted a Final Document on the Decolonisation of Zimbabwe and Namibia, in which it called for extended sanctions against Southern Rhodesia and mandatory sanctions against South Africa. It also condemned the "Wanton and increasing resort to violence and intimidation against the African peoples under the domination and their cynical defiance of United Nations in its efforts to bring about the genuine and complete decolonisation of Southern Rhodesia and Namibia. In subsequent years also the General Assembly continued to adopt resolutions condemning colonialism and reiterate its determination to eliminate colonialism. The General Assembly at its Thirty-Ninth Session held in 1984-85 185

adopted a series of resolutions on decolonisation. These resolutions were largely identical to resolutions approved during the earlier sessions, and reiterated Assembly's condemnation of activities of foreign economic and other interests which are impeding the implementation of the Declaration on Granting of Independence of Colonial Countries and Peoples. It called for full implementation of the 1960 Declaration by the specialised agencies and international institutions of the U.N. System. It deplored 'military activities and arrangements by colonial powers (i.e. South Africa) in territories under their administration which might be impeding implementation of the 1960 Declaration. The Assembly also adopted a series of resolutions reaffirming " the inalienable right to selfdetermination and independence of the peoples U.S Pacific dependencies of American Somoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands in Caribbean; and the British dependencies of Bermuda, British Virginia Islands, the Cayman Islands, all in the Caribbean. The Assembly also adopted a similar resolution in respect of the U.K. dependency of Anguilla, consideration of which had been deferred at its Thirty-Eighth session. Through another resolution the U.N. Assembly adopted an extensive programme of activities for 1985 to mark the 25th Anniversary of the adoption of the 1960 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and People. Some time back the UN General Assembly adopted a resolutions forwarded by the Non-Aligned Movement declaring 1990-2000 as the International decade for the Eradication of Colonialism. The resolution urged the UN Secretary General to submit a report to the 44th session of the General Assembly leading to the adoption of an action plan aimed at ushering in the 21st century a world free from colonialism. The above discussion shows that the United Nations has made significant contribution towards the process of decolonisation by creating a climate of opinion which provided a new impetus to the decolonisation movement. This it has done merely by being a world forum where claims, demands and protests inevitably have had a hearing, and by providing organised channels for the making of resolutions and decisions bearing the stamp of the world organisations. Through the Trusteeship Council and the subsidiary organs of the General Assembly, the United Nations has spurred the colonial powers to improve the lot of their dependent peoples. The widespread concern for their welfare has helped to arouse and has in turn served as a form of pressure on the imperial powers to speed up the process of decolonisation."* According to Jacobson the most important contribution of the United Nations has been that it prevented the use of the violence in the settlement of colonial issues. He says "On balance, the colonial revolution has probably been more peaceful because of United Nations involvement. A case can be made to the effect that the United Nations has contributed * David W Wainhouse, op. cit., p.4. 186 to International stability through its activities at the time of the accession of dependent territories of self-government or independence."*

It is evident from the above discussions that the United Nations (including its various agencies and committees) has played a commendable role in the process of decolonisation. As one writer has observed it has acted as a catalyst in the process of decolonisation. It has provided impetus, cohesion and direction to the forces of anti-colonialism. Even Perez de Cuellar, the Secretary General of United Nations, greatly lauded the achievements of the United Nations in the field of decolonisation. He told the Special Committee of Decolonisation. The achievements of the United Nations in the historic process of decolonisation are among the origination's most extraordinary achievement." However he warned that "our satisfaction with those achievements should not halt or diminish our efforts. On the contrary we must focus our efforts on what remains to be done. There are many complex and difficult problems that must still be solved. It is important to maintain the impetus achieved in the past two decades until we have achieved the final goal of complete decolonisation."

Expansion of International Community

As a result of the process of decolonisation, large number of territories which were formerly under the control of various colonial powers have since gained independence and the size of the international community has greatly expanded. This is evident from the fact that whereas UNO in 1945 consisted of only 51 members, its membership has arisen to 187 in 1999. We can form an idea about the steady growth of the international community from the following Table: 187 Growth of Membership of UNO between 1945-1999 Years Number of Members 1945 51 1946 55 1947 57 1948 58 1949 59 1950 60 1955 76 1956 80 1957 82 1958 83 1960 100 1961 104 1962 110 1963 112 1964 115 1965 118 1966 122

1967 1968 1970 1971 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1991 1992 1993 1994 1999

123 126 127 132 132 138 144 147 149 151 152 154 157 158 159 159 159 159 159 159 166 175 183 185 187*

* Harold K. Jacobson, The United Nations and Colonialism: A Tentative Appraisal m International Organisation, Vol. XVI No. 1, Winter 1962, p. 55. The emergence of a large number of new countries and their entry into the UNO has exercised profound influence on the international relations which has been discussed in one of the subsequent Chapters. * The two members admitted in 1999 are Pacific Island Nations of Kiribati and Nauru. 188

15 Neo-Colonialism and Racialism

"The essence of neo-colonialism is that the state which is subject to it is, in theory independent and has all the outward trappings of international sovereignty. In reality its economic system and thus its political policy is directed from outside." Kwame Nkrumah A general impression prevails among the scholars that though the classical colonialism has faded out, it has made its appearance in a new guise which is described by them as 'neo-colonialism'. In the post World War II period though a number of colonies were able to attain independence and were even admitted as sovereign members to the world body, yet they could not attain economic independence. This state of condition is often given the name of neo-colonialism. According to Kwame Nkrumah, The essence of neo-colonialism is that the state which is subject to it is, in theory independent and has all the outward trappings of international sovereignty. In reality its economic system and thus its political policy is directed from outside."* Similarly another scholar has described neo-colonialism as "the survival of colonial system in spite of formal recognition of political independence in emerging countries which became victims of indirect and subtle form of domination by political, economic, social, military and technological forces." Under neo-colonialism, the former colonies are dependent on colonial powers through capital investments, loans, aid, unequal exchange and finances which are directly controlled by the colonial powers. However, Prof. Schwarzenberger says that "the term neocolonialism as applied to present-day relations of dependence between technologically advanced countries and ex-colonies is a misnomer. It is a post-1945 version of imperialism and might well be described as neo-imperialism." He asserts that "the term neo-colonialism would better be reserved for another type of colonialism rampant in a good many of the new African and Asian states: the direct control exercised over groups of different nationality to whom they deny the benefits of the principle of national self-determination. Prof. Palmer and Perkins describe 'neocolonialism * Kwame Nkrumah, Neo-Colonialismthe Last Stage of Imperialism, p.9. 189 as "a new and more insidious form of imperialism, widely prevalent and particularly pernicious and dangerous." Generally in neo-colonialism the power over the dependent country is exercised by the former imperial power which ruled over it. But this is not absolute principle. Some other imperial power can also establish its control over the neo-colonial territory. For example in Vietnam though France happened to be the former imperial power, but neo-coloniai control passed into the hands of the United States. It is also possible that the control may be exercised by a consortium of financial interests. For example, a number of international financial concerns exercised control over Congo and it was not possible to identify them with any particular state. Prof. Organski has noted three types of colonialismpolitical, economic dependencies and satellites. The first type of colonialism is symbolic of the traditional colonialism in which direct

control was established by a foreign country over a territory and its inhabitants were denied full political rights . The other two forms of colonialism, viz., economic dependencies and satellites are the examples of neo-colonialism. It shall be desirable to know about these forms of neo-colonialism in some details before analysing the reasons for the growth of neo-colonialism.

Economic Dependencies
A country may be politically independent and sovereign, but economically dependent on some other nation which has invested capital and established economic enterprises in the country. The foreign power exercises complete control over the industry, mines, commercial houses, banking institutions etc. through its nationals. On account of their hold on the economic life of the society they are able to have effective voice in the government also.

Satellites
A country which is formally independent but controlled by some foreign power both politically and economically is regarded as a satellite of that country. It may be noted that the control exercised by a foreign country over a satellite state is more extensive than the one exercised by a foreign country over economic dependencies. Most of the states of Eastern Europe are satellites of Soviet Union and their political and economic policies are completely dominated by the Soviet Union.

Why neo-colonialism?
The main reasons which are responsible for development of neo-colonialism in the post World War II period are as follows: First, in the post World War II period most of the Imperial Powers adopted the goal of welfare state and wanted finances for the various welfare projects. They could have easily raised this money from the colonies, but in the changed contest it was not possible to maintain or revive the 190 cold colonial-system because this would have provoked colonial resentment and even resulted in wars. Therefore, these powers instituted the system of neo-colonialism. The most common method which they adopted for this purpose was to break up "the former large united colonial territories into a number of small non-viable states", which were incapable of independent development and had per force to rely upon former colonial powers for economic development, defence as well as internal security. The developed countries provided manufactured goods to the neo-colonial countries at prices of their choice and in return procure their primary products at comparatively cheap prices. In view of their weak financial position these countries could not compel the developed countries to pay

them fair price for their primary products. Once these countries fell in the net of the colonial powers, it was not possible for them to get out of it, because the colonial powers could easily manipulate revolts against the existing government and substitute it by a subservient government. The cold war which started between the two superpowers in the post-World War II period also made it difficult for the former colonial territories to assert themselves and behave in an independent manner. These two super powers came to dominate and influence the international policies to such as extent that it was not possible for these small and newly born countries to act independently. However, a change took place in the attitude of the colonial powers because they disclaimed all intentions of being a colonial power and described these territories under their control as their satellites.

Methods of Neo-Colonialism
Neo-colonialism appeared in different shapes, and adopted different methods. It shall be desirable to know about these variants of neo-colonialism in some details. One extreme form of neo-colonialism was that the troops of the imperial power garrisoned the territory of the neocolonial state and controlled its government. The territories did not enjoy any political freedom. In most of such cases the social, economic and educational activities of the people, were subordinated to the interests of the administering or ruling state. The most common method of control adopted by the neo-colonial powers was through economic or monetary means. As most of these territories were backward and did not possess sufficient finances, they were forced to seek financial as well as technical assistance from more advanced states. They are obliged to seek investments from foreign powers. It has been estimated that eight leading capitalist countries-UK, USA, Federal Republic of Germany, Switzerland, Japan, France, Canada and Netherlands had made over 90% of the total direct private investment in the newly independent countries. As a result of this enormous investment they not only made huge profits but also exploited their natural and manpower resources. In fact most of the capital made available to the 191 developing countries is used for import of equipment, cost of services, foreign specialists, insurance, payment of interest etc., and only a small fraction of 15 to 20 per cent of the capital remains in the country. Another method for exploitation of the newly independent countries is through aid. While extending aid the donor country imposed a number of conditions such as agreement for economic co-operation, right to muddle in internal finances, lowering of trade barriers in favour of the donor country's goods and right to determine how the funds are to be used, to force the recipient to set up counter funds to buy goods from the donor nation etc. Thus they were able to establish their control over these territories and convert them into their economic dependencies. This arrangement was given the name of Economic Imperialism in so far it provided controlling power to the donor country. Sometimes the neo-colonial powers extended 'multilateral aid' to

these territories through international agencies like the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Finances Corporation and International Development Association etc. Even these agencies forced the borrowers to submit to various offensive conditions such as supplying information about their economies, submitting their policy and plans to review by the World Bank and accepting agency supervision of their use of loans etc. In short, it can be said that the benefits of aid to the recipient country have been only marginal and in the long run aid has promoted the interests of the donor by perpetuating the dependence of the recipient countries on such aid. It may be further noted that the foreign capital which is made available under neo-colonialism to the less developed countries is not meant so much for the development of the less developed areas, as for the promotion of the interests of the developed countries. This is evident from the fact that over period of time the newly independent countries have incurred heavy foreign debts which are estimated to have exceeded 1000,000 million dollars in 1986. The debt problem arose due to exceptionally high rates of interests which often obliged the newly liberated countries to seek fresh loans and credits to repay their debts. It has been estimated that in 1981 over 92% of the loans taken by the newly liberated countries were spent to pay off the debts. This trend has persisted in the subsequent years too. On account of this heavy debt burden there has been decline in the economic growth of these countries. The debt problem deserves serious consideration. Unless some feasible solution is fount the debt of the newly independent countries would double by 1995 creating serious social, economic and political problem. The neo-colonial powers resorted to another method of exploitation through the multi-national corporations. The Multi-national Corporations were formed by the investors of different countries in the shape of a Joint Stock Company with a view to undertake enterprise in the developed as well as developing countries. In fact the real motive of the Multinational 192 Corporations is profit making and global domination. In the recent years the Multinationals have become so powerful that their combined total sale is more than the GNP of every country except USA and USSR. Usually their profits exceed their investments. Naturally these Multinationals exercise profound influence on the policy of the government and do not hesitate to intervene militarily. These corporations also undermine the efforts of developing countries to utilise indigenous technology and thus perpetuate their backwardness. The presence of these Multinationals has resulted in an indirect domination of the economies, of the countries where they operate. They were not only able to influence the economic structure of such territories but also exert sufficient influence on the political and economic policies of these countries. The advanced countries also try to perpetuate their exploitation of the newly independent countries by making them dependent on the imperial powers for technology. While making available their technology to the backward and dependent countries they try to control their economies and exploit them fully. In fact while providing technology the advanced countries try to ensure that these countries remain dependent on them for technology for as long as possible.

The neo-colonial powers also make effective use of the instrument of foreign trade for the exploitation of newly independent states. Generally they sell their machines, equipments and technology at high rate and buy goods from developing countries at the lowest price. This is evident from the fact that while the prices of goods imported by the newly independent countries have consistently risen, the prices of their traditional export goods have steadily declined. This fact was also acknowledged by the UN Secretary General (Perez de Cuellar) in his report of 1985. He observed that the commodity prices were in real terms lower than had been since the 1930's and were still declining resulting in further aggravation of the international debt situation for the developing countries. Another notable feature of the foreign trade policy of the neocolonial powers is that they set limits to the import quotas and quantity for traditional export goods from developing countries. Further they adopted discriminatory protectionist policies with regard to exports from developing countries which operates against the interests of developing countries. The colonial powers also try to strengthen their hold over free countries through military methods. They try to bring to power a government which is favourably disposed towards them and try to pull down governments which are not willing to tolerate their diktat. They also try to acquire and built military bases in the countries to maintain their hold over the territory. Above all they also interfere in the internal matters of the states both through overt and covert methods for the protection of their interests.

How far Neo-Colonialism is better than Colonialism

It is generally held that neo-colonialism is better than the old colonialism 193 in so far as the dominant power enjoys only indirect control and has to treat the people of the exploited territories with respect and keep them satisfied. The colonial powers are mainly concerned with safeguarding their own interests without doing any harm to the national interest of the dependent territories. However, if we delve deep into the matter we will find that there are many inherent defects in the neo-colonialism. According to Nkrumah "Neo-colonialism is the worst form of imperialism because it operates on the twin principles of power without responsibility" and "exploitation without redress." Under the old type of colonialism the imperial power was accountable for its actions, at least to the people of its own country, who acted as a check on its inhuman and despotic actions. This is not possible under neo-colonialism. Neo-colonialism greatly retards the social and economic development of the local people. Since the rulers of the neo-colonial states are dependent for their existence not on the people of their territory but on the new colonist masters, they neglect the interest of the people. This attitude also springs from the fact that they realise that the spread of education and advancement of the people in other spheres can make the people challenge the colonial pattern of commerce and industry, which the rulers want to preserve. The financial aid and co-operation in the social and cultural spheres offered by the NeoColonialist Powers also operates against the interest of the recipient country. The financial aid is

nothing but a revolving credit, paid by the neo-colonial master, passing through the neo-colonial states and returning to the neo-colonial master in the form of increased profits. While granting aid the vested interests of the neo-colonial master country generally object to all attempts at raising the prices of the raw materials to be obtained from the 'neo-colonist territories'. They also oppose the establishment of those manufacturing industries which can compete directly or indirectly with their exports to the territory. In short, under neo-colonialism the foreign capital is used for the exploitation rather than the development of the less developed areas. This inevitably increases the gap between the rich and the poor countries of the world. Similarly, the friendly cooperation is offered in education, cultural and social spheres with a view to subvert the desirable patterns of indigenous progress to the imperialist objectives of the financial monopolists. The rise of neo-colonialsm has given rise to rivalry between great Powers and posed a threat to the world peace. Even though a neo-colonist state may be very small and weak, its independent status gives it the freedom to change the neo-colonist master. As a result the major powers try to woo it and the territory becomes the target of cold war, and a serious threat to world peace. The above discussion makes it amply dear that neo-colonialism is worse than the old colonialism in so far it provides to the neo-colonial powers all the benefits which they enjoyed under the old system without entrusting them with any responsibility. The African and Asian countries 194 which have fallen prey to this type of colonialism are ever eager to free themselves from the clutches of neo-colonial powers. No doubt, the task is quite arduous one but it can certainly be accomplished if these countries develop a sense of unity and extend full support to the anticolonial struggle against the imperialist powers. It is also essential that they must keep off from the two blocs and pursue a policy of non-alignment. Above all it is very important that they should develop ideological clarity among the anti-imperialist, anti-colonist, proliberation masses of the Afro-Asian continents because ultimately it is the people alone who make, maintain or break a system.

