Latest news with #BandungConference
The Wire
04-06-2025
- Business
- The Wire
The Search for the ‘Bandung Spirit'
Support independent journalism. Donate Now World While Bandung's call for political independence across the colonies has in fact been met, the economic independence and egalitarian development path it advocated are still substantially unrealised. The plenary session during the historic Bandung Conference. Photo: Public domain. Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Contribute Now This April marked the 70th anniversary of the Bandung conference held in Indonesia in 1955, that brought together high-level representatives from 29 countries, most of which had won independence from colonial rule in the wave of decolonisation that accompanied the onset and advance of the Second World War. The 1955 event that is a kind of milestone in global history since the middle of the 20th century was remarkable in many ways. Though a meeting of leaders rather than of people, it did appear to have the enthusiastic support and sanction of the populations that had won political freedom from imperialist domination. The proceedings and the outcome document had a strong anti-colonial flavour, reflected in the declaration that 'colonialism in all its manifestations is an evil which should speedily be brought to an end'. The reference to 'all manifestations' clearly implied that the challenge was not merely to root out the still present instances of colonial domination, but to stem the onset of neocolonial domination in the then Third World. The conference reflected the mood in Afro-Asian nations. The prevailing sense was that it was imperative to keep imperialism at bay, for which these leaders together committed themselves to and demanded of others recognition of the equality of nations 'large and small', and respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty. Implicit in this case for the establishment of a democratic international order was the idea that the nation state was the entity that matters and the assertion that national governments were more representative of their peoples than any self-designated international rule-making authority. Class character There were of course differences in the perception regarding the potential and ability of the states in newly independent countries to pursue autonomous development that helped fortify political freedom with economic independence. One the one hand, there were those who held the position that in the post-war world the potential for the development of new autonomous capitalist societies was fundamentally limited even if countries won political independence. Their ability to have a transformative influence, depended on the class character of national governments that came to power at Independence. Only if those states were led by forces representing the interests of the peasantry and the formal and informal working class, as opposed to indigenous industrial capitalists and big landed interests in coalition, that the structural changes needed to create the conditions for more egalitarian development based on indigenous capabilities and domestic markets would be ensured. The victory of Communist led forces in revolutionary wars in China and Vietnam, the continuation in power of governments with an avowedly pro-people development agendas (unlike in some other contexts), and the formation of an uneasy 'socialist bloc' along with the then Soviet Union, seemed to provide support for those advocating this form of transformation. It was not just the state that must be the bulwark against imperialism and the driver of autonomous development, but that state must in the interests of the hitherto exploited and marginalised lead a process of institutional change that attacks land monopoly and non-agricultural asset concentration. But a majority of countries that won Independence during the decolonisation years that followed the Second World War, while coming to power on the basis of mass movements against colonial rule, represented a coalition of landed and industrial interests. Despite declaring intent to pursue a radical programme, they failed in practice to implement much needed land reforms that by breaking down land monopoly and releasing peasant energies, would have dismantled barriers to productivity increase in agriculture, raised mass incomes and raised consumption, and generated the wage goods surpluses needed to support economic diversification away from agriculture. This failure, in ways which we cannot elaborate here, limited the growth of the domestic market and held back autonomous development, as well as left untouched the structural constraints leading to bouts of inflation and periodic balance of payments crises. This was true of countries from which some of the inspiring leaders at Bandung – Indonesia's President Sukarno, India's Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, and Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser for example – came. In time, with the failure of autonomous development in the form of 'import substituting industrialisation', these countries would all drop their progressive agendas and embrace neoliberalism, owning that agenda rather than opposing it as an imposition by neocolonial powers. The core constraint The Bandung cohort did realise that they had responsibilities to their peoples who fought for political freedom, installed them as leaders, and gave them the social sanction to advance the project of autonomous and independent development. The issue they faced was not just that of raising productivity and per capita income but of addressing the asset inequality that would deprive that majority of the benefits of post-independence development. That, in turn, would prevent the emergence of a domestic market needed to support a process of development that would be less dependent on international markets dominated by the developed countries and on the foreign investors whose support would be needed to obtain any foothold in those