Representatives of several delegations attending the NAM Summit commended the South Asian Prime Ministers for their initiative, and statesmanship. They said that meetings such as the Singh-Gilani encounter would have been difficult to arrange in any other setting and therefore reconfirmed the effectiveness of NAM.  

The troubled India-Pakistan relationship, aggravated by the terrorist attack on Mumbai, moved towards positive improvement when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India and Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani Prime Minister of Pakistan, met on the sidelines of the 15th Summit of the 118-member Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), which was held in Sharm el Sheikh, July 11-16.

Representatives of several delegations attending the NAM Summit commended the South Asian Prime Ministers for their initiative, and statesmanship. They said that meetings such as the Singh-Gilani encounter would have been difficult to arrange in any other setting and therefore reconfirmed the effectiveness of NAM.

A joint statement by the two Prime Ministers said that they traversed the entire gamut of bilateral relations with a view to charting the way forward in India - Pakistan relations. (The full text of the joint statement appears at the end of this report.) The Prime Ministers affirmed their resolve to cooperate in fighting terrorism which, they said, is the main threat to both countries.

This theme was in keeping with the consensus of NAM members who agreed to fight terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, saying that terror should not be associated with any religion, nationality, civilization or ethnic group.

On the India-Pakistan front, Singh reiterated the need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks to justice. Gilani responded that Pakistan will do everything in its power to do so. He said that Pakistan has provided an updated status dossier on the investigations of the Mumbai attacks and had sought additional information/evidence. Singh said that the dossier is being reviewed.

The foreign secretaries (administrative heads of the foreign ministries) are to meet as often as necessary and report to the two foreign ministers who will be meeting during the forthcoming UN General Assembly (UNGA).

HISTORY OF A KIND

Meanwhile, back at the summit, history of a kind was made when Egypt joined a small exclusive club of members within NAM who have twice chaired the movement. Other nations that have done the same are Cuba and (former) Yugoslavia. Egypt will serve as Chair until the next Summit, to be hosted by Iran, which will then take over as the movements Chair.

Why is a particular country or group of countries given multiple chairmanships? Usually, said an Asian diplomat who did not wish to be named, because in a particular year or years no other country has been able and willing to spare the time and resources to host a summit. With 118 member-delegations, 26 observer-delegations, and numerous VIP guests including the UN Secretary General likely to attend, organizing a NAM summit is not only expensive but can turn into a logistical nightmare.

Some countries have had to construct a ceremonial meeting hall large enough for all the expected visitors. Others have found themselves having to build housing suitable for heads of state. Local officials have benefited from the flurry of construction, because the new homes have been allocated to them after the summit ended.

False steps are not unknown, and some embarrassing moments have to be diplomatically countered. Most of the time, however, the foreign ministry of the chairing country which has overall charge of planning and managing the event, comes off with its good name intact or even enhanced.

Despite difficulties including financial challenges that might arise, the role of the movements Chair is coveted because it carries the mantle of leadership between summits. In recent years, a troika consisting of the current chairing country, its predecessor and named successor comprise a troika that acts on behalf of the movement, and the chairs role is to a slight extent diminished.

Cuba, which ended its second stint as NAM chair in Sharm el Sheikh, had its first turn at NAM leadership before the troika arrangement had been established and concerns were then expressed both within the movement and outside that Fidel Castro would steer NAM off its normal course.

At the Havana Summit (1979) itself, a foreign minister who led his countrys delegation would incessantly say to fellow-delegates: We are like passengers in a railway station who are about to board a train but don’t know the destination that the engine driver has chosen.

Castro was very much aware of such concerns. Shortly after the 6th NAM Summit in Havana he followed the precedent of addressing the UN General Assembly and including in his remarks a capsule account of the summit, its achievements and expectations.

BREVITY

After he had spoken, the Cuban delegation at the UN hosted a lunch where Shahul Hameed, the then foreign minister of Sri Lanka which preceded Cuba as NAM chair sat across the table from Castro who leaned across and asked him: What do you think? Did I speak only for my country or for the movement? Hameed responded with a smile: For both, Your Excellency.

That was probably one of the shortest exchanges between two NAM personalities, many of whom have been known to consider brevity irrelevant. In Sharm el Sheikh by contrast, brevity miraculously received top billing. As the Indian newspaper The Hindu reports:

For a grouping known by the expansiveness of its rhetoric and the prolixity of its participants, the Non-Aligned Movement seems to have turned a new leaf. Short speeches, more or less tightly woven around the theme of international solidarity for peace and development, were the order of the day and even the opening plenary – normally the stage for lengthy, declaratory pronouncements on weighty matters – ended half-an-hour before the time allotted for it.

The only head of state to buck the trend was Libyas Muammar Gaddafi. Speaking on behalf of Africa his stay at the podium exceeded the time taken by his colleagues representing Asia, Europe, and Latin America respectively. He will next appear on an international platform at the UNGA where he has asked for a speaking slot immediately after President Obama.