RACIALISM
The concept of 'racialism' which has earned notoriety with reference to the policy of discrimination being pursued in various parts of the world (specially South Africa) in numerous spheressocial, economic, political, civil and culturalis primarily based on the colour of the skin and the race. According to Ronald Segal the word 'race' has commonly come to mean a division of mankind by colour, just as 'racism' has increasingly come to mean the hostility that one man feels for another because of his colour alone. According to Ruth Benedict "Racism is the new Calvinism which asserts that one group has the stigma of superiority and the other has those of inferiority." According to a booklet issued by the U.N. Commission on Civil Rights, 'racism' implies "any attitude, action or institutional structure which subordinates a person because of his or her colour." But probably the most comprehensive and acceptable definition of Racialism has been provided by the General Assembly in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. It defines

Racialism thus: "Racial discrimination shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercises, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life." It further asserts that "Special measures taken for the purpose of securing adequate advancement of certain racial or ethnic groups or individuals requiring such protection as may be necessary in order to ensure such groups or individuals equal enjoyment or exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms shall not be deemed racial discrimination, provided however that such measure do not, as a consequence, lead to the maintenance of separate rights for different racial groups and that they shall not be continued after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved." The concept of racialism is not a modern innovation and has been in vogue since earliest times. For example, Aristotle in the fifth century B.C. asserted that the people living in northern Europe were unfit to exercise power because they lacked intelligence, while the Greeks being 195 geographically well-suited were fitted to rule. In the medieval period also scholars expressed faith in racial theory and justified the enslavement of the indigenous Indians of the new world, chiefly on the ground that they belonged to different race. Even the assertion of the White races during the colonial rule that they were destined by God to civilize the heathens of Africa was essentially based on race and held the Africans as inferior on the ground that they belonged to different race. In the nineteenth century the French writer Joseph Arthur, Count de Gobineau, advocated racial theories and tried to show the superiority of the white races over other races. He said, "The black peoples of the earth were passionate, lyrical and artistic in temperament; the yellow man represented utility, order and mediocrity, while the white man was the expression of reason and honour." In other countries of Europe also scholars tried to demonstrate the superiority of Teuton or Aryan races. Their views were particularly popular in Germany and U.S.A. As a result the "prejudices based upon race...at times became fixed as a part of culture, it was embodied in the folklore, developed in literature and built into institutions and frequently it persisted even after the circumstances had changed."

Forms of Racial Discrimination

Racial discrimination can assume various forms. In the political sphere racial discrimination involves the domination of one group over another on the basis of race, colour, descent or ethnic basis. In the economic sphere racial discrimination is employed as a means for maintaining cheap and constant labour force at the expense of human rights and fundamental freedoms of working classes. In the social sphere racial discrimination means that the non-dominant group suffers discrimination in housing, public accommodation, health and hospital services, social security and insurance etc. Racial discrimination in the cultural sphere is indeed a serious matter and assumes the form of 'cultural genocide' committed with a view to destroy a particular cultural or racial group. Less stringent forms of discrimination in cultural sphere can be

curtailment of the use of schools, libraries, museums, places of worship cultural institutions etc. by a particular group. Sociologists and anthropologists have attributed racial discrimination of a number of sociocultural factors such as the increased urbanisation and mechanisation; the upward mobility of certain groups; increased emphasis on competence and training; the scarcity of jobs and competition for these scarce jobs; the steadily rising population and its effect on employment and housing; inability to develop internal standards resulting in tendency to depend inordinately on others; and changes in the role of the family with concomitant changes in standards and morality.

Role of Colonialism in Promotion of Racialism

Colonialism also play an important role in the development of racial 196 prejudices. Though initially colonialism started as a means of providing European nations with cheap sources of material and captive market for goods, but later on the colonial powers, in order to maintain their oppressive rule over the colonial people asserted the superiority of their cultures. They put forth the theory of 'civilizing mission' based on the principle of superiority of European culture and sought to replace the local culture by the western culture in the interest of the native people on the plea that they were backward and hence unable to take care of themselves. They described -the natives as "the white man's burden." The colonial powers assumed full responsibility for the economic and political life of the country, monopolising professional, large-scale commercial and administrative activities, exploiting the agricultural and other sources of land and remaining socially aloof, In order to maintain or increase these gains, the Colonists advocated the idea that the others were inferior and hence less deserving of life's benefits. Thus Colonialism greatly contributed to race prejudices and racial discrimination.

Racialism and Democracy

The principle of racialism is against the universally proclaimed democratic principle that "all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." Policy of racialism inevitably leads to political, economic, social and cultural inequalities among human beings. What is really serious is that this differentiation between men is made not on the basis of the qualities of the individualmental or physical or his capacities or merits, but on the basis of their race, colour, descent and national or ethnic origin. As one scholar has observed 'Racial discrimination is the very negation of the principle of equality, and therefore an affront to human dignity. It is a negation also of the social nature of man, who can reach his fullest development only through interaction with his fellows.

Eradication of Racialism
As racialism is contradictory to the principles of humanism and democracy, efforts have been made both at the national as well as the international level to do away with it. The UN Charter affirmed it "faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person"

and demonstrated deep and abiding concern for the various problems relating to the question of race, racism and racial discrimination. On 19th November 1946 the General Assembly adopted a resolution asserting that "it is the highest interests of humanity to put an immediate end to religious and so-called racial persecution and discrimination" and called on ''the governments and responsible authorities to conform both to the letter and to the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations and to take the most prompt and energetic step to that end." In view of the growing racial prejudices in various countries on 7th December 1962 the General Assembly adopted a resolution requesting the Economic and Social Council to ask the Commission on Human 197 Rights to prepare (a) a draft declaration on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination and (b) a draft international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. In 1963 the General Assembly adopted U.N. Declaration on Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination, which affirmed that discrimination between human beings on grounds of colour, race, ethnic origin etc. is an offence of human dignity, denial of Charter principles and violation of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Declaration was given practical shape and resulted in the adoption of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination by the General Assembly on 21 December 1965. This Convention laid down certain norms for the guidance of the states to eradicate racial discrimination. The convention defined racial discrimination as "any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other help of public life." As regards the measures for the eradication of racial discrimination, the Convention recommended to the states to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating racial discrimination in all forms and promoting understanding among all races. For the attainment of these objectives, the states were expected to undertake: (a) not to engage in any act or practice of racial discrimination against persons, groups of person or institutions; (b) not to sponsor, defend or support racial discrimination by any person or organisation; (c) to take effective measures to review and to amend, rescind or nullify the laws and regulations which have the effect of creating or perpetuating racial discrimination wherever it exists; (d) to prohibit and bring to an end racial discrimination by any persons, groups or organisation; and

(e) to encourage integrationist, multi-racial organisations and movements and other means of eliminating barriers between races and to discourage anything which tends to strengthen division. The states undertook to prevent, prohibit and eradicate all practices of racial segregation and apartheid in territories under their jurisdiction. They also agreed to condemn all propaganda and organisations based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin. Again, the states undertook to assure to every one within their jurisdiction effective protection and remedies through competent national tribunals and other state institutions against any act of racial discrimination, violative of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Finally, the states understood to take immediate and effective measures, particularly in the field of teaching, education, .culture and 198 information with a view to combating prejudices which lead to racial discrimination and to promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among nations and racial or ethnical groups. The Convention also suggested the establishment of a Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and an ad hoc Conciliation Commission for the implementation of the programme outlined in the Convention. The Committee was to consider the reports of legislative, judicial, administrative and other measures adopted by the states parties to the Convention and to make suggestions and general recommendations. The ad hoc Conciliation Commission was to provide its good offices to the States parties in disputes regarding application of the Convention with a view to find an amicable solution on the basis of respect for the Convention. Most of the states acceded to this Convention and have adopted variety of measures to prevent and eliminate racial discrimination. Some of the states have even incorporated certain provisions. Thereafter also a number of Conventions were adopted which laid emphasis on the elimination of Racial Discrimination. Some of the prominent ones include the Declaration and the International Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination adopted at Tehran in May 1968; General Assembly Resolution of 1969 entitled Programme for Observance in 1971 of the International Year for Action of Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination; the General Assembly Resolution of 2 November 1973 which designated the ten-year period from 10 December 1973 onwards as the decade for Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination and called upon all states to work towards the goal. In November 1973 the General Assembly adopted the International Convention on Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. This Convention, which came into force on 18 July 1976, provided for international responsibility for the crime of apartheid and asserted that individual members of organisations and institutions and representatives of states shall be held responsible for the same. The same year the General Assembly decided to designate the 10-year

period beginning from 10 December 1973 as the Decade for Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination and called upon all states to work towards the goal. In 1974 the General Assembly recommended the exclusion of South Africa from all international organisations and conferences held under UN auspices so long it continued its policies of apartheid. In June 1976, the Security Council strongly condemned South Africa for shooting the demonstrators in Soweto. Both General Assembly and Security Council called on South African government to grant unconditional release of all persons imprisoned for having opposed apartheid. On 4 November 1976, the Security Council imposed a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa and called upon states to refrain from any cooperation with South Africa. It also set up a committee to examine implementation of mandatory arms embargo against South Africa. 199 In December 1977 the General Assembly adopted a declaration against apartheid in sports and called on states to take appropriate action to cease sporting contracts with any country practising apartheid, and to exclude or expel any such country from international and regional sports bodies. In 1978, a world conference was held at Geneva which adopted a programme of action for elimination of discrimination. In 1983 the Second World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination was held at Geneva. It found that in spite of efforts of the international community during the decade, racism, racial discrimination and apartheid continue unabated and have shown no sign of diminishing. It suggested a programme of action. The programme was approved by the General Assembly on 22 November 1983. The programme laid emphasis on education, teaching and training, dissemination of information, and role of mass media in combating racism and racial discrimination, action by non-governmental organisations and international co-operation. It may be noted that most of the resolutions adopted and decisions taken by various organs of UN condemned racial discrimination in all forms and tried to arouse world public opinion against racism and racial discrimination. They impressed on the government to rescind discriminatory laws which perpetuated racial discrimination and promised more support to the people struggling for the realisation of right of self-determination and elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. However despite these efforts racial policies continued to be followed in South Africa and there were growing incidents of repression. Even the UN Secretary General (Perez de Cuellar) observed in his report to the General Assembly "I need hardly reiterate my strongly held views on the abhorrent system of apartheid and the massive human tragedy which has resulted from it. I hope that even at this very late hour, steps can be taken and contacts established which may avert the worst."

The international community as well as the individual states stepped up efforts to bring about changes in the attitudes, habits, customs and practices. The non-government organisations in various states also played an important role in creating public opinion for ending racial discrimination. It was primarily due to the efforts of these non-governmental organisations that the people of western countries compelled their governments to adopt restrictive measures against Pretoria government in 1985. In view of growing public pressure even Reagan administration in USA was forced to order limited economic sanctions against South Africa. Despite these pressures the Government of South Africa continued to exclude the blacks, who formed 73 percent of the population in South Africa, from elections and deny them even basic human rights. This greatly agitated the non-aligned nations and they adopted a resolution urging the UN Assembly to adopt a resolution declaring 1990-2000 as International Decade for the Eradication of colonialism. They requested 200 the Secretary-General to submit a report to the 44th session of the General Assembly leading to the adoption of an action plan aimed at ushering in the 21st century a world free from colonialism. In view of the mounting pressure from international community, the rulers of South Africa were forced to take certain steps for the liquidation of Apartheid. On the one hand they released several political prisoners like Nelson Mandela and Ahmad Kathrada, who had been under detention for long, and lifted ban on organisation like ANC, PAC, SACP etc., and on the other hand they repealed several Apartheid laws. Some of the important Apartheid laws repealed by the South African Government in 1991 include the Group Areas Act which segregated residential areas; the Land Act which reserved 87 percent of the country for five million whites; and Population Registration Act which defined four main raced groups of South Africa and determined where they could live, get education, work, marry and even be buried. Further, negotiations were started with the African leaders for transfer of power from the minority white regime to majority rule, and the process of democratisation was set in motion. However, the internal bickering amongst the various sections of Africans greatly hampered the process. Despite this, President de Klerk ordered a referendum in March 1992 and the White South Africans voted for a 'liberal' 'one person one vote' constitution. As a result of non-racial elections held in South Africa in April 1994, Nelson Mandela of ANC was elected as the first black President of South Africa, which marked the end of white minority rule after 342 years. This formally put an end to apartheid. 201

16 Asian-African Resurgence
"When the history of the twentieth century is written, it will not be World War I or World War II, the discovery of nuclear energy, or putting men into orbit, or even an exploration of the moon that is to be considered as the great event of the century. The outstanding event of this century

will be that two-thirds of the world's people awakened to the fact that a better life was possible for them. If we are able in this century to abolish, as far as is now technically practicable, poverty, illiteracy and chronic ill-health from the face of the world, the twentieth century, in which we have all lived will go down as the great century of all time." Hoffman

Emergence of Asia and Africa

One of the most outstanding developments in the post World War II period has been the emergence of the Asian and African people from the prison cells of the colonial rule and the obscurity imposed by foreign domination. The significance of this development will become clear if we remember that the majority of the people of these continents were under foreign domination before World War II. These two continents felt the stirrings of nationalism only in the beginning of the twentieth century, specially after the Japanese victory over Russia in 190405. This victory was interpreted as a symbol of the rise of east. But the nationalist struggle in these countries gained momentum chiefly after World War I. In the inter-war period some of the Afro-Asian countries carried on struggle for independence but could not achieve much success. It was only after the Second World War that a number of Asian and African countries gained Independence. The progress was particularly remarkable during the decade 1950 and 1960. Commenting on the significance of the freedom of Asian and African countries, Prof. Barraclough says "Never before in the whole of human history had so revolutionary a reversal occurred with such rapidity. The change in the position of the peoples of Asia and Africa and in their relations with Europe was the surest sign of the advent of a new era." Most of the countries of Asia and Africa at the time of their independence 202 were suffering from chronic problems of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy and disease. To a large extent these problems were mainly the result of their long exploitation by the colonial powers who directed their policies with the sole objective of making maximum profits out of trade with these colonies. They took away all the important raw materials and dumped manufactured goods, which greatly retarded the economic and social progress of these colonies. Above all, this greatly demoralised the people of these countries and resulted in loss of selfconfidence and self-reliance. Though the states of Asia and Africa differed from each other, yet they possessed some common features. For example, all of them had a history of western domination of varying duration and degree of severity. All of them were underdeveloped and characterized by low standards of living, widespread illiteracy, mass disease etc. Their economies were completely dependent on the production of agricultural commodities and raw materials. Most of the inhabitants of these countries even lacked the basic amenities of life. In short, they were "ill-fed, ill-housed, illiterate and ill."

