This really speaking is the basis of our foreign policy and its international framework - this concept of non-alignment, the concept of anti-colonialism, the concept of anti-imperialism, the concept of working for peace, and, at the same time, believing in an anti-imperialist struggle, development of developing countries on these lines, he was also thinking of some mixed international arrangement. And this daring thinking and acting for peaceful co-existence really laid down the bais for the detente. At the present moment, we do see it. I had dealt with it in detail, when I spoke in the other House. I do not want to repeat it here. At present, the big powers are thinking in terms of detente because of many reasons. One of these is that the developing non-aligned countries have created a certain force, a certain condition in the world. This is one aspect. Secondly, there is a certain technological imperative. Naturally, the success in the technological development has reached a stage when nobody can say that they alone are tallest. There may be descriptions of the world today as’ bipolar’ or ‘tripolar’ or ‘five polar’. I do not know how many poles there are. Basically, there seem to be two. But both the poles have come to realise that if there is a war, a nuclear war, nobody is going to be a winner. Therefore, there is no other alternative, but detnte. This is the position. At the present moment, the word ‘detente’ has become - I do not say dirty - somewhat unfashionable; for the purpose of election they are making it unfashionable. But the fact remains that the technological revolution has created certain political compulsions in the international sphere. And one of them is that the powers with all powerful weapons have come to realise that they just cannot make use of those powerful weapons.
Therefore, while we always consider detente as some sort of a very healthy development, and we welcome it, at the same time we say that detente should not really be confined to one particular, continent or one particular situation, that it should not become merely a technique of crisis management but that it should be a genuine movement which can be made applicable to all the continents and all the situations and all the tensions-in the world. This is, what our foreign policy expects and this is one of the objectives that we have before us. Therefore, when we think of non-alignment, I would like to say that ‘ we should think Of non-alignment in a much more positive manner.
During the debate, many Members have referred to non-alignment. And nonalignment has been a basic tenet of our foreign policy. The Summit Conference of Non-aligned Nations will soon be taking place in the capital of one of our friendly countries, Sri Lanka. And incidentally, this will be the first Summit in Asia. Therefore, India, along with all the other Asian countries, is proud that this Summit is being held in our continent, and we should certainly make all efforts to make it a great success. Possibly, you may be aware that we are making the necessary efforts, and I am leaving for Algiers to attend the Non-aligned Coordination Bureau meeting which is going to do the preparatory work. And I think all the non-aligned countries of the world as well as the other countries are looking forward to this historic meeting that is going to be held at Colombo.
From the beginning, non-alignment was never a unidimensional concept; it was a composite policy consisting of a number of fundamental elements. In the words of Jawaharlal Nehru, the objectives of non-alignment are -
“The pursuit of peace, not through alignment with another major power or groups of powers but through an independent approach to each controversial or disputed issue, the liberation of subject peoples, the maintenance of national and international freedom. The abolishing of racial discrimination and elimination of want, desease and ignorance which afflict the greater part of world’s population.”