markets. In sum, the less developed countries would have to pursue more egalitarian strategies with a major or even dominant role for the State, as well as cooperate with each other to create combined markets and realise the scale needed to support the diversification of economic activity. Seven decades after the Bandung conclave, its vision appears to have been only partially realised and does not seem to have the needed purchase among governments who are seen as central to breaking the shackles of global economic inequality. After a brief honeymoon with the ideals that were espoused at Bandung, States in most post-colonial countries lost the will to stand up to imperialism and push ahead with strategies that could have helped them pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. They had failed to deliver on the promises based on which the mass upsurge against imperialism was mobilised, having gone too far to accommodate the demands of powerful, asset owning vested interests and their elite backers. This not only resulted in the persistence to different degrees of inequality, poverty and social deprivation, but also subverted the effort to pursue autonomous and successful development. The result was the loss of support from those advocating or aspiring for national development. Also read: Unchallenged at Home and Abroad: Jawaharlal Nehru's Leadership With the Non-Aligned Movement By the 1970s, governments in most less developed countries were faced with a development impasse. To resolve that, they turned to the surfeit of liquidity that flooded global markets following the rise to dominance of finance starting in the 1980s. Rather than stand up to foreign capital and influence, expand domestic markets, and build domestic capabilities, they embraced neoliberalism in the hope that they can leverage foreign investment and finance to restructure themselves as export engines growing on the basis of markets in countries they had promised to win economic independence from. The result has been heighted vulnerability, extreme volatility, and social retrogression. The exceptions However, the Bandung promise of a pushback against imperialism was kept alive and was rejuvenated by the revolutions in China and Vietnam. Victory in the Vietnam war, the 50th anniversary of which is being celebrated this year, highlighted a model form of the national liberation struggle in Vietnam and marked the completion of the Vietnamese revolution. The synchronisation of that important anniversary with the 70th anniversary of Bandung has partly strengthened the call for a revival of the Bandung spirit. It is true that China and Vietnam too embraced 'reform', expanded the space for private initiative and relied on external markets to accelerate growth. But their success along that path, despite its many adverse consequences, is in no small measure due to the strengths and resilience built during years of 'socialist' development. The idea that the character of the leadership of the national liberation struggle was crucial has an interesting history. It originated in the view articulated at the Sixth Congress of the Communist international in 1928, in the 'Theses on the Revolutionary Movement in Colonial and Semi-colonial Countries'. That view had held that 'When the dominant imperialist power needs social support in the colonies it makes an alliance first and foremost with the dominant classes of the old pre-capitalist system, the feudal type commercial and moneylending bourgeoisie, against the majority of the people.' However, subsequent analyses did not either restrict that kind of alliance only to the colonial period or limit it to one between feudalism and imperialism. Rather, the possibility, especially after the October Revolution, that any attack on feudal land monopoly could develop into a movement against private property itself, was seen to necessitate a compromise between the 'national bourgeoisie' and feudal landlordism in the post-colonial period. As a result, the ability of the post-colonial state, constructed in part by an incipient capitalist class to sustain successful industrialisation, was also seen as limited. What this position went on to argue was that the fall-out of this correlation of forces constrained industrialisation and capitalist development in three ways: (1) It sapped the ability of emerging elites in underdeveloped countries to radically transform agrarian relations, and thereby constrained growth of the domestic market and manoeuvrability of the State; (2) It transformed the underdeveloped countries into a sink for surpluses to finance that process of accumulation; and (3) It subordinated local production and markets to the needs of capital accumulation on a world scale, resulting in growing external vulnerability. The argument was not that capitalist development would not occur, but that such development would be characterised by extreme gradualism, its effects on wage earners and the salariat would be immiserising, and that at all times it would be characterised by the utmost external vulnerability making the pace of development dependent on the access of domestic elites to international capital. The questionable alternative 'models' This view was sought to be skirted subsequently by a very specific interpretation of the successful diffusion of capitalism into two countries with a special history. if we take the post-World War II period (and therefore treat Japan since the Meiji restoration separately), there have been only two countries that have made the developmental transition within a market economy framework, in the sense of having moved from backward to developed-country status: South Korea and Taiwan. Other countries that had made that transition were either part of the Soviet Union and not market economies in any meaningful sense, and China and Vietnam which show some promise of making that transition have a very specific non-market, pre-'market-economy', history. In sum, South Korea and Taiwan are more exceptions rather than the