The Afro-Asian countries did not possess any factories, roads, railways and means of communication. People had a high rate of illiteracy and there were hardly any facilities for higher education and learning in these areas. A semblance of banking service did exist in some of the countries which were created by the colonial powers to promote their own trade interests. As these countries did not have any industries, their economies were purely agricultural. These were geared to meet the demands of the colonial power and produced the raw materials and staple goods which were required by the imperialist power. In short, these countries were highly backward in the economic as well as social field. The political freedom in these countries paved the way for two other revolutions viz., mastery of science and technology for economic growth and effort to bring about social transformation of their societies. The people of Asia and Africa felt that their political freedom shall be incomplete without progress in the social and the economic sphere. Therefore, most of these countries soon after their liberation, embarked upon the path of economic reconstruction to effect speedy development of their economies. In this task they were assisted by UN and other powers like U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. They were given liberal aid for development plans so that they may be able to transform their economies at a rapid speed. As the leaders of these countries were keen to raise the living standards of their people at the earliest, they accepted aid from all the sources without being dogmatic. Majority of the countries like India, Burma, Ceylon, Guinea, Mali, Congo, Tanzania, U.A.R. etc. prepared their economic plans along socialistic lines, while others preferred to follow the capitalist methods. It may be noted that as these countries did not possess sufficient capital to undertake productive economic projects they had to largely depend on foreign capital and assistance. As the private capitalists were reluctant to 203 invest in these countries due to uncertain conditions, the capital came chiefly through aid from the governments and international bodies.

Impact of Afro-Asian Resurgence on International Relations

The Afro-Asian countries, whose number has consistently grown since World War II, have exerted great influence on the international relations which can be studied under the following heads: 1. Change in the Nature of International Relations: In the first instance the emergence of large number of Afro-Asian countries on the arena of world politics has effected a great change in the character and nature of international politics. Till the end of Second World War the study of international relations mainly centered around the activities of the European powers which decided all the questions of war and peace in the world. In other words the entire politics centered around the western states. With the emergence of the new countries of Asia and Africa, the small countries have come to exercise profound influence on the course of international relations. In short, international relations are no more confined to European nations but have assumed much wider character.

2. It gave a setback to Imperialism and Racialism: The Afro-Asian resurgence gave a serious setback to imperialism and racialism. As the countries of Asia and Africa had been victims of imperialism and racialism during the colonial rule, after their independence they became strong critics of the same and were determined to eliminate the same from earth's surface. Their independence by itself provided an impetus to the nationalist movements in different parts of the world. Further the Afro-Asian countries extended open and full support to the people under colonial domination and thus expedited the process of decolonisation. In the elimination of racialism Afro-Asian countries played a significant role. Through their consistent efforts inside the UN, as well as outside, they succeeded in demolishing the contention of the imperialist powers that racialism was essentially a domestic problem. They fully utilised the forum of the United Nations, the General Assembly in particular, to impress on the international community that racialism was an international problem which posed a serious threat to the international peace. It was mainly due to the efforts of the Afro-Asian group in the United Nations that the racialism in South Africa and Rhodesia etc. was debated and the powers practising racialism were censored. In short, the Afro-Asian countries have been the chief force behind the struggle against imperialism and racialism. It was chiefly due to pressure exerted by the Afro-Asian countries that imperialism and racialism have been eliminated. 3. Gave serious setback to Colonial System: The emergence of Afro-Asian countries has given a serious blow to the colonial system. Over 100 states have attained independence since 1945 and majority of them are in Asia and Africa. After their independence these countries extended, full support to the nationalist movements elsewhere and succeeded, to a large degree, in getting them free from the colonial yoke. Even at present 204 these states are fully backing the struggle of the people of Namibia against South Africa. In short, the Afro-Asian countries have exerted great influence on the imperialist powers to stage a retreat. The Afro-Asian countries have also taken a lead in organising struggle against neo-colonialism. It is mainly due to the efforts of Afro-Asian countries that the renunciation of unequal treaties and agreements under which the imperialist powers enjoyed various kinds of privileges, the dismantling of the imperialist bases and withdrawal of foreign troops etc. from the neo-colonial countries had been made possible. In fact the Afro-Asian countries are determined to defend their sovereign rights against the former colonial powers in particular and the imperialist world in general. In the economic sphere also the Afro-Asian countries have made a determined bid to escape exploitation at the hands of the imperialist powers and insisted on establishing economic relations in terms of equality. In most of the former colonial countries the foreign property has been nationalised and determined bid has been made to acquire full control over the natural resources of the country. This has gone a long way in ending the neo-colonial exploitation. 4. Democratisation of International Relations: With the emergence of Afro-Asian countries a change has also taken place in the manner of conduct of foreign policy, which in turn has

effected the nature of international relations. Till the close of the Second World War the major foreign policy issues were decided by a small elitist group of rulers. But after the emergence of new states people began to play an important role in the formulation of foreign policy and international relations have assumed a democratic character. No ruler, howsoever powerful he may be, can afford to go against the wishes of the people and the well cherished ideals of peace, justice, freedom, international organisation etc. This point is fully proved by the point that even President Reagan of United States who had openly asserted that he would not impose economic sanctions against South African Government, was obliged to apply these sanctions due to pressure of public opinion. 5. Helped in Strengthening World Peace: The Afro-Asian countries have rendered great service to the cause of world peace by adopting the path of non-alignment and keeping off from the power blocs. As most of the Afro-Asian countries were economically backward they wanted to devote their full energy to quicker development of their countries. This naturally demanded that they should keep out of the mad race for armaments and the cold war prevailing in the post World War II period. Further, as they needed financial assistance for their development, it was not desirable on their part to align themselves with one side or the other. On the other hand they wanted to get the best of assistance from both the groups. The emergence of a strong non-aligned group went a long way in reducing tensions between the two superpowers and reducing the gravity of cold war. The best justification for keeping off from power blocs was provided by Pandit Nehru of India thus: "If we are camp followers 205 of Russia or America or any other country of Europe, it is, if I may say so, not very creditable to our dignity, our new independence, our new freedom, our new spirit and new self-reliance." The Afro-Asian countries contributed to world peace not only by keeping out of the two power blocs but also by avoiding war if possible and keeping out of all wars except those undertaken in self-defence; by opposing military pacts because these led to insecurity; and through collective action and in right direction. They also contributed towards world peace by working for the elimination of racial discrimination. 6. Prominent Role at the UN: The Afro-Asian countries, due to their numerical strength, have been able to play a prominent, rather dominants role in the United Nations. No doubt, in the beginning the Afro-Asian countries were not able to exert much influence on the decisions of the United Nations but with the passage of time and growing cohesion of the anti-colonial and antiimperialist forces they emerged as a potent force and were able to exert much influence on the political and economic issues. Both the powers, aware of the voting strength of the Afro-Asian countries, have been trying to woo them because they cannot dare to easily brush aside their views. It may, however, be noted that the process of increasing participation of these countries in the international affairs has not been all smooth and the former colonial and imperialist powers have tried to undermine the process through the ruling elites in these countries. But despite these hurdles most of the Afro-Asian countries, because of their experience in the international sphere, developed new confidence and have been able to safeguard their national interests with effectiveness.

The growing role of the Afro-Asian countries at the United Nations and other international forums has met with severe criticism at the hands of imperialist powers. The western countries have often complained that the developing countries are dominating the United Nations by virtue of their sheer physical majority. According to Prof. Vernon Mckay this has complicated the international relations. He says "It creates not only substantive problems but organisation difficulties for all the foreign offices of the world. It brings forth a large group of untrained and inexperienced diplomats dealing, with unfamiliar tasks." However, it is not possible to agree with this criticism because the Afro-Asian countries have not complicated the international relations, rather they have straightened the same. It is a different matter that the western powers have not been able to reconcile with the role of diminishing importance. In the past some of the Afro-Asian diplomats might have behaved in an inexperienced manner and even showed some sort of dependence on their senior partners, but now they have acquired sufficient experience in the international sphere and do not any more suffer from lack of confidence and psychology of dependence. They have been able to staff their diplomatic services with people who are capable of safeguarding their national interests. 7. Increased the Importance of United Nations: As most of the 206 Afro-Asian countries were economically and militarily no match for the big powers they tried to place greater reliance on the United Nations and other international agencies for the solution of various political, economic and social problems. They have consistently supported UN intervention in the various political issues to ensure that the world peace was not disturbed. In the socio-economic fields too they have insisted on greater role for the United Nations and its agencies. It was mainly due to the insistence of the Afro-Asian countries that United Nations set up Special Fund and launched various Technical Aid Programmes in the various underdeveloped countries with a view to expedite the development of the economies of these countries. By repeatedly expressing their faith and loyalty in the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, these states have succeeded in creating a very favourable climate in favour of the world body. In view of this even the superpowers have not been able to bypass the UN and have extended full support to it. In short, it will not be wrong to say that the United Nations has come to occupy a prominent position chiefly because of the Afro-Asian countries. 8. Significant Role in the Creation of New International Economic Order: Ever since their independence the Afro-Asian countries have been insisting on the regulation of economic relations among various nations on terms of equality and have been demanding a say in the determination of the international commercial monetary and financial policies which effect their interests. But, the imperialist power were not willing to concede this demand and continued to take important decisions in these matters without consulting them. However, with the increase in the strength of the non-aligned countries, they have come to exert significant influence. In AprilMay, 1974 the UN General Assembly, at the initiative of the non-aligned countries, adopted a Declaration regarding the establishment of a New International Economic Order and a Programme of Action on the establishment of a New International Economic Order. It was insisted in the declaration that the economic relations amongst the states should be based on the principle of interdependence rather than unequal exchange. It emphasised that the rich and

developed countries were obliged to increase and facilitate the flow of resources to the less developed countries. It was in their own interest to encourage the promotion of growth and development of the poor countries in order to expand their markets. Further progress in this direction was made at the UNCTAD IV meeting at Nairobi in May, 1976 when a programme of global action was adopted to improve market structure in international trade in commodities of interest to the developing countries. Though the goal of New International Economic Order has not been fully achieved as yet, it certainly is an important step in the direction of regulating the international economic relations on the basis of equal distribution of the global resources. The above discussion clearly establishes that the resurgence of Afro-Asian countries has left a deep impact on international relations. Hoffman 207 has beautifully summed up the significance of the resurgence of Asia-African countries thus: "When the history of the twentieth century is written, it will not be World War I or World War II, the discovery of nuclear energy, or putting men into orbit, or even an exploration of the moon that is going to be considered as the great event of the century. The outstanding event of this century will be that two-thirds of the world's people awakened to the fact that a better life was possible for them. If we are able in this century to abolish, as far as is now technically practicable, poverty, illiteracy and chronic ill-health from the surface of the world of the twentieth century, in which we have all lived, it will go down as the great century of all times." 208

17 The Present International Economic Order and Quest for New International Economic Order
"No international order can be considered just, if co-operation with the aim to raise the poorest of the world to a decent standard of living is not one of its basic principles." Henry Kissinger The present International Economic Order was evolved during the Second World War and the years thereafter. This order was quite different from the economic order found in the nineteenth or early twentieth century. The change was necessitated on account of the revolutionary changes which had taken place in the field of technology and communication. The emergence of the multinational corporations and appearance of a number of independent states on the arena of international field also necessitated these changes. According to Dr. Kissinger the present international economic order is based on four priciples (i) open and expanding trade; (ii) free movement of investment capital and technology; (iii) readily available supplies of raw material, and (iv) international cooperation.

The economic system which emerged in post World War II period was based on confrontation between two superpowers. In the East the Soviet Union imposed a Communist international economic system based on the principle of socialist commonwealth. The members of the socialist commonwealth were economically isolated from the West and became dependent on the Soviet Union. In the West an economic system based on liberal principles of free trade and free capital movements was created with USA occupying a dominant position in the system. The Third World countries in the main continued to be part of the western economic system on account of old links with imperial powers. Thus the economic system which emerged in the post World War II period consisted of three sub-systems. Spero has designated these three subsystems as (i) the Western system of Interdependence; (ii) the North-South System of dependence; and (iii) the East-West System of independence. Spero admits that this separation of the three systems is artificial since interactions 209 and problems overlap all systems in the real world. But since the problems and processes of the sub-systems differ, it shall be desirable to know about these sub-systems in some details. 1. Western System: The Western system includes developed market economies of North America, Western Europe and Japan. The units of this system are highly developed capitalist countries and are involved in great mutual economic interaction. This increased interaction has been largely due to the U.S. dollars, the internationalisation of banking, monetary consequences of multinational corporations and creation of Eurocurrency and Eurobond markets. As a result of this increasing interaction the events in one country have direct impact on other members of the system. Thus the monetary, trade and investment policy in one country has a direct impact on the monetary, trade and investment policies of other countries in the system. Though the interdependence of the member states of the system has contributed to their economic prosperity, it has also given rise to a number of critical political problems. In the first instance, the growing interdependence of the members of one system has led to increased number of disturbances with which the decision makers have to cope. Quite often while formulating their domestic economic policy, these leaders are guided by the disturbances arising out of conditions obtaining in other countries of the system. This poses a serious problem for the states who desire to control their own economies and has contributed to the weakening of the national management of economies. 2. The North-South System: The second sub-system of the present economic system is NorthSouth system which is concerned with relationship between the developed market economies and the less developed economies of countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America. Unlike the Western system which is composed of almost equal factors, this system is characterised by complete inequality and disparity. There are vast differences in per capita gross national income of the various units. There is also great difference in the per capita average gross national product. As a result the gap between the rich and the poor countries is further widening. A major feature of this system is growing dependence of the South on North, which naturally enables the latter to influence the events in the Southern countries. The Southern countries are

dependent on the North for a number of things. Firstly, they are greatly dependent upon them for trade because a large percentage of their gross national products come from trade with the North. The dependence of the South on North for trade is on account of their small interest market, concentration of exports to single or a small number of primary products; and vulnerability to the demand conditions of a single market. Secondly, the countries of South are dependent on North for investments due to lack of adequate resources. In most of the countries of South the foreign investments have 210 been made in important sectors of production, raw material production, export industries and dynamic sectors of economy. Thirdly, the countries of South are also dependent on the North for money. Often the currency of dependent countries of South are linked with the currencies of dominant Northern country which enables the latter to influence the internal as well as the external monetary policy of these countries. The advanced countries influence the domestic and foreign policy of the countries of South by providing them assistance to overcome' the balance of payments problems. Even when such assistance is provided through International Monetary Fund the donors are able to exercise considerable influence in this regard. Fourthly, aid is also used as an instrument by the North to manage and manipulate decisions from outside. Aid also contributes to dominance in the fields of trade and investments. In addition to the above factors which clearly demonstrate the dominance of North over South, exclusion of the countries of South from the major economic institutions of the Norththe International Monetary Fund (IMF), the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the General Agreement on Tarrifs and Trade (GATT) further demonstrates their inferior position vis a vis countries of North. In the absence of any share in the decision-making process, the underdeveloped countries of the South have expressed their dissatisfaction with the system and demanded the creation of a New International Economic Order. Another argument advanced for doing away the existing system is that it does not provide the countries of South a share in the resources and other benefits and aims at perpetuating South's dependent status. 3. East-West System. The third sub-system is the East-West system. This sub-system is characterised by independence in so far as there is very little interference amongst the partners and consequently very little impact on each other. The cold war of the post World War II period also contributed to the isolation of these systems from each other. The Western countries led by USA evolved their own political institutions like IMF, IBRD, GATT etc. in which the East did not take part. On the other hand the East followed a policy of economic and political isolation within the socialist common-wealth. However, in recent years these two institutions are not working in isolation and there has been a growing economic interaction between the two.

Main Features of the Present Economic Order

After briefly examining the various sub-systems of the present economic system, it shall be desirable to have an idea about its main features. The features of the present economic order are as follows: 1. It is based on East-West Division and is characterised by confrontation of the rich and the poor. 2. It is protective of the interests of the north and is governed by 211 economic interactions based on the principle of non-discriminatory liberal trade. 3. It is nationalist and irrational. 4. It is based on market place economy. Actually the trade is so regulated that the developed countries gain access to markets of developing countries on favourable terms. 5. It involves inflow of foreign private capital from the developed countries to the developing countries and consequent increase in the activities of multinational corporations.