TWO DOCUMENTS

Despite the brevity of most speeches, some habits die hard. The summit was book-ended by two documents each of which passed the century mark. The report from the outgoing Chair (Cuba) was 120 pages long, and the final declaration from Sharm el Sheikh, was somewhat shorter – at 110 pages.

Both documents covered key political and social issues that press on the international community, such as climate change, disarmament, food security, Palestine, the global development agenda, and terrorism. A recurring emphasis both in summit documents and in discussions was on the global economic crisis and its disastrous impact on the poor.

This approach was consistent with a recommendation to heads of state and government from their foreign ministers who urged that measures taken to resolve the effects of the crisis should not be geared at preserving the serious flaws of the present international economic architecture, which has been demonstrated to be unjust, inequitable and ineffective, nor selective in nature, but aimed at introducing the required structural reforms, and in no case should be at the expense of developing countries.

The concerns of participants, overall, were captured by Prime Minister Singh who said that developing countries had been hardest hit by the worst economic crisis in living memory. Pointing out that the crisis emanated from the advanced industrial economies, he cautioned that unless the aftermath of the crisis was carefully managed, developing countries would continue to be badly affected.

Singh also poured scorn on the stagnation in international political and financial institutions where decision-making authority is based on charters written some 60 years ago although the world has changed vastly in the intervening years.

WHAT NEXT?

With the summit meeting behind them: what next?

Critics have said that NAM meetings are no more than meaningless occasions for hollow eloquence. The capacity of NAM members to speak at length has been already noted, as has the fact that this tendency is being brought under control.

Moreover, it is not accurate to claim that NAM meetings are or have been meaningless because the NAM viewpoint on many regional and national issues has been vindicated over time. These issues include China’s legitimate claim to its seat at the UN, rejection of the fiction that Taiwan is China and China is not, the wars of national liberation and integration in Indochina, the futility of the cold war, the negative impact on less powerful countries of membership in acronymous alliances, and sovereignty over natural resources.

The fact that the old cold war has ended obviously requires individual countries following policies of non-alignment to redefine their strategies so that their foreign policies remain independent and sustained by their own interest as defined by themselves.

As for NAM, it has never claimed to be a monolithic bloc nor a rigid institution. It is an extraordinary instrument of political persuasion and its continued significance was stressed by no less than UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon when he addressed the NAM Summit.

Ban said that NAMs involvement is vital to solving todays common problems, from climate change and the economic crisis to ensuring a world free of nuclear weapons. It is abundantly clear that no country – regardless of size or resources – can solve problems alone, he added. That raises the stakes and the space for the Non-Aligned Movement to shape a better world. Now more than ever, your engagement is very vital to achieving global solutions to our common problems.

In addition, he highlighted the effort to seal the deal at Copenhagen later this year on a new climate change pact aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions. We need to mobilize the political momentum for an equitable and effective deal. Your participation is vital – I count on you to attend. 
_______________________________

INDIA-PAKISTAN JOINT STATEMENT

Following is the full text of the Joint Statement issued after the meeting between the Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh and his Pakistani counterpart Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt:

The Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan Singh and the Prime Minister of Pakistan Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani met in Sharm El Sheikh on July 16, 2009.

The two Prime Ministers had a cordial and constructive meeting. Both leaders agreed that terrorism is the main threat to both countries. Both leaders affirmed their resolve to fight terrorism and to cooperate with each other to this end.

Prime Minister Singh reiterated the need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks to justice. Prime Minister Gilani assured that Pakistan will do everything in its power in this regard. He said that Pakistan has provided an updated status dossier on the investigations of the Mumbai attacks and had sought additional information/evidence.

Prime Minister Singh said that the dossier is being reviewed. Both leaders agreed that the two countries will share real time, credible and actionable information on any future terrorist threats. Prime Minister Gilani mentioned that Pakistan has some information on threats in Balochistan and other areas.

Both Prime Ministers recognized that dialogue is the only way forward. Action on terrorism should not be linked to the Composite Dialogue process and these should not be bracketed. Prime Minister Singh said that India was ready to discuss all issues with Pakistan, including all outstanding issues.

Prime Minister Singh reiterated Indias interest in a stable, democratic, Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Both leaders agreed that the real challenge is development and the elimination of poverty. Both leaders are resolved to eliminate those factors which prevent our countries from realizing their full potential. Both agreed to work to create an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence.

Both leaders reaffirmed their intention to promote regional cooperation.

Both Foreign Secretaries should meet as often as necessary and report to the two Foreign Ministers who will be meeting on the sidelines of the forthcoming UN General Assembly. 

______________________________

The writer has served as Sri Lanka's ambassador to Canada, Cuba, Mexico, and the USA. He was Chairman of the Commonwealth's Select Committee on the media and development.