rule. There are some telling similarities between these two that make them exceptional. Externally, South Korea and Taiwan were countries that became 'independent' after having been liberated from Japanese imperialism by the United States, that placed them under occupation. That resulted in a special, even if subordinate relationship with the US and them, strengthened by the fact that these were frontier states in a geopolitics marked by Cold War conflicts. They also served as important rest, recuperation and refuelling bases for American troops during the Vietnam war. Not surprisingly, despite being geographically not too large, as of September 2022 South Korea was host to 73 US military bases. This special relation not only gave the country easier access and special privileges in the markets of the US and its allies, but special access to private international capital markets at a time when developing countries were being shunned by international banks. South Korea was a 'semi-core' rather than 'peripheral' country. It was the periphery of metropolitan capitalism, rather being a peripheral country in global capitalism. The State here mattered not because it was a bulwark against imperialism, but because it was the instrument through which imperialism consciously facilitated their development to establish them as 'frontier states'. Contemporary relevance It is in this background that we must assess the relevance of the Bandung agenda today, when international inequality and the push of capital from the North to the South have locked many less developed countries in a debt trap; when the developed nations refuse to recognise their prime responsibility for redressing the effects of past carbon emissions that triggered the current climate crisis; and, when developed countries turn inward and seek to resolve their domestic problems by shutting out the less developed from presence in their markets. The global majority countries are once again recognising that they need to stand on their own feet, shape autonomous development strategies, and cooperate to strengthen each other. But to pursue that agenda they need to break out of the grip of neoliberalism, enhance domestic policy space and reverse and unravel asset and income inequality to grow local markets. That requires social pressure and transformation. This possibly explains why, though 'Bandung' was a landmark that received popular support in Afro-Asian nations, the 70th anniversary passed with scattered celebrations that were little more than a token recognition of the importance of the occasion. Underlying this absence of the Bandung spirit is the reality that, while Bandung's call for political independence across the colonies has in fact been met, the economic independence and egalitarian development path it advocated are still substantially unrealised. But that makes a case not for dropping the Bandung agenda, but for recognising that there are prerequisite for reviving the Bandung spirit, which has gained a new relevance. However, the changed circumstances also pose new challenges. What the embrace of neoliberalism did was that it set off competition among these poorer countries to win larger shares of the limited world market open to them. Wages were kept down, foreign investors were wooed and developed country governments appeased in order to emerge the winner. Few did, but even when they did the outcome was not adequate to ensure coveted membership of the rich nations club. The result largely was greater dependence, excessive external debt, subordination and extreme vulnerability. Meanwhile, whatever growth occurred largely bypassed the poor. And when the US administration under Trump decided to weaponise tariffs and held out the threat of being shut out of the American markets, governments in even the more 'successful' countries, had to rush to negotiate and offer concessions that are likely to set back development and hurt most those who have been marginal beneficiaries of whatever development has occurred. That weakness explains the muted response to attempts to recall Bandung. It poses a challenge to democratic forces and civil society actors when seeking to revive the spirit of Bandung and realise its ambitions. They must struggle to put in place truly representative governments committed to pursuing the goals that inspired national liberation struggles the world over. C.P. Chandrasekhar is the Global Research Director at International Development Economics Associates (IDEAs). He is a Senior Research Fellow at the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and was engaged in teaching and research at the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning at Jawaharlal Nehru University for more than 30 years. In commemoration of the 70th anniversary of the Bandung Conference, IDEAs, Yukthi and Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies have organised a two-day conference in Colombo, Srilanka on June 2 and 3 at the historic venue of the Bandaranaike Memorial International Conference Hall, which was the site of the 5th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement. Read more about it here. This article was originally published on the IDEAs website. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments. World Musk Slams Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' as 'Abomination' View More
Nikkei Asia
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Nikkei Asia
France's Macron calls for 'new coalition' between Asia and Europe
SINGAPORE -- French President Emmanuel Macron on Friday called on Europe and Asia to build a new coalition that upholds global norms and to defend sovereignty in a keynote address at the Shangri-La Dialogue security summit here. A Europe-Asia alliance can lead to "new coalitions, new agreements" and a resetting of the rules-based order, he said. Citing the Bandung Conference that convened more than 70 years ago among African and Asian countries, Macron said the time for non-alignment has "undoubtedly passed."