Critical Evaluation of the Present System

According to the Western scholars the present economic system has served its purpose and greatly contributed to the growth of gross world product during the past three years. However, the critics of the present system while conceding that it has contributed to the growth of gross world product contend that it has led to uneven distribution of the income between states and within countries. According to one estimate, the poor groups in the poor nations which constitute more than one-third of world's population have an income of 100 dollars per capita, while the rich groups of the poor countries, which constitute one quarter of humanity, have approximately 300 dollars per capita. On the other hand the poor groups in the rich nations, which constitute another quarter of humanity, have an income of 850 dollars per capita, while the rich groups of the rich nations of the world, which constitute only 16 percent of the world population, have an average income of 3000 dollars per capita. In simple words, the system has led to uneven distribution of income between states and within countries. Further, the present system is bringing about destruction of our environment and the unlimited exploitation indulged by it is bound to result in scarcity of resources. Secondly, the present system is not essentially based on free enterprise and free markets, because it is guided and manipulated in many respects. In actual practice in place of open and expanding trade, we see a tariff system with low tariffs for raw materials and high tariff for industrial products. This has blocked the industrialisation of the poor countries. The flow of capital and the credit systems is also dominated by United States, European countries and the oil producing countries. There is no free flow of technology and the system of regulating the ownership of patents, which restricts the use of those patents to rich countries.

Finally, the notion of readily available raw materials is also virtually non-existent because we are confronted with the threat of scarcity. Thus we find that the present international economic system is not as free as is often claimed. The present system is largely guided and manipulated for the benefit of rich countries. The present system has operated to the benefit of developed countries in many ways. (i) Firstly, as the present system operates on the principle of free trade, this has tended to benefit the developed nations. Often the developed 212 nations charge very high prices for their finished and consumable goods, and pay very low prices for the raw material exported by the developing countries. This has resulted in high imbalance in trade between the developed and developing countries. (ii) Secondly, as most of the developing countries are dependent on the developed countries for capital and aid, they have increasingly come to look to them. Often the developed countries are able to swallow back the aid provided to developing countries in the shape of trade deficits and gap of balance of payments. Even the International Monetary Fund has tended to promote the interests of the rich countries. (iii) International institutions like International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which have been created to help the developing countries have also operated in the interest of western countries. Often the developing countries are unable to repay the loans granted to them by the IBRD due to their low rate of growth. Sometimes they are not able to repay even the interest which make them even more dependent on the developed countries. (iv) The trade of most of the developed countries is regulated under the General Agreement on Trade and Tariff which has tended to be protectionist and seeks to protect the interests of the member nations unmindful of the interests of the Third World countries. (v)The developed countries have created certain preferential trade blocks like EEC, COMECON etc. which afford protection to the members at home and assure them large overseas markets without competition from the Third World countries. If we are genuinely interested in finding a solution to the problem of an equitable division of property, of scarcity of natural resources and of depletion of the environment, the only solution lies in the New International Economic Order.

NEW INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER

There has been a yawing gap between the developed and developing countries. Of the estimated 4,000 million people inhabiting the world 1,200 million live in countries where per capita GNP is less than $ 2,000 a year. At the other end, a minority of around 600 million live in countries where per capita GNP ranges between $ 2,000 to 5,600. Another 2,200 million live in countries where per capita GNP level range 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 relationships between themselves and the developed countries. 213 The developing countries raised the question of establishing New International Economic Order (NIEO) and demanded restructuring of international economic relations on just, democratic principles on the basis of full equality. They asserted their determination to dispose freely their own national resources. In view of the persistent demand from the developing countries for restructuring of the economic system in 1973 the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution No. 3171 which acknowledged the right of the states to nationalise foreign property and to determine the forms and size of compensation. In 1974 the General Assembly reaffirmed the right of each state to regulate and control the activities of the Transnational Corporations in its territory and adopted the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of the States. On 1 May 1974 the General Assembly in the face of opposition from United States and other western powers adopted the Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order by an overwhelming majority. The Declaration stipulated the principles on which the international economic relations should be based. The main principle emphasised by the declaration were sovereign equality of states, their territorial integrity, non-interference in the internal affairs, equal participation of all the states in the solution of their own choice, inalienable and permanent sovereignty of each state over their natural resources and all economic activities, including the right of states, peoples and territories under foreign domination to reimbursement and full compensation for the exploitation, depletion and damage caused to their natural and other resources etc. The Declaration laid down a solid international legal basis for establishment of truly equal international economic relations, meeting the interests of all states and people. The Assembly also adopted a Programme of Action which outlined specific steps for the implementation of the Declaration. In 1975 the General Assembly at its 7th Special Session in the course of discussion on 'Development and International Economic Cooperation' reiterated the demand for the acceleration of the implementation of the decisions of the General Assembly taken at the earlier session. Thus the General Assembly in the 6th and 7th Special Session accepted the need of restructuring of the international economic relations on democratic basis. However, it failed to take any concrete measures for the implementation of these decisions due to obstructions posed by USA and other western powers. The year 1976 was marked by UNCTAD IV holding meeting in Nairobi (Kenya) in the month of May and beginning of the deliberations of the Conference on International Economic Co-operation also known as North-South Conference meeting in Paris originally scheduled to end in December 1976 but reconvened for a final session at the end of May 1977. The call for New International Economic Order is based on the assumption that the prevalent international order perpetuates and aggravates international inequalities and that new relationship of interdependence should replace the older patterns of dependence and unequal 214

exchange. It is argued by the advocates of New International Economic Order that the rich developed countries are morally obliged to increase and facilitate the flow of resources to less developed countries and that it is in their self-interest to encourage the promotion of growth and development of the poor countries in order to expand their markets. The less developed countries hold the view that the Developed Countries must recognise the growing power of the commodity producers as evident from the success of Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in raising oil prices, and accept that the locus of power has inclined in their favour. The spirit of the New International Economic Order is envisaged in the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States adopted by the UN 27th General Session on December 12, 1974, asserting its main objectives : The achievements of more rational and equitable international economic relations and the encouragement of structural changes in the world economy, the creation of conditions which permit the further expansion of trade and intensification of economic co-operation among all nations; the strengthening of the economic independence of developing countries, the establishment and promotion of international economic relations taking into account the agreed differences in development of the developing countries and their specific needs." The New International Economic Order embodies exhaustive and ambitious proposals. The main objective is no less than the creation of a new structure of economic relationships, warranting fundamental changes in a large number of related fieldscommodity trade, market access and preference, aid flows, the activities of multinational corporations, the international monetary system, the restructuring of international institutions, the transfer of technology etc.

Goals and Means

New International Economic Order deals both with goals and means. The goals which are rather more evident from all the UN Conference held on this issue, lay emphasis on the desire for a more just distribution of world economic resources among the countriesrich as well as poor. (i) In the wake of the oil crisis in 1973, the OPEC countries with a little below 300 million people have been able to raise their incomes sharply. The rest of the poor countries with about five times people have rather been placed in more precarious position. The oil crisis helped only a handful of countries-some of whom were already rich-whereas the vast majority lost by it. The poor remain poor. The "25 poorest countries" are mentioned in world forums but no practical action has so far been initiated to help these nations. Besides the need of making NIEO's benefits available to the poorest states has not been given serious thought. The developed countries are putting up firm resistance against it. Another reason is that 215

the less developed countries have already suffered so much at the hands of superpowers that these states now stand inflexibly on the principle of sovereignty and do not allow any foreign country or the UN to interfere in their internal affairs. (ii) Mini-Income Target. The New International Economic Order sets forth another goal to create a material minimal standard of living, a mini-income for those who are facing harsh economic realities. Its purpose is to persuade the rich countries to agree to various reforms in the international economy. As owing to various reasons, the principle of sovereignty will play a decisive role in relation to UN also in the near future, such a goal should practically imply that the rich countries accepted such reforms within NIEO which would be instrumental in creating a mini-income for the poorest countries and that their aid for development would be channelled to poorest countries and in particular to those countries which carry out a conscious policy of levelling and justice inside their own borders. Even Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State, in a speech to the Seventh Extraordinary General Assembly of the UN said, NIEO, advocated the principle of a minimum standard of living. He opined that international co-operation must be directed to the problems of creating a secure basic economic security for all and this "challenge is above ideologies and block politics. No international order can be considered just if co-operation with the aim to raise the poorest of the world to a decent standard of living is not one of the basic principles." The endeavour to create a 'mini income' for all people irrespective of which country they hail from, would become the leading guidelines, the foremost goal is the work to create New International Economic Order. (iii) Parts and the Whole. There are three parts of entity embodying NIEO. The first is to the extent to which the developing countries can force the rich countries to a more just distribution of world income than the one we have today. For instance, the price policy of the OPEC cartel, which in one stroke was able to redistribute about a couple of per cents of world income from the rich to the oil producing countries. Several raw material countries are dreaming about how by acting in a similar manner, they could form the cartels also for other raw materials and force the developed countries to pay many times higher than that the importers pay now. The second factor is that of morality that the rich should share their wealth with less developed countries. The third and most important motive behind the NIEO is of a materially more concrete nature. It emphasises that it is in the common interest of developing and industrial countries alike to elaborate a NIEO, for example, both sides can have a common interest in a reduction of the fluctuation of prices of raw materials and therefore accept certain stabilisation agreements, if the governments in rich countries could come to find that it would be in the interest of the large consumer groups to import cheaper goods from the developing countries, although it could hit 216 some home industries and its workers whose problems would have to be solved in another way through labour market policies.

These three partsthe threat, the morals, and the common interests, can be said to be the main parts in the entity called NIEO. However, the entity is greater than and different from the parts comprising it.

The Means
The means for realising the NIEO are basically instruments of economic policies which can be mutually devised by the developed countries and less developed countries. The NIEO can be realised through international trade. The LDCs want better financial possibilities to develop their economies. They want to have a greater inflow of one of the most dynamic development factors science and technologyand at the same time these countries opt for exercising control over its composition. The developing countries aspire for acquiring help as well as industrialisation and development in agricultural sector. Besides, these countries want a greater formal as well as real power in the decisive institutions which govern the international economic development, especially the entire UN system. The prominent means through which NIEO can be realised are explained below: (a) Foreign Trade: The major demands of the LDCs in respect of foreign trade are they want higher prices on their export goods, some sort of guarantee of a similar development for export and import prices and better possibilities for facilitating admission to the markets of the rich countries. The case of export cartel of the OPEC countries, with a four-fold doubling of the oil prices, has provided an impetus to the developing countries. It has motivated the raw material exporting countries to search out the possibilities of creating other cartels for raw materials between the developing countries or if this does not work out, at least some sort of international raw material agreements which should provide the developed countries good prices and stability in their countries. There are possibilities that effective cartels might perhaps be formed in the bauxite or copper production on the model of oil cartels. But it is doubtful if cartel method would be successful. The case of oil export is different. Even prior to the oil crisis, the oil export from the oil producing countries was about 50 per cent larger than the sum of the five next most important export commodities of the less developed countriescopper, coffee, sugar, cotton and natural rubber. Currently, the oil export from the developing countries is almost exceeding the sum of all other export from them. Another factor disfavouring cartel system is that it redistributes the profits from trade in an unsystematic manner. This system helps only rich countries whereas the countries like India and Bangladesh are losers. Moreover, developing countries are not the only countries which export raw materials. The Unites States, the Soviet Union and a host of other developed 217 countries are more benefited from cartel system than the developing countries.

There are proposals to create raw material agreements between the rich and developing countries. The past experience reflects the unsuccessful mislayer of such attempts. Both rich and poor countries share a common interest in a certain stability in price development and perhaps some practical results can be worked out in this direction. The expectations that such stabilisation agreements at the same time should envisage a price policy which severely redistributes gains from rich to poor countries, cannot be particularly high. The endeavours to relate import and export price development for the less developed countries with the help of indexing appear to be too complicated to yield quicker results. Better recourse for the developing countries is open to their own markets in the developed countries for exporting their products. The developed countries can provide protection to the interest of less developed countries. Mutually agreed norms can be worked out with a view to distribute the burden justly. (b) Development Aid: It is widely argued that the rich countries should contribute one per cent of their total production to the developing countries. The poor countries should share the development expertise of the rich countries. Development aid is a powerful means to realise the objectives of NIEO quicker and sooner. Another way through which developed countries can help the LDCs is the writing-off of old debts or putting a moratorium over it. The poor countries which are mostly indebted too, should in this way get an extra assistance, which would be valuable. This type of measure can easily be carried through politically in the rich countries than development and to the same tune. (c) Science and Technology: The developing countries require and in their scientific and technological development, technical assistance provides gains and savings which can further be invested in economic development. However, scientific and technological know-how is precisely not under the direct control of the states but under the control of multinational enterprises. These transnational corporations do not use science and technology in the interest of developing countries but more in their monopolistic interests. A study conducted by the UNCTAD reveals that of all patents in the world, about six per cent are owned by the less developed countries. Other about 84 per cent is owned by the multinational corporations operating in the developing countries. And of these only 5 per cent is used in production. The transnational enterprises are there to thwart the efforts of others from starting production of the goods patented that is a protection against competition. In reality, the patents of the multinational corporations effectively discourage all indigenous national efforts in the developing countries to develop their productivity with the help of modern technology. The Soviet Union and Japan have made considerable development 218 by copying and imitating foreign techniques. For realising the objectives of NIEO, it is necessary that developing countries should scrap the present patent system and work out norms authorising the developing countries with rights to produce any technique which they are capable of

producing. It has to be ensured that such a system of rules is not exploited by the Multinational Corporations. (d) Industry and Agriculture: Much has been said in the domain of industry and agriculture in the international forums. No new special proposals have come forward in regard to NIEO. It is well known that developing countries want to raise their degree of industrialisation. The process of industrialisation cannot be had in isolation. This process entails the involvement of industrialised countries. It is not clear how far these industrialised countries are willing to help and co-operate with the developing countries. The developing countries which share seven per cent of industrial production, during the recent session of the General Assembly of the UN, wanted to establish a principle that the developing countries should be entitled to "a larger percentual share of world industrial production." This demand of developing countries was strongly opposed by the representatives of the European Community and Japan. Developed countries were willing to accept only that the developing countries are entitled to a "larger industrial production." Agriculture is another realm where developed countries are reluctant to cooperate with the developing countries. The United States has the greatest export surplus which can be used for help in starvation or disaster. This can perhaps help in feeding the millions in the poorest countries. But inside the United States, there are lobbies which hold the view that food assistance to developing countries helps in augmenting population "uncontrollably," that America cannot alone finance the food deficit of the developing countries. A section in America is of view that the Soviet Union can purchase the whole surplus and that food can be used as a weapon like oil. However, the developed countries can afford to share their food surplus with the poor countries. (e) Share in Decision-making: The New York Times, in a leading article in May 1975 about how to save UNO, wrote, The reason why the UN General Assembly does not function now is that countries with 10 per cent of world population and 3 per cent of its production can marshal as two-thirds majority in the General Assembly. Half of this number can stop Soviet-American proposal and have done it." The developing countries have thus great power in the UN General Assembly. But in General Assembly no real decisions are taken. It adopts only resolutions and principles which cannot force others to act on it. However, the powerful bodies where decisions are taken and can be enforced are the Security Council of the UN, the World Bank and other important economic organisations. The developing countries have little or no power in these important world bodies. These are dominated by the developed countries. 219

Fresh Resolution by U.N General Assembly

In view of the growing demand from the less developed countries the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution in 1979, which has been described as a watershed in the struggle of developing countries for the creation of New International Economic Order. The resolution emphasized the need of global talks within the framework of the UN on energy, raw materials, trade development, currency and financial questions. It was expected that the discussion on the these subjects should lead the world towards a new economic order. But in view of opposition of United States to hold discussions for the creation of NIEO within the framework of the United

Nations, it was decided to hold talks outside the forum of the United Nations. This resulted in the Cancun Summit Meeting in October 1981. In fact the idea of holding such a summit meeting was mooted by the Independent Commission on International Development Issues headed by Willy Brandt, the Ex-Chancellor of Germany. The Commission had suggested that while detailed negotiations between the two sides should take place in a UN framework, the ground for this should be laid by north-south summit of manageable size. In the meanwhile in 1980 the General Assembly noted at its meeting that very limited progress had been made towards the implementation of the 1974 Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States. It, therefore, passed a resolution re-affirming the Charter and emphasised the need of working towards a new international economic order. The resolution also called for an indepth review of the implementation of the Charter at the 36th session of the General Assembly in 1981.

