Keywords:
Related Articles:
Abstract
Focusing on the 2012 Tehran Summit, this article reassesses the Non-Aligned Movement’s strategic relevance in a multipolar world. It reviews NAM’s historical identity, agenda items at Tehran—nuclear non-proliferation, Palestine, development financing—and member states’ diverging priorities. The analysis argues that while normative commitments endure, effectiveness depends on coalition discipline, agenda focus, and engagement with global governance forums.
Full Text
The body traces NAM’s evolution from decolonization solidarity to a heterogeneous forum navigating US–China rivalry and regional crises. Section One summarizes Tehran’s declarations and diplomatic theatre. Section Two examines internal fractures—issue linkage, regional blocs, and leadership contests. Section Three evaluates NAM’s policy leverage in the UN system, G-77 processes, and climate negotiations. Section Four proposes a pragmatic renewal strategy: concentrate on global public goods (development financing, equitable tech transfer, health security) and coordinated voting in multilateral bodies. The conclusion contends that NAM can still matter if it trades breadth for depth.