Associated Press
29-05-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Bharat Summit brings 450+ delegates from 100 nations to Telangana to rethink global justice; opens with a candlelight vigil condemning the Pahalgam attack
The Bharat Summit in Telangana brought together over 450 delegates from 100 countries to advance global justice. Leaders adopted a 44-point agenda promoting equality, peace, and democracy, emphasizing empathy and collaboration to address global challenges while honoring India's legacy in justice and solidarity. India, May 29, 2025 -- 450+ global delegates, 100 nations, one united call — delivering global justice from Hyderabad to the world In what is probably one of the first of its kind conference, the Govt. of Telangana, India in collaboration with Samruddha Bharat Foundation, an NGO based in New Delhi, India, hosted the first edition of the Bharat Summit- a global conference to mark the 70th anniversary of the historic Bandung Conference that laid the foundation for the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), bringing together over 450 delegates representing progressive parties from 100 countries to 'deliver global justice'. The Summit began with the INC along with participating political parties from over 100 nations joining a candle-light vigil, in solidarity with the victims of the terror attack in Pahalgam, J&K and registering a strong stance against cross border terrorism. The vigil, led by Telangana CM Revant Reddy, was joined by several senior Congress leaders like Salman Khurshid and Gurdeep Singh Sappal. The theme of the Summit, which included incumbent and former ministers from EU, Africa and Asia and the US as well heads of political parties and think tanks, was to rethink and deliver global justice- social, economic, ecological and geo-political. For the first time, international alliances like Progressive Alliance, Progressive International, NAM, SocDem and others shared a stage to address common threats and concerns facing countries globally. Apart from senior ministers of the Telangana Government and several prominent leaders from the Opposition alliance of India including Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, the Summit was attended by former ministers and incumbent members of Parliament from across the world. Anne Linde, Former Foreign Minister of Sweden, Bert Koenders, Former Foreign Minister, Netherlands, Jorge Taiana, Speaker of Mercosur, Former Foreign Minister & Former Defence Minister, Argentina, Monica Fein, President Socialist Party of Argentina, Arena Williams, MP, Labour Party, New Zealand were among some of the speakers and delegates at the Summit. Apart from the fact that the Summit hosted over 450 leaders from social-democratic parties to 'rethink global justice', the Summit's timing was significant since it was organised to mark 70 years of the Bandung Conference. But while the Bandung Conference was attended by 29 parties and the NAM hosted 56 parties, the Bharat Summit expanded its umbrella to bring within its ambit over 100 countries from 5 continents. In a significant milestone, Congress leaders and global delegates collectively adopted the Hyderabad Resolution, a 44-point agenda under the theme 'Delivering Global Justice'. The resolution reaffirms a shared commitment to the values of freedom, equality, justice, and solidarity, uniting social-democratic, socialist, and labour movements from around the world. Key agenda items include reshaping the economic paradigm, advancing environmental justice, striving for gender equality and social inclusion, defending democracy and social justice, working for peace and human security, and reforming global institutions. Underscoring the common concerns of rollback of democratic rights and freedom, of the sustained attack on civil liberties, undermining of institutions, disregarding multilateral agreements, spreading lies and fuel division, the Resolution highlights the role it envisages for the progressives to collectively take on. Senior Congress Leader and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi delivered a powerful address reflecting on the changing nature of democratic politics around the world. He called for a political shift from fear and hatred to listening, empathy, and love. 'Democratic politics has fundamentally changed. The rules that applied a decade ago don't work anymore,' Gandhi said, pointing to how concentrated capital and media control have reshaped the political landscape. 'This is the new politics—where the opposition is not engaged with but crushed. All our avenues were compromised, including the media. That's when we reached back into history and decided to walk from Kanyakumari to Kashmir—a 4,000-kilometre journey.' Reflecting on his Bharat Jodo Yatra, Gandhi shared two key lessons: 'First, our opponents have a monopoly on anger and fear—we cannot fight them on that ground. But during the yatra, I discovered the transformative power of listening. I spoke less and listened more, and that changed everything.' The second lesson, he said, was about embracing love in politics. 'Until the yatra, I had never used the word 'love' in politics. But once I did, people began to respond. Love and affection can disrupt hate more powerfully than any argument.' Rahul Gandhi concluded by saying, 'Disagreements on policy will always exist. But while their lens is anger, hatred, and fear, our lens must be love, affection, and deep listening. I am confident this summit will help build the ideas we need for a new kind of politics in India and the world.' Agreeing with the vision of the Bharat Summit, Senior German politician Lars Klingbeil of the Social Democratic Party said, 'The topics being discussed at the Bharat Summit are closely related to the issues we are facing in Germany. Our international rules-based order has come under great pressure. There are attempts to disrupt this order and to replace the 'rule of law' with the 'rule of might.' These developments must stop.' Wayne Swan, National President of the Labor Party and former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, said, 'We believe in the power of public policy to change people's lives. In this era of hyper-individualism and the growing influence of oligarchs, it is becoming increasingly difficult to secure economic equality.' He also added that party activism has never been more important, particularly in the face of rising fascism and the concentration of power among oligarchs in countries like the United States. Telangana Chief Minister Shri Revanth Reddy, addressing international delegates, showcased his government's progressive welfare policies. 