Cancun Summit and New International Economic Order

At the Cancum Summit of 1981 the issue of establishment of NIEO again came for consideration. President Reagan made it amply clear that USA and other Western powers would take part in negotiations for cooperation for development only if the existing institutions were supported and the developing countries participated and cooperated with these institutions. On the other hand the representatives of the developing countries insisted that the ultimate authority over global negotiations must be placed in the hands of the United Nations.

Commonwealth Heads and NIEO

In 1981 the Commonwealth Heads of Governments in their meeting at Melbourne recommended the constitution of a group to review the issue of North-South Dialogue. The group was constituted on 2 February 1982 under the Chairmanship of B. Akporode Clark of Nigeria and contained representatives of Zimbabwe, U.K., Australia, Sri Lanka, Singapore, Jamaica, Guyana and India. The group was asked to review the negotiating process between the developed and developing countries; to examine the principal obstacles which had to-date limited success in these negotiations; to identify to what extent these obstacles were the result of 220 shortcomings in negotiating process and to suggest improvements which would reduce the obstacles to the negotiating process or problems of institutional arrangement. The group submitted its report entitled The North-South Dialogue: Making it Work on 27 August 1982 to Ramphal, the Commonwealth Secretary General. In early December, 1981 the representatives of the developing countries at the United Nations drafted a resolution for the General Assembly proposing North-South negotiations on restructuring the international economy. However, the United States Government objected to this resolution on the plea that it posed a threat to the Independence of established economic institutions like World Bank and IMF. Consequently, the resolution was not taken up for debate.

In February, 1983 the Brandt Commission published its second report entitled "Common Crisis North: Co-operation for World Recovery" in which the Commission proposed a series of financial measures to assist the resolution of the current balance of payments debts and banking crises and to help promote recovery in developing and industrial countries.

South-South Meet or New Delhi Consultations

The origin of the South-South dialogue lies in the failure of the North-South dialogue. As the North did not respond favourably to the demands of the South for reduction in tariff liberalisation, international commodity agreements to stabilise prices, official aid at concessional rates, and reforms in the international monetary system, the countries of the South were convinced that there was no common ground between North and South. The tough stand of the United States further confirmed this conviction. Therefore, with a view to make the international co-operation more efficacious, they decided to concentrate on following nine points: (1) Agreement on the immediate launching of global negotiations; (2) Increasing food production in developing countries; (3) Reversing of the present disturbing trend in the flow of assistance from the developed to the developing countries; (4) Strengthening of multilateral co-operation; (5) Devising mechanism to finance the development of energy resources in developing countries; (6) Speedy adoption and implementation of schemes to lighten the financial burden of increased oil prices and to ensure supplies of aid to developing countries; (7) Provision of financial support for balance of payments problems in the traditional stage of oil importing developing countries; (8) Reversing protectionist trends; and (9) Development of solidarity and collect self-reliance of developing countries to reduce their vulnerability to pressures from and events in affluent countries. The deliberations, however, showed that the member states were sharply divided and failed to reach any consensus. Differences particularly existed over three facets of the US position. So far the U.S.A., or for that matter, the countries of North had insisted on three conditions, viz., (i) there should be a preliminary meet in any of these countries to discuss 221 North-South issue before the matter was taken up at the United Nations; (ii) the global negotiations should not cover the composition, role and functions of the three institutions (the Bank, the IMF and GATT); (iii) any resolution adopted by the United Nations on North-South will not be binding on the member countries. At the end of the South-South Meet at New Delhi, a hope was expressed that the exchange of view at New Delhi, would enable the Group of 77* to discuss and negotiate effectively with the industrialised countries to come to an agreement on the procedure and frame of global negotiations. It was further asserted that the Group of 77, while being firm in approach on matters of principles and substance, should be flexible on the strategy and avoid getting bogged down in details and technicalities. It was insisted that a concerted strategy should be adopted on these negotiations in the United Nations.

Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting at New Delhi, 1983

The problem of New International Economic Order received the attention of the heads of governments of Commonwealth countries at its meeting in November, 1983 and it adopted a Statement of Economic Action, which inter alia emphasised "We recognize that there are some differences concerning the nature and scale of the reforms and adaptations required in the international economic system ... We believe that the situation calls for a comprehensive review of the international monetary, financial and relevant trade issues. An immediate process of preparatory consultation is needed to identify areas of agreement, potential agreement and areas requiring further consideration. All the countries affected must be directly involved in the discussions and decision-making. There is a widespread belief among us that it will be necessary to discuss these issues at an international conference with universal participation. The preparatory process could result in consensus on covering such a conference." The meet asserted that Commonwealth can play useful role in stimulating a more responsive dialogue and decide to establish a Commonwealth Consultative Group for the purpose of promoting a consensus on the issue covered by the above statement. Despite all these efforts North-South dialogue could not make much progress and the developed countries showed no intention to give due representation to the developing countries on international trade and aid agencies. On the other hand the multilateral institutions in which the industrial nations have the decisive say have begun to face new problems especially in regard to resources matching the growing needs. At present the prospects for the evolution of the New International Economic Order are quite bleak, even though some countries of South still entertain the * Actually at present this group consists of 120 States, although the original name of 'Group of 77 is still used for it. 222 hope that with little patience they would be able to convert the Western Governments and bring about certain changes in the existing order and make it more fair and equitable. The question of New International Economic Order was again raised in the United Nations in December 1983 when the developing countries tabled a resolution deploring the activities of certain developed states, which they believed, took advantage of their predominant position in the international economy to exert unwarranted pressure or coercion on the sovereign decisions of the developing countries. No wonder, the western powers opposed the resolution. Thus we find that while the rich capitalist countries are in theory willing to admit that steps are needed to expedite the process of development in the poorer countries they are not willing to replace the existing international economic system. In the light of all this, it seems quite improbable at present that the New International Economic Order would be feasible in near future unless there is change of heat in the developed capitalist countries. In the existing climate of economic recession there is very faint hope of such a change.

India and New International Economic Order (NIEO)

Ever since her independence, India has pleaded for democratisation of International political order and restructuring of the economic system evolved into the post world war II period. This was considered vital by the Indian policy makers for the economic and social upliftment of the Indian people. For the attainment of these objectives India tried to forge new links and tried to revamp the old links by gradually changing its economic relations. India sought to promote international economic co-operation on the basis of equality and mutual benefit and initiated steps to usher in new International Economic Order. India pleaded for ending the exploitative features of the present economic system which was dominated by the rich and developed countries and evolving a system which was conducive to the socio-economic developmental needs of the developing countries. It is note worthy that the Indian representatives played a vital role in getting the General Agreement on Trade and Tariff (GATT) rules amended and secured permission for the developing countries to bypass import restrictions with a view to improve their export potential. In fact ever since sixties India has been strongly pleading for the creation of New International Economic Order at various forums like the United Nations, NAM, Third World Conferences, Afro-Asian Solidarity Conferences etc. It shall be desirable to briefly review the efforts made by India to further the cause of New International Economic Order. As noted above, in the sixties, India at the meeting of Trade and Development Board insisted on the adoption of an integrated international policy for raw materials and commodities to ensure a just and equitable relationship between the prices of imports and exports of developing countries. India succeeded in getting GAIT rules amended and secured 223 for the developing countries the right to impose import restrictions with a view to improve their export potential. In the UN also India consistently continued to support the demand for increasing the role and share of the developing countries in the international economic order. At the Sixth Special Session of the General Assembly in 1974, India's Foreign Minister (Sardar Swaran Singh) suggested: (i) Compreshensive policy for the repolarisation of prices of raw materials; (ii) Provision of additional liquidity for specially affected countries, (iii) Equitable pattern of voting rights in IMF and other international financial institutions; (iv) Provision of external capital for the development of developing countries and (v) Financial and technical assistance to developing countries. Most of the these suggestions were incorporated in the 'Declaration on the establishment of New International Economic Order' adopted by the United Nations on 1 May 1974.

At the Seventh Special Session of the UN General Assembly held in 1975 also India's Foreign Minister (Mr. Y. B. Chavan) put forth following suggestions for the establishment of NIEO. (i) Only through voluntary transfer can developing countries acquire a sort of buffer between rising bills and falling export earning. It is a matter of great concern that while official development assistance has barely exceeded 7 billion, the world's expenditure on the means of destruction has reached staggering proportions. (ii) Due to sharp rise in their imports, particularly fuel, fertilizers and manufactures, the import bills of most developing countries have increased to such an extent that even with a 100% increase in export earnings, there is no assurance that balance will be corrected or even half way met. (iii) For the production of trade of developing countries, a more managed approach to the problem of trade in manufactures which would deal not only with the removal of trade barriers, both tariff and non-tariff, but also with the question of supply, of production, marketing and distribution. (iv) The developing countries to have a greater say in the management of monetary system. The IMF should provide greater liquidity to the developing countries to cope with the problem of external debts. (v) The conduct of transitional corporations should be subject to greater regulations because they have acted irrationally also in many instances detrimental to the sovereignty and the freedom of developing countries in the management of the resources of development. India also strove for realising the ideals of NIEO in the various sessions of UNCTAD. During the session of UNCTAD held at Nairobi in May 1976, India played a vital role in getting the programme of global action adopted to improve the market structure in international trade in commodities of interest to the developing countries. On 11 June 1978, 224 India's Prime Minister (Morarji Desai) said The road to NIEO may be rough, torturous and long, but it must not be allowed to become a mirage. It was here that countries like USA have crucial role to play by giving the lead in the implementation of various decisions aimed at eradicating the poverty and want from the earth." In 1982, India took initiative to organise South-South meet in New Delhi to secure increased economic and trade co-operation among the developing countries and to coordinate the policies of developing countries with the approach of the developed countries. This meet was attended by representatives of 44 developing countries. Addressing the meet, the Indian Prime Minister (Mrs. Indira Gandhi) expressed concern over the deterioration in the global economy since the Cancun Summit. The Indian Prime Minister specially criticised the protectionism in the industrialised countries which virtually tantamounted to victimisation of the developing world and urged the developing countries to close their ranks to withstand pressure from the affluent nations.

In 1985, India organised a two-day ministerial level meeting of the developing countries to consider Global System of Trade Preference (GSTP) to promote South-South co-operation. The meeting was inaugurated by Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India. In his inaugural speech Rajiv Gandhi called upon the developing countries to work for collective self-reliance through boosting of their trade. Realising that there was very little scope for an early NorthSouth agreement over New International Economic Order it was felt desirable to promote SouthSouth cooperation among the developing countries as a step towards evolution of new economic order. India also played active role in promoting the idea of creation of NIEO at the various meetings of Group of 15 (G-15) and played a vital role in its deliberations and decision making. At the second summit meeting of G-15 held at Caraces (Venezuela), India urged the developing nations "to sieze the historic opportunity provided by the end of super power rivalry, to pool their combined energies and to seek to resolve their problems through South-South cooperation." The Indian Prime Minister asserted that it was wrong on the part of some developed countries to prescribe in somewhat arbitrary terms what mankind should do and where it should go after the easing of East-West relations. At the third summit meeting of G-15 held at Dakar (Senegal) in November 1992 also India expressed concern over 'diminishing opportunities and contracting freedom' in the wake of end of East-West confrontation and pleaded that the developing countries should go in for South-South cooperation in a big way. Again, as Chairman of the Fourth Summit of G-15 held at New Delhi in 1994, India played a significant role in emphasising the need of South-South Cooperation, and holding North-South dialogue so that the interests of the developing countries could be adequately projected in the implementation of the Uruguay Round. In the next two G-15 summits held in Argentina and Zimbabwe also India played active role in promoting 225 the idea of greater South-South cooperation. In short it can be said that India not only played an important role in the establishment of G-15 in 1990, but has also been playing a leading role in the deliberations and decisions of the group. It has consistently worked for securing fair balance in relations between North and South, while at the same time trying to promote greater SouthSouth cooperation in the economic field. It is evident from the preceeding account that India has consistently pressed the need of New International Economic Order at various international forums and has projected itself as a stauch supporter of NIEO with a view to end the dominance of the international economic system by the rich and to secure an equitable distribution of world income and resources. 226

18 Sovereignty over Natural Resources

"The right of people to self-determination shall also include permanent sovereignty over their natural wealth and resources. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence on the grounds of any right that may be claimed by other states." Human Rights Commission

Introduction
Every nation is bestowed with natural resources available in land, sub-soil and water. Exploration and utilisation of these resources have been engaging the attention of the concerned countries and international communities alike. The emergence of newly independent nations especially after the Second World War which inaugurated the process of decolonisation, made these countries realise the value of the natural resources which were subject to foreign exploitation during the colonial era. The concept of permanent sovereignty over natural resources gained prominence during early 1950s when colonial rule started receding. The newly independent nations realised the necessity of reappraising and altering uneven legal arrangements in the shape of concession inherited from the colonial period. During the spell of colonial rule, the foreign powers especially the Multinational Corporations (MNCs) were exploiting the natural resources of the colonies. Usually the status of permanent sovereignty over natural resources is discernable in laws and regulations governing the ownership and use of land, subsoil, and water resources. Principles with regard to the ownership of natural resources vary from country to country. Some countries follow the rule that ownership of lands and waters falling within the boundaries of the national territory is vested originally in the nation itself, and any private property has its basis in the right of the nation to transmit title to its resources to private persons. In other countries, all unalienated land or land which is regarded as vacant or unoccupied, is considered as public property. Natural resources available in the subsoil are treated in some countries as the property of the owner of the surface land under which they can be found. In other countries, the state assumes into itself the ownership of either all subsoil resources or of certain kinds of resources. In 227 countries where ownership of subsoil resources is vested in the state, it may either allow their development by private individuals under licences, leases or other concessions or retain for itself the exclusive right to develop some or all such resources.

Global Concern
There has been a growing awareness among the newly independent countries of Asia and Africa to preserve their political independence and free themselves from the economic exploitation by the former colonial powers. The countries of Latin America have also joined the Afro-Asian countries to regain economic emancipation from the developed world. The natural resources are

available in abundance in the Third World Countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The endeavours of these Third World Countries to control their natural resources have found manifestation in the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources. This principle has been enunciated and re-affirmed in a number of resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly. It was finally incorporated in the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of states adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1974. It was as early as 1951 the UN General Assembly vide its resolution 626 (vii) of 21 December 1952, had recognised that the right of peoples to use and exploit their natural wealth and resources is inherent in their sovereignty. A similar right was envisaged by the draft Human Rights covenants proposed by the Human Rights Commission in January 1955 vide Article 1 (3): The right of people to self-determination shall also include permanent sovereignty over their natural wealth and resources. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence on the grounds of any rights that may be claimed by other states." The text of proposal mooted by the Human Rights Commission was further modified by the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly with a view to incorporate "right", in the first Article of the UN covenants of Human Rights in the following words: The people may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligation arising out of international economic co-operation based upon the principle of mutual benefit and international law. In no case a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence."

