NEUTRALISM: its meaning and significance in contemporary international politics. by Abstract Neutralism - dissociation from the Cold ',Var - can take many forms. Ac a doctrine it is to be found in its most comprehensive forms in Asia and Africa; and because its chief proponents are leaders of their countries, it is a profoundly pragmatic and eclectic doctrine. Yet it is deeply grounded in certain widespread hopes and fears, and is usually nourished by nationalism. Neutralist foreign policies are shaped by, and yet have come to shape, the style and scope of Cold War rivalries. Six forms of policy neutralism may be distinguished. These are: new state neutralism; pioneer neutralism; neutral- ization; buffer status; traditional neutrality; and erstwhile isolationism. Each of these types of policy represents different ways in which a state can become neutralist, and it is suggested how many- etates fall into each of these classes. Nearly three quarters of the neutralist states in early 1961 are new states which have become independent since 1945* Many of them practise policies which are in some respects like those of three pioneer neutralists - India, Yugoslavia and Egypt. Since 1945 neutralism has been of growing significance internationally. The study of general contacts and relations and of general resemblances and differences is the only avenue to a general perspective without which neither profit nor pleasure can be extracted from historical research." Polybius, Book I, Chapter 4. АС КГТ О'УХКР SE:.tEK g S My grateful thanke are due: to ray colleagues - Bruce Miller, Christopher Hughes, Maurice Hookham and John Day; to my former teachers - Professors C. A. Manning and Jüartin flight; to my brother Michael to the staffs of many libraries and embassies; to the many colleagues, friends and students who have helped me in various ways; and last, but most of all, to my wife. Abbreviations* А.А.А.P.S.S. The Annals of the American Association of Political and Social Science. A.J.I.L. The American Journal of International Law. Akzin Benjamin Akzin (ed.) - New States and International Organizations. A Report prepared on behalf of The International Political Science Association (U.N.E.S.C.O., Paris, .1955). A.P.S.R. The American Politioal Soienoe Review. B.Y.I.L. The British Yearbook of International Law. Campbell John C. Campbell - Defense of the Middle East. Problems of Amerioan Policy (Frederick Praeger, New York, revised edition, i960). Cs. Chapters. * C.S.M. The Christian Science Monitor. D.S.B. The Department of State Bulletin (Washington, D.C., fortnightly). Fifield Russell H. Fifield - The Diplomacy of South- east Asia: 1945-1958 (Harper Bros., New York, 1Ö5B)'.' Goodwin Geoffrey L. Goodwin - Britain and the United Nations (Oxford University Press for R.I.I.A., 1957). J.M.H. The Journal of Modern History (Chicago). Lenczowski George JLenczowski - The Middle East in World Affaire (Cornell University Press, New York, second edition, 1956). M.S.P. 1961 The Mutual Security Program. Fiscal Year, 1961. A Summary Presentation. (Department of State, Washington, D.C., March i960). Oppenheim- L. Oppenheim (ed. by H. Lauterpacht) Lauterpaoht International Law, 2 vols., Longmans, 1948. * This list does.not include such familiar abbreviations as N.A.T.O., S.E.Ä.T.O., U.N., op.cit., etc. Abbreviationо (continued) O.U.P. Oxford University Press R.I.I.A. The Royal Institute of International Affairs. The Middle East The Middle East. A Political and Economic Survey. 3rd edition, edited by Sir Reader Ballard (O.U.P. for R.I.I.A., London, 1958). The War Ä the Survey of International Affairs 1939-1946. Neutrals The VYar & the Neutrals, edited by A. & V. M. Toynbee (O.U.P. for R.I.I.A., London, 1956). The World in Survey of International Affairs 1939-1946. March 1939 The World in March 1939, edited by A. Toynbee and P. T. Ashton-Gwatkin (O.U.P. for R.I.I.A., London, 1952). U.S.W.A. The United States in World Affairs (Annual volumes. Harper Bros, for the Council on Foreign Relatione, New York). Y.B.U.N. United Nations, Yearbook of the United Nations. Y.B.W.A. The Year Book of World Affairs (London, Stevens for London Institute of World Affairs). gable of Contents Радев INTHODUC TION 8-13 CHAPTER I. NEU TRATJ THE fcUPEHJWIRS AJ<D ТНК COIJ) tfAR. 14-70 CHAPTER II. NEUTRALISM AS INTERNATIONAL DOCTRINE. 71-121 CHAPTER III. NEUTRAliISЛЬ OVERALML VIE7AS STAT. E POLICY - 122-166 CHAPiER IV. NEUTRALISE AS STATE POLICY - SOME CASE STUDIES,. 167-245 CONCLUSION 246-254 Table of Membership of the United Nations in January 1961. 