'We have implemented the largest farmer debt waiver in India—Rs 20,674 crore—and provide over Rs 20,000 crore annually in agricultural subsidies,' he said. Highlighting women's empowerment, he added, 'Our women entrepreneurs are competing with Adani and Ambani.' Deputy Chief Minister Shri Mallu Bhatti Vikramarka noted that the presence of over 450 international delegates had provided the right platform to exchange ideas on global justice and peace, in alignment with Rahul Gandhi's vision of NYAY. The Bharat Summit is poised to be a defining moment for the global progressive movement, committed to a democratic, liberal, and just world order, while honouring India's legacy in global peace and justice. About the company: About Government of Telangana The Government of Telangana is committed to progressive governance, social justice, and inclusive development. As host of the inaugural Bharat Summit 2025, Telangana showcased its leadership in fostering global dialogue on justice, equality, and peace. With landmark initiatives such as the largest farmer debt waiver and robust support for women entrepreneurs, Telangana continues to drive transformative welfare policies that empower communities and promote sustainable growth. The state stands as a vibrant hub for innovation, collaboration, and a people-first approach to governance, shaping India's future while contributing to a just and democratic world order. Contact Info: Name: Masuma Siddique Email: Send Email Organization: Stellaratti Brand Consultants Address: 10, 29th Rd, Bandra West, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400050 Website: Release ID: 89160047 In case of encountering any inaccuracies, problems, or queries arising from the content shared in this press release that necessitate action, or if you require assistance with a press release takedown, we urge you to notify us at [email protected] (it is important to note that this email is the authorized channel for such matters, sending multiple emails to multiple addresses does not necessarily help expedite your request). Our responsive team will be readily available to promptly address your concerns within 8 hours, resolving any identified issues diligently or guiding you through the necessary steps for removal. The provision of accurate and dependable information is our primary focus.
The Wire
27-05-2025
- Politics
- The Wire
Unchallenged at Home and Abroad: Jawaharlal Nehru's Leadership With the Non-Aligned Movement
May 27 is the death anniversary of Jawaharlal Nehru. As the nation observes today the 61st death anniversary of India's first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, not only the architect of modern India but also of its foreign policy, it may be worth recalling his role in the founding of the Non-Aligned Movement six decades ago. This month marks the 70th anniversary of conference of Afro-Asian countries held in Bandung, approximately 100 miles from the Indonesian capital of Jakarta, in the last week of May 1955. It was the Bandung Conference which laid the foundations of the Non-Aligned Movement that was to be later inaugurated in the then Yugoslavian capital of Belgrade in 1961. The Asian Relations Conference was held in New Delhi from March 23 to April 2, 1947 at the initiative of Jawaharlal Nehru, then the Vice-President of Viceroy's Executive Council (interim Prime Minister). It was the first conference of Asian countries ever and Nehru chose Sarojini Naidu, the tallest woman Congress leader (she was president of the Indian National Congress in 1925) to preside over the conference. This was perhaps symbolic of many strides towards women empowerment that India would take after gaining independence a few months later. As many as 243 delegates from 28 Asian countries participated in the conference which was held in Purana Qila (Old Fort) in New Delhi. Nehru declared in words that have become memorable to be often quoted in the context of India's foreign policy: 'For too long we, of Asia, have been petitioners in Western courts and chancelleries. That story must now belong to the past. We propose to stand on our own feet and to co -operate with all others who are prepared to co-operate with us. We do not intend to be plaything of others.' Even five months before the conference, within a week of taking over as the interim prime minister, Nehru broadcast to the nation on September 7, 1946: 'We propose, as far as possible, to keep away from the power politics of groups, aligned against one another, which have led in the past to world war, and which may again lead to disasters on an even vaster scale…We are particularly interested in the emancipation of colonial and dependent countries and peoples, and in the recognition in theory and practice of equal opportunities for all races.' Thus, all the principles of India's foreign policy were enunciated by Nehru at the dawn of the nation's independence: non-alignment, freedom, honour, non-interference and equality of peoples and nations. With Nehru as the pivot, India, Indonesia and Burma became the nexus of an independent Asian viewpoint. In 1954 when Gamel Abdul Nasser became the leader of the new Republic of Egypt, the West started putting pressure on him to join the Baghdad Pact. But he was influenced by the example of the three Asian countries and refused to join