The Role of UN
By the late 1950s, the Third World Countries had fully realised the significance of exercising permanent sovereignty over their natural wealth and resources and started adopting a wellconcerted approach to safeguard 228 their interests. They realised that though they had gained political independence the imperialist powers were still exploiting them and treating their raw materials and natural resources as appendages of the imperialist powers resulting in backwardness of their economies. Therefore they decided to press for the recognition of their sovereignty over their natural resources. On account of this feeling of the Third World countries on 21 December 1952 the UN General Assembly passed a resolution asserting "the right of peoples to use and exploit their natural wealth and resources is inherent in their sovereignty." The UN Covenant on Human Rights adopted in 1955 also incorporated this right in Article 1 which provided The peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligation arising out of international economic co-operation based upon the principle of mutual benefit and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence." The developing countries made full use of the UN mechanism in their struggle. In view of the growing pressure from the developing countries on 12 December 1958 the UN General Assembly adopted resolution No. 1314 which recommended the setting up of a commission to

examine the status of permanent sovereignty of states over their natural wealth and resources. In persuance of the above resolution in December 1958 the UN General Assembly established Commission on Permanent Sovereignty over natural wealth and resources 'to conduct a full survey of the permanent sovereignty over natural wealth and resources as a basic constituent of the right of self-determination'. Two years later in December 1960 the UN General Assembly further recommended that the 'sovereign right of every state to dispose of its wealth and natural resources be respected'. In 1962 the General Assembly on the recommendations of the Commission on Permanent Sovereignty adopted resolution 1803 (xvii) in the form of a Declaration on Permanent Sovereignty Over Natural Resources. The Declaration dealt comprehensively with the inalienable and inherent right of developing nations to exercise permanent sovereignty over their natural resources and recorded the fundamental principles of sovereignty of states over their natural resources. The Declaration was of immense significance because it was negotiated within the framework of the United Nations. It tried to reconcile the competing, and in some respects conflicting, interests of capital-importing countriesthe owners of natural resources, and capital-exporting developed countries. The principles outlined in the Declaration on Permanent Sovereignty Over Natural Resources were complemented and clarified during subsequent discussions of this problem at the United Nations. One of the reports of the UN Secretary General observed that the sovereignty included the right of every state to dispose all of its natural resources and' to determine what economic structures would make its best use possible, and to determine the sphere and character of direct foreign investments and their conditions. 229 The assertion of the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources was of immense significance for the developing countries because it provided a basis on which these countries could claim to change the inequitable and uneven legal arrangements under which foreign investors enjoyed right to exploit natural resources available within the territorial boundaries of developing countries. Such an alteration could be facilitated through an exercise of (i) the right to nationalise i.e. to acquire the rights enjoyed by the foreign investors or (ii) the right to envisage changes in particular terms of the arrangements including the right to repudiate an arrangement already made with the foreign investors. In 1973 the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 3171 (xxvii)which recorded the right of states to nationalise foreign property and to determine the forms and size of compensation. At the 29th session the General Assembly reaffirmed the right of each state to regulate and control the activities of the Transnational Corporations in its territory and adopted the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of the States.

NIEO AND NATURAL RESOURCES

In May 1974 the General Assembly, despite the resistance of delegates from United States and other western countries, adopted by an overwhelming majority the Declaration on the establishment of a New International Economic Order and the Programme of Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order. The Declaration recorded the principles

on which the international economic relations should be based and emphasised the principles of sovereign equality of states, their territorial integrity, non-interference in the internal affairs; equal participation of all states in the solution of world economic problems, the right to adopt an economic system of their choice, inalienable and permanent sovereignty of each state over their natural resources and all economic activities including the right of states, peoples and territories under foreign domination to reimbursement and full compensation for the exploitation, depletion and damage caused to their natural and other resources etc. The Programme of Action adopted by the UN General Assembly outlined the specific steps to be taken for the implementation of the Declaration. Some countries, while rendering support to the Declaration on NIEO, expressed reservations to certain provisions, especially with regard to permanent sovereignty including the right to nationalisation. These countries put forth the view that the Declaration could have included a statement on their duty to compensate in accordance with the prevailing norms and practices of international law. However, there has been an increasing support to Third World countries' inalienable and inherent right to exercise permanent sovereignty over their natural resources. It has been adopted as one of the rights in the charter of Economic Rights and Duties in States adopted by the General Assembly in 1979. This right was also affirmed by the Lima Declaration on Industrial Development and Co-operation adopted by the United Nations 230 Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO) in 1975. The Lima Declaration stated that effective control over natural resources and the harmonising of policies for their exploitation, conservation, transformation and marketing comprised an essential condition for the economic and social development of the Third World countries.

Assertion by Developing Countries

During 1970s, the developing countries pursued well-concerted strategies to effect control over their natural resources. All these measures envisaged increased involvement of the developing countries in the exploitation of their natural resources. It also envisaged a new pattern of relationship between the host government and foreign companies. The March 1977 report of the UN Secretary General states that traditional concession agreements were more and more being replaced by full or partial ownership of exploitation enterprises or an increased role in their overall management by means of nationalisation, joint ventures or various forms of service contracts. The existing concession agreements between the host countries and foreign investors both governmental or private, contain provisions not only for traditional royalties and tax payments, but for envisaging social and economic infrastructures, providing employment opportunities for natives and providing training facilities for national, technical and managerial staff. Such arrangement also helps the host countries to acquire necessary capital and technical know-how along with a larger share of profits. In some of the developing countries the national governments assume partial or full ownership through unilateral action whereas in majority of cases, the transfers were mutually negotiated between the host governments and the companies. Major instances in this regard have been the

assumption of majority or total ownership of petroleum fields by oil producing countries, the nationalisation of copper mines by Zaire in 1966-67, nationalisation of iron mines by Venezuela in 1974 and the nationalisation by Madagascar of its chromite mines in 1975. Besides, the developing countries producing principle commodities have formed associations like OPEC, OAPEC, to safeguard their interests. The United Nations has contributed to the realisation of the sovereignty of states over natural resources by making modifications in terms of compensation to be given in case of nationalisation. It has provided Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States "In case of nationalisation, expropriation on transfer of ownership of foreign properties, appropriate compensation should be paid by the states adopting such measures, taking into account its relevant laws and regulations and all circumstances that the state considers pertinent. In any case where the question of compensation gives rise to a controversy it shall be settled under the domestic laws of the nationalising states and by its tribunals, unless it is freely and mutually agreed by all states concerned that other peaceful means be sought on the basis of the sovereign equality of states and in accordance 231 with principle of free choice of means." In simple words, the charter has affected a significant change in respect of mode of determination of compensation and the mode of settlement of disputes relating to the question of compensation. These producer's associations reflect the determination of developing countries to attain better bargaining position in the world market. Increased emphasis is being laid on the development and use of natural resources. The United Nations has played a dominant role in this field. The world organisation operates as an executing agency for conducting surveys of mineral, energy and other resources and for projects to develop technical and research institutes. In 1970, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations established the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. The Committee since its inception has rendered advisory services to the governments of developing countries, reviewed arrangements to coordinate UN activities in natural resources development etc. This action was taken in terms of UN General Assembly Resolution of 1966 which re-affirmed "the inalienable right of all countries to exercise permanent sovereignty over their natural resources in the interest of their national development." The resolution also provided that the United Nations should undertake a maximum concerted effort to channel its activities so as to enable all countries to exercise that right fully.

Revolving Fund for Natural Resources Exploration

In 1973 the United Nations established United Nations Revolving Fund for Natural Resources Exploration (UNRFNRE) with a view to help the developing countries locate mineral deposits and geo-thermal reservoirs that were feasible to exploit; to assess the volume and market value of such resources; promote investment; and recycle a share of the resulting income to fund further exploration. The Fund began its operation in 1975 when exploration projects in Bolivia and Sudan were approved. This was followed by projects in other countries. By 1984, 18 projects had been approved. Most of the fund-supported explorations took place in Africa and Latin America and led to the discovery of copper, lead, zinc, gold, silver and phosphate deposits. The

fund is financed by voluntary contributions. By 1985 governments of 16 countries had contributed a total of $ 33.8 million to the fund. Japan has been one of the largest contributors to the fund. The governments which receive assistance from the fund are expected to repay the amount within 30 years if the Fund supported exploration leads to commercial production. No doubt the Fund has rendered valuable service to various countries in identifying valuable resources through variety of field operations and encouraged technical cooperation among the developing countries for the exploration of natural resources. But ultimately it is only through development of national capabilities to undertake and conduct operation that a nation can effectively exercise sovereignty over natural resources. 232

UN's Role in Assessment and Utilisation of Natural Resources

The UN has also helped developing countries to assess and utilise their natural resources by identifying valuable sources through a variety of field operations. Thus it has helped Jamaica in the investigation of metallic minerals. It has also rendered valuable help to the United Republic of Tanzania and Burundi in their exploration programmes and tried to encourage application of electronic data processing to mineral exploration and development. The UN has also felt concerned with the development of water resources in the developing countries. In 1977 the United Nations Water Conference was held at Argentina which was attended by 116 countries. The Conference tried to create world-wide awareness of the supply and demand of water resources and adopt policies to development, underdevelopment, promote further development and improve management in order to achieve higher levels of efficiency in the allocation, distribution and utilisation of water. In pursuit of the above plan in 1980, it launched the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade with a goal to provide clean water and adequate sanitation for everyone by the year 1990. While the cost for these projects were to be borne by the developing countries themselves, one-fifth to one-third of the funds were to come from external sources. The Decade helped some 1.3 billion people in the developing countries gain access to safe drinking water. In 1992 twentyone UN agencies convened an International Conference on Water and the Environment at Dublin in preparation for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, which was subsequently held at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The main thurust of the United Nations activities in this area has been directed towards sustainable development of fragile and finite water resources, which is coming under increasing stress through population growth, pollution and increasing demand for agricultural and industrial purposes. In 1994, the Committee on Natural Resources requested the Secretary-General to prepare a report on the state of the world's freshwater resources, to be considered by a special session of the General Assembly in 1997. The Commission on Sustainable Development also requested that the United Nations and its specialised agencies should carry out a comprehensive assessment of freshwater resources, to identify the availability of such resources and make projections of future needs. The United Nations paid special attention to the exploitation of hydro electric potential of countries in Asia and Africa so that they could effect savings on imports of oil bill, which was rising by an average of 5 per cent every year. In addition it also paid attention to the study of

biogas development, improved charcoal burning and geothermal, solar, tidal and windpower. In 1981 the General Assembly convened the United Nations Conference on New and Renewable Sources of Energy at Nairobi to examine alternative forms of hydropower, fuelwood and charcoal, geothermal energy, ocean energy, oil shale and tar sands, peat and the use of 233 draught animals for energy purposes. The Conference adopted a programme of Action for the Development and Utilisation of New and Renewable Sources of Energy, this blueprint for national and international action was subsequently endorsed by the General Assembly in 1981. The UN has also encouraged sea-mining and adopted Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1982 which inter alia- laid comprehensive rules for mineral resources development and scientific research. The objectives of the convention include the equitable and efficient use of sea resources thereof. The Convention contains all the rules governing the ocean, their uses and resources and covers all aspects of State's rights and responsibilties in their use of the ocean, including the settlement of disputes. The Convention declared 200 miles coastal area as an Exclusive Economic Zone in which the coastal state shall have sovereign rights over all resources and economic activities and jurisdiction over such matters as the conduct of marine scientific research and protection and preservation of the marine environment. It also laid down that sea-bed and sub-soil of the continental shelf shall also fall within the national jurisdiction. Above all the Convention provided for the creation of an International Sea-Bed Authority which shall be responsible for allotting and licensing possible sea-mining sites. In 1978, the United Nations set up a Department of Technical co-operation for Development (DTCD) to help the developing countries to make proper use of their energy, water and mineral resources. In the field of energy the DTCD implements projects in developing countries for the exploration, development and utilisation of petroleum and gas, coal, electric power and renewable sources of energy. It has launched several projects in the areas of energy planning, policy and conservation. It also helps the governments to strengthen their energy-related organisations through personnel training, technical co-operation projects, direct advisory services, the publication of technical documents and international seminars. The DTCD has also focussed attention on planning and management of water resources development, rural water supply, establishment and strengthening of national water resources institutions ground-water exploration and exploitation, and river basin development-The DTCD also acts as the principal agency for mineral resources development and provides technical assistance on such matters as policy and legislation, exploration and evaluation, mining, processing and marketing-It also provides specialised advisory services. In 1989 DTCD was executing some 80 projects in 50 countries. In 1987 the United Nations Conference for the Promotion of International Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy was held at Geneva where the high-level participants expressed views and exchanged experiences on topics ranging from the production of electricity to the application of nuclear techniques to food and agriculture, medicine hydrology, research and industry. In fact the United Nations maintains an

234 active programme of technical cooperation in the field of natural resources and energy. The programme comprises advisory services on policies and strategies, project and programme formulation and implementation in natural resources management. Meetings, symposia, workshops and publications also form a part of this programme. In addition to this the UN assists the developing countries with services of technical advisors which render advice on policy, evaluation, exploration and exploitation of indigenous resources, the transfer of technology and the design of projects and feasibility studies. During the last two decades hundreds of technical cooperation and preinvestment projects in natural resources and energy involving hundreds of millions of dollars have been implemented. All these efforts have greatly helped in the development of the natural resources of countries where these projects have been undertaken. 235

19 The Crisis in Energy Resources

"Finding a solution to the energy problem .... requires, a frontal attack on a multitude of wellentrenched forces, not the least of which is the standard of living to which much of the developed world has become accustomed or to which others aspire. Mustering the political will to make the front attack may prove the most formidable task. Jet the need is clear." Kegley and Wittkopf One of the major problems which has confronted the world economy in recent years is how to meet the growing needs of energy for economic development. For a long time man depended on coal as a source of energy. To a large extent the industrial revolution was also the outcome of the use of coal energy. Even thereafter coal continued to be a dominant source of energy. However in 1960's coal lost its position to oil because of its lower cost and convenient use. By 1970 oil provided more than half the total energy consumed by the world. The production of crude oil rose from 1503 million tonnes in 1965 to 2850 million tonnes in 1973. Various countries evolved technology and living styles on the expectation of uninterrupted supplies of conventional energy forms. However in 1973 as a result of Arab embargo and the consequent price increase in oil brought about by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cartel a serious problem was created for the developed as well as developing countries. While the developed countries were faced with the problem of maintenance of high standards which they had attained in the twentieth century, the oil importing developing countries were confronted with the problem of their survival. The position was further aggravated by the fast depletion of the fuel wood as a source of energy. Accordingly great attention was given to the preparation of positive plans and programmes to solve the energy crisis. In the developed countries the energy problem was aggravated because of the prolific use of energy and unregulated relations between the oil consuming and oil producing countries. The Western multinational oil corporations promoted a wasteful energy consumption pattern for the

sake of higher profits. They deliberately kept the prices of oil and gas at a low level in comparison with their real value. After 1973 the oil producing 236 countries established national control over energy resources and tried to bridge the gap between the price and value of oil. This naturally led to sharp escalation in prices of energy resources. It is said that there has been five-fold increase in the prices of petroleum intensified inflation and increased trade and payment deficits and thus retarded the pace of overall economic growth. The developed countries in their turn shifted the burden of their economic problems on the developing countries and took a number of economic measures which proved detrimental to the fragile economies of these countries. Sometimes the developed countries even threatened to use force in the Persian Gulf area with a view to gain access and privileged buyer position to the energy resources of the developing countries. On the other hand in the developing countries also demand for energy considerably increased. So far in these countries energy was used for transport, mining and manufacturing purposes. With the adoption of large-scale farming by the developing countries the energy consumption greatly increasedboth directly and indirectly. It has been asserted that the rate of increase of petroleum consumption has been higher in developing nations during the past three decades.

The Seriousness of Crisis

The problem of energy resources is indeed a grave problem. This shall be fully borne out by the following facts: 1. In the first place it is said that the global demands for oil is increasing at such a fast pace that within 10 to 20 years the demand would outstrip the supply. It is expected that the production of oil will reach its peak in 1990's and then peter out. According to estimates the world's known oil reserves of 648 billion barrels cannot last much beyond 2015 A.D. at the present rate of consumption. No doubt as a result of further exploitation and improvement of techniques the oil reserves may last a little longer but it is certain the sooner or later reserves of crude oil will dry up. 2. Secondly, the developing countries which constitute two-thirds of the world population are consuming only one seventh of the total energy. As the process of development in these countries gets accelerated their energy requirements would also increase. This would not only aggravate the energy problem but also increase the burden of fuel import bill. The developing countries are already paying a full import bill worth $ 67 billion which is likely to reach $ 100 billion by 1990. 3. Thirdly, the exploitation of forests in the tropics is proceeding at such a fast rate that unless alternative sources of energy are developed, over 40 per cent of the timber resources in the developing countries would be reduced to ashes during the next two decades.

