Is the movement necessary? Will it survive as a multilateral trans-continental forum of states?
The foreign ministers meeting could be an occasion for member-states to deliberate on these questions and come up with collective responses for them. Prominent members of NAM like India, Egypt, Algeria, Mexico, and Indonesia have articulated their continuing support for the movement in ritualistic terms. Prime Minister Deve Gowda, responding to a question from the media recently, stated that in his view NAM should be nurtured and strengthened. His speech at the G-15 summit at Harare also underlined the continuing relevance of the movement. Ritual genuflection to the movement and theological commitments apart, it is time to ask down to earth questions about how relevant the movement is in the post-Cold War age. The first point of examination should be as to what constitutes the movement. The creation and survival of a movement is predicated on there being a substantive parallelism, if not commonality of interests and concerns amongst members who become part of the movement. The second p