the Anglo-American pact. Nehru seized the opportunity to broaden the base by including Egypt and other African countries to create a distinctive Afro-Asian presence in world affairs. The idea of a wider conference of Asian and African countries had been earlier mooted at the South East Asian Prime Ministers conference in Colombo, April 1954. Unchallenged at home, by the beginning of 1955, Nehru had also emerged as one of the most influential leaders in the world. As S. Gopal, wrote in Jawaharlal Nehru – A Biography ( Volume 2, 1947- 1956): 'Abroad his status was equally unchallenged. No single individual had done more, in the years since the Second World War, to project Asia on to the world stage.' The stage was now set for the first meeting of Afro Asian countries that President Sukarno of Indonesia offered to host at Bandung which an Arab delegate thought 'did not look an Asian city at all. It was too clean.' The conference was held for seven days in the last week of April 1955. But a month earlier, Nehru, who religiously kept parliament informed of all matters – national and international – told the Lok Sabha on March 31: 'When the history of this time is written in the future, two things will stand. One is coming of atomic energy, and the other the emergence of Asia…This conference is something historic. It is unique. Of course, no such thing has ever happened before and the fact of representatives of 1,400 million people meeting even though they have differences amongst themselves is a matter of utmost significance.' Twenty-nine countries of Asia and Africa were invited to Bandung, including China for the inclusion of which both Nehru and U Nu of Burma had to make extraordinary efforts to convince those who were strongly opposed to China's participation. The plenary session during the historic Bandung Conference. Photo: Public domain. The conference lasted seven days, the highlights of which are best described in the words of Nehru himself: 'The Bandung Conference has played an important role. It has represented various forces that have been developing in the past few years and has compelled the attention of other countries to these new developments. While the fact that there are some new independent countries in Asia is known to everybody, the real significance of this is not always appreciated. There is, in large parts of Asia and Africa, an intense desire to be left free to work out our destiny. We want progress at a rapid rate. But with all our past memories of colonial domination, we suspect any attempt at interference or patronage… 'The aggressive attitudes of communism or anti communism find no echo with us and we see no reason whatever why we should lose our own individuality, give up our thinking and become a mere camp follower of others… 'We are little tired of the conflicts and hatreds of Europe and see no reason why we should succumb to them…The Bandung Conference was the first clear enunciation by the countries of Asia especially that they have an individuality and viewpoint which they are not prepared to give up because of the views of or pressure from other countries.' But, he cautioned, it would be absurd to expect that the Bandung Conference would lead to the solution of international problems: 'The Bandung Conference should not be judged so much from the forceful speeches delivered but from the joint statement issued at the end.' The joint communique established 10 principles for developing friendship and cooperation among nations some of which were: a) respect for the fundamental human rights and principles of the UN Charter; b) respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nation; c) abstention from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of another country; d) refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country; e) settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means; f) recognition of the equality of all races and nations; and g) respect for justice and international obligations. Earlier, on May 3, while briefing the Congress Parliamentary Party (CPP), the Nehru said: 'A rather remarkable thing is that at the conclusion of the Conference almost every country has commended it, has approved of it- certainly the American press, the British press, the French press, the Russian press, the Chinese press and others. It is a remarkable thing that something should be done which is approved of by all these people who usually never agree about anything.' Winston Churchill, Nehru's one-time foe, wrote to him, almost two months after Bandung, on June 30, 1955: 'I always admired your ardent wish for peace and the absence of bitterness in your consideration of the antagonisms that had in the past divided us. Yours is indeed a heavy burden and responsibility, shaping the destiny of your many millions of countrymen, and playing your outstanding part in world affairs.' In this letter, and another one he had written a few months earlier Churchill used the phrase 'the light of Asia' for Nehru. So what may be the relevance of Bandung today? Its 70th anniversary is a good opportunity for India, Indonesia and some other countries of Asia and Africa, to revive the Non-Aligned Movement, which in the words of late prime minister Indira Gandhi, the chairperson of the movement in 1983, was the 'history's biggest peace movement.' In a recent article in a daily, former foreign secretary Shyam Saran wrote: 'The Bandung Principles or Das Sila remain valid as norms for inter-state relations and for creating a more democratic world order. They should be revived. NAM, which incorporated the Bandung Spirit, became the the largest peace movement in history, creating a zone of peace between contending ideological and military blocs. We need a similar space free of great power contestation.' But for that to happen India needs a leadership that has the wisdom, vision and global stature of Jawaharlal Nehru. Praveen Davar is an ex-Army officer, columnist and editor of The Secular Saviour.
