The conference of non-aligned foreign ministers in Nicosia is notable above all for the recognition that the new trend in the US-USSR relations calls for a fresh assessment of the international scene and possibly a new strategy on the part of the non-aligned movement. In keeping with the well established vocabulary, the foreign ministers have spoken of growing detente between the superpowers. This proposition is, of course, valid. The recent agreement on the dismantling of intermediate ballistic missiles and the proposal to reduce the strategic nuclear force of the two by as much as 50 per cent are certainly expressions of a new relationship between them. But a deeper reality lies behind the detente. This reality is the recognition by the Soviet leadership headed by Mr Gorbachov that the entire Soviet system, not just its economic component, has become moribund; that it fetters the creative abilities of the Soviet people to a point that the country has fallen behind the west in every field; that in order to have any chance of renovating the system, it needs to reduce defence expenditure substantially and to win western cooperation; that in order to secure this cooperation, it is necessary for it to reassure the west; and that this calls not only for confidence-building measures in Europe such as the reduction in its military presence, both nuclear and conventional, there but also retrenchment of its involvement in the third world. In plain terms, it is clearly on the cards that the non-aligned movement would have to deal with a situation (west-dominated) which is very different from the one (bipolar) it has been familiar with since the end of World War II.
Attention is inevitably focussed on developments in the Soviet Union, especially the struggle between the reformers headed by Mr Gorbachov and the conservatives for whom Mr Ligachev, the second most important man in the Politburo, is said to speak. For the Soviet Union, the outcome of this struggle is without doubt a matter of life and death. The country will be condemned to long-term stagnation and loss of influence if the conservatives win. But victory for the reformers, even if it is possible, which is unlikely in effective terms, can at best mark the beginning of a slow and painful process of renewal with innumerable ups and downs which must oblige the leadership to concentrate its attention and energy first on domestic problems and then on those of its Warsaw Pact allies. Thus, on any reckoning, the Soviet role in world affairs in the near future is likely to diminish, making it even more difficult than it is already for third world countries to cope with western pressures. Quite candidly, the prospect for non-aligned nations for at least the next 10 years is a bleak one. We can expect inequalities to increase rather than decrease.
As if this was not cause enough for concern for the non-aligned movement, it has to cope with conflicts within it, which cannot but weaken its capacity to achieve its minimum objectives such as independence of Namibia and vacation of the West Bank by Israel. South Africa is doubtless the dominant power in the region. As such it enjoys considerable room for manoeuvre. But it could not have been so reckless in its attacks on Angola and Mozambique if it did not enjoy the kind of backing it has from the United States and Britain which in turn would not have been the case if Washington and London had reason to show greater regard for the susceptibilities of the third world. Israel’s continued occupation of the West Bank is an even more eloquent testimony to the weakness of the third world, especially the Arab world. The Arabs have never been able to put up an effective front against the Israeli occupation. They have been too divided among themselves to do that. Their capacity to come together has been fatally undermined by Iran’s hostility towards them. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are arming themselves with state-of-the-art weapons not for a possible confrontation with Israel but with Iran. The eight-year war between Iran and Iraq, both members of the non-aligned movement, has gravely weakened both and the prospect remains of continued hostilities between them even if the current UN mediatory efforts produce some kind of settlement. This is not a counsel of despair. It is a plea for a realistic assessment on the one hand and a renewed attempt to mend fences within the movement on the other.