Above all shortage of energy is bound to retard the pace of economic growth in the developing countries and affect adversely the rate of progress and human welfare in the developed countries. 237

Efforts to Resolve the Crisis

In view of the energy crises many developing and oil exporting countries came to feel that the issue should be discussed not only in the Committee on Natural Resources but also in the General Assembly in the context of global negotiations. In 1981 the Conference on new and Renewable Sources of Energy was held at Nairobi and called for the development and introduction of new and renewable energy sources in order to meet future energy requirements particularly in developing countries. It not only dealt with policy questions but also considered specific measures relating to energy assessment and planning. It also paid attention to research and development of new technologies and pleaded for adoption of mature technologies. In 1982 the U.N. General Assembly set up an inter-governmental Committee on the Development and Utilisation of New and Renewable Sources of Energy. It stressed the need to help developing countries to exploit their own energy resources more effectively. It was stressed that special attention should be focussed on the great hydroelectric potential that remain untapped in Africa and Asia and to the study of biogas development, improved charcoal burning and geothermal, solar, tidal and wind power. The Department of Technical Co-operation for Development which was set up in 1978, has also done commendable job in resolving the energy problem. It has provided technical assistance for national energy surveys and energy planning; assessment of the potential of specific energy resources; establishment of national energy institutions; and development of appropriate energy technologies for all sources. It has implemented numerous projects relating to conventional energy supplies and also focussed attention on development of new and renewable sources of energy. Such projects have been carried out in countries like China, Ethiopia, India, Kenya, Philippines, Romania, Thailand, Yugoslavia etc. The Department also provided technical assistance for national energy surveys and energy planning; assessment of potential of specific energy resources, establishment of national energy institutions and development of appropriate energy technologies from all sources. In 1983 the Department, under a programme jointly funded by Japan, Sweden and United Nations, conducted survey of the potential of small hydroelectric power stations in 48 developing countries. It also offered technical assistance to developing countries to enable them to exploit their mineral resources through survey and exploration programmes. It also launched several training schemes and tried to promote technological transfers.

Steps to deal with Energy Crisis

No doubt alternative energy sources are available in the form of coal, nuclear energy and replaceable hydroelectric power which should last for several centuries, but the current level of

technology for harnessing these alternate sources of energy does not indicate possibilities of their filling 238 the gap created by the exhaustion of oil and natural gas. Therefore a twofold approach is called for to deal with this problem. On the one hand energy must be conserved by foregoing some luxuries of life, specially by the affluent countries. Secondly, more concerned research and development efforts should be made to develop alternative energy sources. We may deal with these two aspects in some details.

Energy Conservation
In view of the fast depleting sources of energy, special attention needs to be given to energy conservation, specially in the affluent countries. For example in USA more than 50 per cent of the energy consumed is lost as waste heat to atmosphere. Considerable economy can be made in consumption of energy without adversely affecting the current standards of living by measures like reducing the size of cars, imposing construction standards for new housing with a view to reduce the expenses on heating and air-conditioning, encouraging use of fluorescent light tubes in place of ordinary bulbs etc. It may be noted that the prospects for energy conservation are great in affluent countries. In developing countries there is less scope for conservation of energy because in these countries the energy is mainly consumed for essential purposes. No doubt even in these countries the energy consumption can be considerably reduced through fuel efficiency. As in the developing countries maximum energy is consumed in the Industrial sector, economies in consumption of energy (both electricity and mineral fuels) can be achieved through planning of industrial development, technical improvements in industrial processing and retrofitting.

Alternative Sources of Energy

While making bid to conserve energy in every possible manner, effort should also be made to discover and develop alternative sources of energy. Some of the important sources of energy which can be developed include gasification of coal, Shale oil, nuclear fission energy, solar energy, geothermal energy, energy from biogas plants, wind and tide, and energy from unconventional sources like fusion of two hydrogen atoms to produce helium etc. It may be noted that some of these sources of energy such as coal or oil are non-renewable sources and when consumed continuously their stocks are likely to get exhausted very soon. Such sources of energy should be used with great caution and economy. On the other hand there are some renewable sources of energy such as sun and wind, which can be constantly replenished. Such sources of energy can be used more liberally Further the technical feasibility of harnessing energy of various kinds and the relative impact of various energy alternatives on the environments are constraints on the use of energy of various kinds. Similarly while making a selection regarding the source of energy factors like convenience and transporting costs have also to be taken into account.

239

Coal
Coal is without any doubt an important alternative source of energy because the world possesses immense reserves of coal in comparison with any other fuel. World's technically and economically recoverable reserves of coal are estimated at 636 billion metric tonnes, which is equivalent to 3095 billion barrels of oil or about 5 times the proven reserves of oil. Since 1974 coal exploration and pre-investment work has been undertaken in almost all coal producing developing countries and coal mines are being developed in sixteen of them. Another 28 developing countries are known to have coal deposits but produce no coal at present. However the use of coal as energy is not only costly in comparison with oil and natural gas but also poses hazards for human life as well as environments. Further the transportation of coal over long distances also poses a serious problem. In recent years considerable research has been conducted to overcome these problems. The development of slurry pipelines is expected to solve the problem of coal transportation. Some of the countries have developed the process of coal gasification which can also help in overcoming the problem of energy crisis. Again scientists have developed a Magnetohydro Dynamic Device (MHD) to convert coal directly into electricity, which is certainly much better than the method of generating electricity through thermal power plants in which almost 70 per cent of energy is lost in the air or in cooling towers. In comparison with the thermal power plants the MHD system is 60 per cent more efficient. Thus coal constitutes an important source of energy in those countries which have large reserves of coal. Its importance as a source of energy may decline only after certain other new sources of energy are developed.

Natural gas
Natural gas refers to hydrocarbons which are found in a gaseous state in underground reservoirs. It is cleaner and a more convenient source of energy than oil or coal. The world natural gas reserves have been estimated at about 456 billion barrels of oil equivalent, which is 72 per cent of the proven oil reserves and 15 per cent of proven coal reserves. According to reliable estimates the gas reserves are likely to last for at least next half century. But unlike coal, the production of natural gas is unevenly distributed as compared with demand. More than 75 per cent of the gas reserves are in North America, the Middle East and the centrally planned economies including China. The global development of the potential for rapid growth in consumption is dependent on export trade. Further, shortage of transportation presents problems which have not yet been resolved.

Oil Shale
Production of oil from shale antedates the conventional petroleum industry. All shale are fine grained sedimentary rocks containing solid organic matter which on heating disintegrate into oil and gas but which do 240

not contain any free oil. It can be burnt directly as a low-grade fuel in specially designed boilers. Large shale deposits are available in Brazil, China, Zaire etc. Some other countries like Burma, Jordan, Morocco, Thailand and Turkey also contain potentially exploitable deposits of shale. The world oil shale reserves have been estimated as equal to 3264 billion barrels of oil. However, the exploitation of shale poses a serious problem in so far as its production involves destruction of large areas of land and involves high environmental costs. Therefore, the use of shale-oil for production of energy has not found favour and there do not appear to be any immediate prospects for its use as source of energy in the foreseeable future.

Fuel Wood
Fuel wood is one of the most important source of traditional energy for residential uses, including cooking. Its demands has grown far faster than supply. As a result, the forests of developing countries are being consumed at a rate of 1.3 per cent of the total forest area or 10-15 million hectares a year. As the fuel supplies are exhausted, animal and crop residues are also burned depriving the soil of the valuable nutrients and organic conditioning material. Similarly, the amount of dung being burned annually is believed to be equivalent to some 2 million tons of nitrogen and phosphorous. Although, the fuel-wood crisis has already reached serious proportions technically and economically sound means exist both for reforestation and for improving the efficiency with which wood and other fuels are burnt. To ensure adequate fuel wood supplies planting would have to increase 15 fold. Further the use of fuel-wood can be made more efficient through design and dissemination of improved stoves.

Electricity
Electricity is another primary source of energy which is acquired through Hydro-power projects. The hydro-power projects which were earlier considered uneconomical have become attractive on account of the large increases in the oil prices. But as these projects need a long lead time, the progress has been quite modest so far. Again, mini hydro projects can be useful for isolated areas for village electrification schemes and small industry. But much progress is not likely to be made in this regard on account of the scarcity of managerial and engineering talent.

Nuclear Energy
It is asserted that nuclear energy can provide a long-range answer to the problem of energy crises through the breeder nuclear fission reactor which possesses great potential for producing energy. Even at present nuclear power accounts for one per cent of worldwide energy use and six per cent of its electrical demands. According to some authorities by 2020 A.D. nuclear power would account for one-third of world's energy needs. 241 This estimate, however, rests on the assumption that developments in this regard would continue to make favourable developments, which is quite doubtful. In 1979 following an accident at the Three Mile Island Nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania, which resulted in large release of

radioactive contamination, a number of countries like Sweden, Italy Switzerland etc. announced reassessment of their nuclear power plants. Secondly, the higher cost of production of nuclear energy has also greatly undermined the important role which nuclear energy can play. Thirdly, the issue of waste disposal also poses serious problems. No safe procedure for handling nuclear wastesome of which remains dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years has yet been devised.

Biogas Plants
Bio-gas can be another source of energy. Bio-gas can be produced by efficient recycling of the livestocks, human and plant waste to meet the cooking and lighting requirements of the rural communities. In India which has huge quantities of organic sludge, large quantity of bio-gas can be produced to meet the energy requirements in the rural sector. In India more than 25,000 gobar gas plants have been installed in different parts of the country and their number is ever on the increase. Similarly China is also said to have set up a large number of biogas plants to meet the energy requirements of its communes. In USA a corporation has been set up to extract methane gas from cow dung from cattle ranches in Oklahoma with a view to transmit gas to the neighbouring states pipelines.

Solar Energy
Sun is the most important source of energy and efforts are on to exploit this energy for heating and air-conditioning of homes and commercial places. A breakthrough in this regard has already been made. But the processs is very complex and costly and much improvement is desired before it can be effectively used. Despite these limitations at present it cannot be denied that there are great prospects for the use of solar energy in future. It has been estimated that about 15 per cent of the United States energy supplies might come from the sun about 25 to 30 years from now. Similarly it is hoped that in India solar energy may be utilised for irrigation pumps.

Geothermal Energy
Geothermal energy is another important, though modest, source of energy. This source of energy has been used since late nineteenth century in Italy, New Zealand, Japan, Mexico, Iceland, the USSR and USA where steam or hot water emerge up to the surface. Countries like New Zealand, and Iceland which abound in hot springs can make extensive use of this source of energy. A noteworthy feature of geothermal energy is that it creates very limited hazards for the environments. However, the chief limit 242 in the expansion of geothermal exploration and development is shortage of personnel experienced in geothermal work.

Wind Energy

This source of energy has been used by man for a long time. Though it is only a modest source of energy, it can nonetheless be utilised on a limited scale. The wind-power projects appear to be economically attractive for suitable sites. However, there has been little recent experience with it and much more exploration of sites is needed to assess its potential role.

Ocean Energy
This is yet another important renewable source of energy, which has great potential. Several countries have set up plants for producing electricity from sea waves. India set up first power plant for producing electricity from sea waves at Vizhinjam. The plant can produce maximum of 150 MW and an average of 75 KW for 10 months in a year. According to Kegley and Wittkopf "The brief perusal of short term alternatives to energy derived from oil is perhaps more disheartening than encouraging. Among other things it demonstrates that the energy issue is in fact a complex interplay of technical, economic, environmental and national, international political issues. Finding a solution to the energy problem therefore, requires a frontal attack on a multitude of well-entrenched forces, not the least of which is the standard of living to which much of the developed world has become accustomed or to which others aspire. Mustering the political will to make the front attack may prove the most formidable task. Yet the need is clear."* Denis Hayes is also not quite happy with the energy policy of the present governments. He says "Most energy policy is still framed as though it were addressing a problem that our grand children will inherit. But the energy crisis is our crisis. Oil and natural gas are our principal means of bridging today and tomorrow and we are burning our bridges."** * Charles W Kegley and Eugener R. Wittkopf, World Politics - Trends and Transformation, p.296. ** Denis Hayes, Rays of Hope: The Transition to a. Post Petroleum World (1977). 243

20 The Role of International Law in International Relations

"International law is the only objective and impartial yardstick in international relations; a solid basis fir any international policy worth of that name; a, sure touchstone far the settlement of international disputes, and an effective reducing agent of mere statecraft, cleverness and opportunism. It sets up a standard to which the good and the just can repair. International optimism, confidence and tranquility are in direct proportion to its strength and advancement." Kleffens

The present age is an age of internationalism in which the different states regularly come into contact with each other. To regulate the relations of states, both during times of peace as well as war, certain rules and regulations have been evolved over the past few centuries which are generally termed as international law. These rules regulate the mutual relations of the states according to certain accepted norms and prevent the use of unnecessary force for the settlement of disputes. Most of the states observe these rules in their national interests. The states which occupy a comparatively weak and defensive position, particularly, attach great importance to these rules and invoke them more frequently. According to Ball and Killough though "these rules have fallen shortboth in content and in possibility of enforcementof creating" the stable international order required by the nature of modern life. Nevertheless, they comprise a basis for further development which must be undertaken if the goals of peace and the promotion of human welfare are ever to be attained. Similarly Prof. Kleffens considers international law as "the only objective and impartial yardstick in international relations; a solid basis for any international policy worthy of that name." Before examining the role of international law in international relations, it shall be desirable to know about the meaning, sources and nature of international law. 244

Meaning of International Law

Numerous definitions of international law have been offered by the scholars of the subject. According to Frenwick, international law in broad terms means a "body of general principles and specific rules which are binding upon the members of the international community in their mutual relations." According to Lawrence international law means "the rules which determine the conduct of the general body of civilised states in their mutual dealings." Stowell defines international law as "certain rules generally observed by the mankind and enforced primarily through the agency of the governments of independent communities into which humanity is divided." According to Sir Henry Maine international law is "a complex system, composed of various ingredients. It consists of general principles of right and justice, equally suited to the conduct of individuals in a state of natural equality, and to the relations and conduct of nations; of collection of usages, customs, and opinions, the growth of civilisation and commerce; and a code of positive law." According to Prof. Hall international law means the "rules of conduct which modern civilised states regard as binding to them in their relations with one another with a force comparable in nature and degree to that binding the conscientious person to obey the law of his country, and which they also regard as being enforceable by appropriate means in case of infringement." Probably the most comprehensive definition of international law has been given by Prof. Oppenheim, a great authority on international law. He says "International Law is the name for the body of customary and conventional rules which are considered legally binding by civilised states in their intercourse with each other." He further adds that it is "a law for the intercourse of states with one another, not a law for individuals" "a law between and not above, the single states." An equally comprehensive definition of international law has been offered by Starke.