255-259 Select Bibliography 260-262 Appendices: 1. S\YiPR Neutrality 263-269 2. Swedish Neutrality 270-273 Jawaharlal Nehru of India 274-233 Л. President Tito and Yugoslav Neutrality 234-239 5. President llasnor and Pan-Arab Neutralise 290-306 ; 6. President Sukarno of Indonesia 307-312 7. S. "v. R. PAndaranaike of Ceylon 313-317 8. Burmese Neutralisa 318-324 9. Prince Sihnnauk of Cambodia 325-326 7-10. President Nkrumah of Ghana 327-329 Submitted with the thesis - Peter Lyon: "Neutrality and the Emergence of the Concept of Neutralise" in Hevierr of Politics, April, i960, pp. 255-268. INTRODUCTION "Те must therefore use ordinary words. They separate us least from the past, which we are trying to understand, and from the present, with its Babel of tongues, in which and to which we must tell what we have understood. But let us not imagine that ordinary words are easy to use. To split the ism demands clarity of thought and constant watchfulness." Sir Keith Hancock - Country and Calling. "Neutralism is, of course, one of those rather rotund words which does not readily admit of definition." Mr. Menzies to the U.N. General Assembly, 5th October, i960. Since the end of the Second /orld Vfar the political neologism''" 'neutralism* has been used so often by so many people, in such different circumstances and with such different intentions, that its meaning seems to change, chameleon like, depending on the context in which it appears. Contemporary usage has not produced any real consistency in definition, though it iE clear that the word invariably has reference to the Cold War struggle between the United States and its allies on the one hand, and the Soviet Union and its satellites on the other. It'is the aim of this study to try to distinguish what are the main kinde of neutralism, by reference to what states do, and what statesmen say, to draw attention to their distinguishing features, and to assess their importance in contemporary international politics. As neutralism is по» such a protean term, it is necessary at the outset to clarify its intended use here. Neutralism is taken to mean dissociation from the Cold Уаг. This working definition is sufficiently broad in reference to cover such popular phrases as "non-alignment", "active and peaceful co-existence", "active policy for peace", "independent policy", "positive neutrality", "positive neutralism". During the course of the thesis some of the 1. I have briefly traced the emergence of this neologism in "Neutrality and the Emergence of the Concept of Neutralism", Review of Politics. April i960, pp. 255-268. JO favourite euphemisms, circumlocutions and synonyms for neutralism are indicated where appropriate. Indeed, the very looseness v.'ith »vhieh the term neutralism is used today has endowed it with an element of metaphor. But it is important to bear in mind all the time the difference between the central concern here - which is to try to describe the. main way с in 'hich since 1945 there has been dissociation from the Cold -7ar --arm the fact that the label neutralist is used tenderitiously and varyingly, both by Cola War protagonists and by self-avowed neutralists. Inevitably, the method adopted here necessarily involves controversial attribution of the label neutralist to states or persons A-here others might deny that this ic a permissible usage. It is hoped that the reasons for such attributions will be clear in their context. Obviously, there are many forms of dissociation from the Cold ?ar. It ia the task of this thesis to try to indicate which have to date been the major one8, and why. Ihoufh there is much popular confusion between the terms 'neutrality' and 'neutralism1, in this study they are regarded as quite distinct. By neutrality is meant non- involvement in war, while by neutralism is meant non-involve- ment in the Cold <7ar. Though the metaphor of 'Cold' far describes the slurring over of the differences between war and peace, it is important to remember that it is quite 10 Q possible for a state to be neutralist in its policy in the Cold War while at the same time being neutral with regard to a given local hot war. Also, a state can be involved in a local hot war while remaining neutralist in the Cold War. • And the fact that a state is neutralist in the Cold ffar is, of course, no guarantee that it would be able to be neutral in a global hot war. Although as terjis neutralism and nationalism are seldom confueed, their important interaction as political forces is one of the main themes of this study. over The main concerns and aims of this thesis can best be indicated byxreference to the contents of the four main chapters. The period under consideration is 1945 to early 1961, inclusive, and„referencesto events outside these limits are mostly incidental. , Chapter I outlines the main features and phases of the Cold War and thus describes the setting in'which neutralism occurs and is shaped.