Malaysia Sun
26-05-2025
- Business
- Malaysia Sun
China, Indonesia reaffirm Bandung Spirit, pledge closer cooperation
JAKARTA, May 25 (Xinhua) -- During Chinese Premier Li Qiang's ongoing official visit to Indonesia, the two countries highlighted the contemporary value of the Bandung Spirit and pledged for closer bilateral cooperation as well as better strategic coordination. "China stands ready to work with Indonesia and other developing countries to jointly uphold the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and the Bandung Spirit," Li said Sunday in talks with Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto. In April 1955, a landmark conference in Indonesia's city of Bandung gathered 29 Asian and African nations under the flag of solidarity, friendship and cooperation, marking the awakening of the part of the world known now as the Global South. "Today, more than seven decades later, the world is once again at a critical crossroads," Li said on Saturday when addressing the business community of the two countries. Unilateralism and protectionism are on the rise, and acts of bullying are increasing, he said, stressing that against this backdrop, the contemporary value of the Bandung Spirit has become more prominent. Shortly after the premier's arrival on Saturday, Li and Prabowo jointly visited a commemorative exhibition marking the 70th anniversary of the Bandung Conference. In his visit, Li has urged China and Indonesia to make the pie of cooperation bigger, strengthen industrial integration and safeguard free trade. He told Prabowo on Sunday that China is willing to work with Indonesia to enhance the alignment of development strategies and deepen high-quality Belt and Road cooperation, especially by optimizing and strengthening landmark projects. Li urged the two sides to further enhance the "golden brand" of the Jakarta-Bandung High-Speed Railway. The premier also said both sides should enhance market connectivity and industrial collaboration, improve the level of trade and investment facilitation, and expand cooperation in areas such as finance, new energy, digital economy, artificial intelligence (AI), aerospace and the ocean. Noting that 2025 marks the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the two countries and the 70th anniversary of the Bandung Conference, Prabowo said on Sunday that Indonesia will take this opportunity to deepen the comprehensive strategic partnership with China and jointly promote peace, development in Asia and the world. He said Indonesia is ready to expand cooperation with China in agriculture, finance, infrastructure, green economy, AI and education, and upgrade industrial collaboration. Prabowo also expressed the hope that more Chinese enterprises invest and do business in Indonesia. The two leaders on Sunday witnessed the signing of a number of cooperation documents in areas concerning economic development policies, industrial and supply chain as well as finance. Li also met with Speaker of Indonesia's House of Representatives Puan Maharani on Sunday. He told Puan that China insists on taking Indonesia as a priority in neighborhood diplomacy, and is willing to deepen all-round strategic cooperation with Indonesia. Analysts here spoke highly of the visit and the future development of China-Indonesia relations. "Premier Li's visit to Jakarta sends a strong signal that China-Indonesia relations are growing increasingly close. The two countries have developed a strategic partnership across economic, political and developmental spheres. This visit reflects the deepening cooperation and mutual recognition of each other's roles in regional and global affairs," said Muhammad Syaroni Rofii, a scholar on international relations at the University of Indonesia. Li arrived here Saturday for an official visit and will leave for Malaysia on Monday to attend the ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations)-GCC (the Gulf Cooperation Council)-China Summit in Kuala Lumpur.