According to him international law may be defined as that body of law which is composed for its greater part of the principles or rules of conduct which states feel themselves bound to observe and therefore, do commonly observe in their relations with each other and which includes also (a) the rules of law relating to the functioning of international institutions or organisations, their relations with each other and their relations with States and individuals; and (b) certain rules of law relating to individuals and non-State entities are the concern of the international community." An analysis of the above definitions of international law shows that almost all the scholars emphasise that international law is a body of customary rules which the states consider is binding upon themselves. These rules not only relate to the functioning of the international institutions but also concern the actions of state and individuals in so far their rights and duties are affected. 245 Orign and Sources Though some sort of rules of mutual understanding have existed in human society since the earliest times, but a beginning towards the evolution of the international law was made during the Roman period when definite rules and principles were laid down for the regulation of the relations of people. These rules continued to be observed even after the decline of the Roman Empire and ultimately became the basis of the international law. However, the rules of international law in the modern sense emerged only with the rise of nation states like Britain, Portugal, France, Spain, etc. These states agreed in writing upon certain rules regarding conduct of war, preservation of neutrality and demarcation of their colonial spheres. These rules included in various agreements and treaties constitute the first written rules of international law. According to Prof. Potter the international law which is practised by the states in modern times is largely the work of private scholars. During the period between fourteenth and sixteenth centuries a number of scholars wrote books on international law, which became the basis of the international law in subsequent years. In this regard Hugo Gortius rendered most valuable service and produced the monumental work "On the Law of War and Peace". He emphasised the independent nature of the international law and insisted that the states should observe the rules of international law. In the nineteenth century efforts were made to prepare comprehensive codes of international law and scholars compiled the various treaties etc. Certain institutes were set up which were entrusted with the responsibility of codification of law. As a result of the efforts of these institutes great progress in the direction of codification of international law was made during the nineteenth century. But it was in the closing year of the nineteenth century and first decade of the present century that the famous Hague Conferences were held (1899 and 1907) which formulated certain new rules of international law as well. Both the League of Nations and the United Nations paid attention to codification of international law and appointed special committees for the purpose. While the League could not accomplish much in this direction, the United Nations succeeded in providing the vast body of international law a concrete shape by

reducing them to writing. It not only codified the existing rules of international law but also helped in the development of international law by drafting a number of new conventions. At this stage it shall be desirable to have an idea about the sources of international law. As international law is primarily based on the consent of the statewhether tacit or express,it is mainly based on customs and treaties. Customs are the rules evolved after a long historical process which are recognised by the members of the international community and are now considered as obligatory by the states. Most of the rules with regard to the diplomats are based on customary law. The treaties on the other hand are more certain source of international law. These are generally 246 of two types, those pertaining to specific matters between the contracting states and those which lay down general rules for large number of states. The former, which are binding only on the signatory states, are not that rich source of international law as the latter which have played a vital role in the development of international law. Some of the important multi-lateral treaties include Treaty of Westphalia (1648), Treaty of Paris (1815), Treaty of Versailles (1919), Geneva Conventions of 1864, 1906, 1929, and 1949, the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Covenant of the League of Nations (1920), the Kellog-Briand Pact (1928), the U.N. Charter (1945) etc. Even though legally these multi-lateral treaties are binding only on the signatory states but in reality they have assumed universal character. The legal commentaries on international law are another valuable source of international law and have greatly contributed to the development and clarification of numerous vague aspects of international law. These commentaries, though mere abstract speculations on law, are of immense value because they not only influence the decisions of the courts but also the thinking of the people all over the world. Finally, the decisions of the courtsboth national and internationalhave greatly contributed to the development of international law. As Chief Justice Marshall of U.S.A. observed The decisions of the courts of every country, so far as they are founded upon a law common to every country will be received, not as authority, but with respect. The decisions of the courts of every country show the law of nations, in the given case, is understood in that country, and will be considered in adopting the rule which is to prevail in this."

International Law a Weak Law

There is controversy among scholars whether international law is a law or not. Austin and Holland, are not willing to consider international law as law because it is not backed by the authority of the state. They emphasise that the rules of international law are voluntarily obeyed by the states and can be described as law by courtesy only. On the other hand scholars like Lawrence, Oppenheim, Starke hold that international law is law even though it has not been formulated by any formal legislative authority. According to Lawrence, the rules of international law "though like other rules are sometimes evaded and sometimes defied, do nevertheless receive general obedience. They are no more reduced to a nullity by being sometimes broken,

than are the laws of the land, because the habitual criminal disregards them with impunity." Similarly, Oppenheim asserts that international law is a law. He argues "Violations of international law are certainly frequent, especially during war. But the offenders always try to prove that their acts do not constitute a violation and they have right to act as they do according to the law of the nations, or at least that no rule of nations is against their acts. The fact is, that states while breaking the law of nations, never deny its existence, but recognise its existence 247 through the endeavour to interpret the law of nations as justifying their conduct. And although the frequency of the violations of international law may strain its legal force to breaking point, the formal though cynical, affirmation of its binding nature is not without significance."* However, Oppenheim admits that international law is comparatively a weaker law because it is a law between and not above the states. For a proper understanding of the position of international law visa-vis the state (municipal) law, it shall be desirable to compare the two. At the outset it may be pointed out that the state law is highly developed, while the international law is rather poorly developed and possesses a decentralised character. Usually, a domestic legal system implies three processes: legislation, adjudication and enforcement. Different institutions are connected with these three processes viz., Legislature, Courts and Police. All these three processes are also present in so far as the operation of the international law is concerned, although they fundamentally differ from the processes at the state level. With regard to the legislation of international law, as there is no international body, these laws are made outside formal institutions. The most common process for the formulation of international law is the general treaty signed by a number of states which indicates that they mutually accept certain rules with regard to a particular area. Sometimes, these treaties are drafted by international institutions or adhoc conferences, but they come into force after these are ratified by the appropriate authorities in the state. International Law also emerges out of the customary policies followed by a number of states. If a sufficient number of states follow a particular policy, it assumes the shape of a customary international law. For example, for a long time the states have been permitting innocent passage to the commercial vessels in their coastal waters. This custom has crystalised into a practice and assumed the shape of customary international law. The other important sources of international law include the opinion of publicists or scholars and rules framed by international institutions like League of Nations and United Nations. It is thus evident that the law making process of the international law is highly decentralised. In the absence of a common law creating authority the different states play an important role in the enactment of international law. As these states present conflicting interpretation of law, conflicts and disagreements often arise over the nature of the law itself. In the absence of a common institution "the formulation of the laws itself often involves direct political bargaining." As regards the international adjudication, three type of judicial institutions apply international lawthe national courts, the International Court of Justice and ad hoc international tribunals.

Most of the international legal questions are handled by the courts of the states who decide the cases in accordance with the international legal norms. The International * Oppenheim, International Law, Vol.1, p. 12. 248 Court of Justice, which is one of the Six organs of the United Nations, also operates in a decentralised manner. As the members of the International Court of Justice are elected by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council, bargaining and political interests often influence the decisions of the judges. Again, the court enjoys only advisory jurisdiction. It tenders necessary advice to the UN on political and constitutional questions as and when requested, and interprets the international treaties. But due to purely advisory nature of its opinion, it is not able to play a significant role in the disputes among states. Again, the court's jurisdiction depends on the voluntary submission of the states. In other words, before the Courts can apply international law the two states must agree to refer the case to the Court. This is in complete contrast to the legal system operating in the states where the subjects of the legal system have to stand trial regardless of their willingness. Finally, there are ad hoc tribunals sometimes also known as Commission or Arbitral Courts. These tribunals are set up by two or more states to deal with specific case. The judges of such courts are appointed by the mutual consent of the concerned states and they identify the area of international law to be applied. In other words, such courts also operate with the prior consent of the concerned states. It is thus evident that the international adjudication, like international legislation, is greatly affected by the lack of a central institution vested with necessary authority by the states. Politics more often than not determines the ability of the courts to deal with the various disputes and the courts are often used by the States for political decisions. As regards the enforcement of international law no permanent police force exists to punish or deter the law breakers. Action is taken purely on political considerations. The only force which is placed at the disposal of the United Nations is the one meant for peace-keeping operations. No doubt, the use of force can be authorised by the Security Council, but the right of veto enjoyed by the Five Permanent Members of the Security Council prevents any effective use of force against these Five Permanent Members or their allies. In fact both the General Assembly and the Security Council are more concerned with the maintenance of peace rather than enforcement of law. This implies that if a state violates the international law which does not pose a threat to peace, probably no action would be taken against it. On the other hand if a state does not violate international law and pose a threat to peace by its action, the Security Council and the General Assembly will take action against it. In short, the violation of international law is punished only when it poses a threat to peace. There is another fundamental difference in the enforcement procedure at the domestic and international level. In the domestic sphere a person can resort to self-help only under unusual circumstances, viz., the police is not available to protect him. On the other hand in the international sphere on account of absence of an international police force, the

249 states have to resort to self-help as a matter of course. The self-help can take the shape of diplomatic protest, economic sanctions, or even acts of war. However, the general principle emphasised by the international law is that the action should be stronger than the wrong committed by the State. On the basis of the above discussion we can say that in comparison with the domestic legal system, the international law, on account of its decentralisation, provides a relatively amorphous setting for official interactions among states. Generally the states are not willing to trust any external institution in the areas affecting their national security. However, in areas like navigation of the high seas or diplomatic exchanges, the states extend full respect to the international laws. It is quite evident from the above discussion that International Law is a weak law. Highlighting the organisational weakness of international law Prof. Paton says "International Law is very weak on the institutional sidethere is no legislature, and while a court exists it can act only with the consent of the parties and has no real power to enforce its decisions. It is true that the International Law of peace is seldom broken, but once grave issues arise we see flagrant disregard of accepted rules. The public opinion of the world may be a factor not lightly to be ignored, but it is harder to deal with a nation that is law-breaker than to expel a primitive man from his community; hence while primitive and International Law both lack institutional machinery, the sanctions of the former are really more effective since they are brought to bear on the individual and not on the nation."* It is true that International Law is less explicit than the state law and is frequently violated by the states because it lacks the necessary enforcement power. However, this does not take away from the International Law the right to be considered a law. In our times international law is becoming more exact with larger number of rules being reduced to writing and greater emphasis on codification. It would be wrong to deny to International Law the right to be considered law simply on the ground that it lacks enforcement power. There are certain sanctions behind international law as well, even though they differ from the sanctions behind the municipal or state law. Moreover, compulsion or force alone is not the basis of law. Prof. Oppenheim also says that international law is a weak law because it is law between the sovereign states. To quote him "As between states which are dependent and legally equal, there can be of course no common law-making body having power to bind them by its decrees, nor is there any Common Tribunal except the Permanent Court of International Justice having authority to interpret and apply law between parties at variance to compel, resort to the tribunal and give effect to their judgements. For these reasons, International Law is not only less imperative * WG. Paton, A Textbook of Jurisprudence, p.63. 250 and less explicit than State Law, but it also lacks the coercive force of State Law."

Role of International Law in International Relations

It is an irony that the significance of the role played by International law in International Relations has been completely ignored by the scholars. Generally the scholars do not attach any importance to the role of international law in international relations, and even if it is acknowledged they consider it as one of the lesser instruments of state policy. Some scholars have so much undermined the role of international law in international relations that they go to the extent of arguing that it is useless in so far it has failed to prevent wars, and plead that it should be discarded. However, this opinion hardly does any justice to the important role played by international law. It is true that international law has not been able to prevent wars, but it is also true that international law can strengthen the case of a state which appeals to it. According to Kleffens International Law is "a wrong shield, giving those who possess it, better morale and a consideration undoubtedly of special importance to the armed forces. A shield is a weapon of defence, not offence. No weapon can be more legitimate." He further asserts that "International Law is the only objective and impartial yardstick in international relations: a solid basis for any international policy worthy of that name, a sure touchstone for the settlement of international disputes; and an effective reducing agent of mere statecraft, cleverness and opportunism. It sets up a standard to which the good and the just can repair. International optimism, confidence and tranquility are in direct proportion to its strength and advancement."* The significance of the international law has been acknowledged by most of the countries. They grant constitutional or statutory recognition to this body of laws. For example, in India the Constitution has clearly laid down in part IV of the Constitution (Directive Principle of State Policy) that the government shall give due respect to the principles of international law. The Constitution of U.S.A. also emphasises the binding nature of the international law. It clearly states that the treaties concluded by the government shall form a part of the supreme law of the land. The Courts in U.S.A. have gone a step further and asserted that not only the treaties but the entire body of international law, including the customary lawshall form part of the Americal law. Even in other countries where no constitutional or statutory recognition has been accorded to international law, the binding nature of the law is not denied by the state. As the real sanction behind law is not legal force but the will of the state, the international law is given due respect. Prof. Kleffens has rightly observed * Eleco N. van Kleffens, "The Place of Law in International Relations" in Mclellan, Olson and Sondermann (eds) Theory and Practice of International Relations, pp.423-424. 251 "the ultimate basis of the respect due to international law (and to all laws, for that matter) lies outside the realm of lawit is of a moral and sociological order. We respect law and its enforcement because we feel in our heart and conscience, it is right and useful that the law be observed, and not because there is any fundamental rule of law commanding as that we must accept it as right, whether we agree to accept it or not."* Prof. Palmer and Perkins while admitting the defects and limitations of the international law consider it absolutely essential for a better international order. They say "With a consciousness

of the defects and limitations of international lawthe inadequacies of the legislature, judicial and executive functions, the narrowness of the range and the too frequent misunderstanding of its nature and of its proper rolethe men and women who seek a world of peace and order see that law as an index to their progress. Offering no formula by which the putting of words on paper can compel states to follow a course of justice and friendship, international law does provide almost the only means by which states can register and secure the gains which they make towards a better international order."** After agreeing in principle about the important role which international law plays or can play in the sphere of international relations, it shall be desirable to examine how international law is inevitable for the conduct of international relations. In fact, the need of systematic relations at the international level, as in the case of other societies, requires that there should be some rules of understanding which the members may observe in their complex relations and avoid chaotic conditions. There is hardly any sphere of state activity which is not regulated by some or the other rule of international law. Take for example the question of the jurisdiction of the members of the international community. To a large extent it is regulated by International Law. In the absence of a clear cut border and jurisdiction of the states, disputes are bound to arise, as it did happen between India and China in 1962 in view of their undemarcated boundaries. Similarly, the flight of an aircraft to or across a foreign country requires the consent of the concerned countries. This problem has been resolved through the civil aviation treaties to which most of the states are signatories. In the absence of these treaties the international movement of aircraft would be impossible. The flight of the military aircraft is, however regulated under different set of rules and generally the military planes of one country are not permitted to fly over the territory of another state for obvious reasons. The bilateral relations between different states are possible only due to existence of rules of international law. In the absence of rules pertaining to diplomatic envoys and their immunities, the foreign ambassadors would not have enjoyed exemptions from the jurisdiction of the state to * Ibid., p.426. ** Palmer and Perkins, International Relations, pp.295-96 252 which they are accredited. In the absence of these rules it would not have been possible to exchange envoys and establish regular dealings with other countries. The International Law by bestowing special status on the diplomats has made more intimate bilateral relations possible. The commercial relations between the members of the international community have grown largely because of international law. The commercial relations between different countries are regulated under numerous bilaterial and multilateral treaties which constitute an important part of international law. Likewise the military and financial assistance rendered by the states to each other is made possible by the various treaties and agreements among the concerned states.

Even the social and political changes which take place in the international society are largely due to international law. For example the Human Rights have come to occupy a prominent position in the constitutional systems of all the countries since World War II. This was made possible by the adoption of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This declaration challenged the long established convention of the states that what they do to their own nationals is their own concern. The Declaration by exerting necessary moral pressure on the states to concede certain basic rights to its citizens, brought about a revolutionary change. Subsequently, these rights were accorded legal status through incorporation in the two treaties concluded in 1966. International Law has also greatly helped in the technological advancement of the states. For example, after World War II when the question of utilising the resources of the continental shelf arose, there was every possibility of conflicts arising amongst various states due to absence of any exact law. This conflict was eliminated through the creation of new law on the subject. Similarly, in the late sixties UN sponsored a treaty containing legal rules regarding Outer Space, and thus eliminated the possibility of friction among the powers. Likewise, the problems of hijacking of aeroplanes, kidnapping of diplomats and exploitation of the source of the deep sea, which could have posed a serious challenge of international peace, were resolved through necessary laws. International Law indirectly influences the conduct of the international relations by providing the framework for the international organisation and society. It also contributes towards social justice by encouraging the international society to move in a particular direction. No doubt, in comparison to the domestic law, which is more readily obeyed by the people, the international law cannot receive willing obedience of the member states, yet it can be said with some amount of confidence that it does exercise some influence in this regard. This influence is greater when the law itself is not under dispute. The states tend to respect international law because they do not like to be charged with its breach. The above discussion makes it amply clear that international law has played a significant role in international relations. It provided a normative framework within which and with reference to which states take their decisions 253 Generally the states try to achieve their goal in keeping with the provisions of the law or in a manner which is not contrary to the law. Hence it can be said that international relations can be systematically conducted because of the existence of a body of international law. Without international law the international system would not be able to survive or work smoothly. According to Alan James "the significance of international law is enduring and vital. It does not control the ebb and flow of international politics, but it does provide an indispensable framework for the political process. Without it, relations, if not minimal, could not be other than anarchical in the most drastic meaning of the word. Internationally, as elsewhere, law is a concomitant of ordered relations."* * Alan James, "Law and Order in International Society" in Alan James (ed.), The Bases of International Order, pp.83-84.