![]() |
![]() ![]() Non-aligned Perceptions: from Delhi to Cartagena Chapter IV As stated before, debates on colonialism tend to be loaded with emotions. Whereas colonial systems are strongly condemned by some as racist exploitation, others praise it as a system of good governance over those unable to rule themselves. This chapter will examine a selection of official statements on colonialism by representatives of colonised peoples. The very first Afro-Asian Conference, which was one of the precursors of the later Non-Aligned Movement, was held in Delhi in 1947. Many of its participants were yet to be decolonised. Interestingly, Tibet also participated in this conference. The first official and most important inter-governmental conference of the Afro-Asian Block was held in Bandung, Indonesia, in 1955. This conference is generally seen as the founding meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). Most of the 29 participating states had recently been decolonised and the anti-colonial sentiments expressed during the conference were very strong. The Final Communiqué of the Bandung Conference condemned colonialism on various grounds. It called colonialism a 'means of cultural repression' and defined colonialism as 'the subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation'.56 It is interesting to note that this definition reappeared five years later in the aforementioned UN General Assembly resolution 1514. However unanimous those attending the Bandung Conference were in their condemnation of colonialism, there existed considerable divergence of opinion on its definition. The Ceylonese delegate, Sir John Kotewala, received strong support when he maintained that:
There is another form of colonialism [i.e. other than western colonialism], however, about which many of us represented here are perhaps less clear in our minds and to which some of us would perhaps not apply the term colonialism at all. Think for example of those satellite states under Communist domination in Central and Eastern Europe - of Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, Albania, Czechoslovakia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Are not these colonies as much as any of the colonial territories in Africa or Asia? And if we are all united in our opposition to colonialism, should it not be our duty to openly declare our opposition to Soviet colonialism as much as to Western imperialism?57 Kotewala's strongest critic was Zhou En Lai, who represented the People's Republic of China (PRC). Zhou strongly rejected Kotewala's suggestion for the obvious reason that the PRC and the Soviet Union were allies at the time. Moreover, Zhou adhered to the Leninist doctrine on colonialism, according to which colonialism equalled 'capitalist exploitation'. According to Lenin socialist systems of government could therefore never be colonial.58 Thirdly, Zhou might have felt threatened by the analogies between Russian 'new colonialism' and Chinese policies, not only in Eastern Turkestan, Inner Mongolia and Tibet, but also in other areas, such as Cambodia, Thailand and Laos.59 For these reasons Zhou objected to the inclusion of the phrase 'colonialism in all its forms', as proposed by the majority. He finally accepted the face-saving word 'manifestations' instead of 'forms', so the Conference as a whole could declare that 'colonialism in all its manifestations is an evil which must be speedily brought to an end.' As far as Zhou's rejection of Kotewala's observation was mostly based on reasons of a political rather than a conceptual nature, it had little bearing on the Conference's observations on the nature of colonialism as a system of 'alien domination, subjugation and exploitation.' Interestingly, the Constitution of the People's Republic of China states that 'China consistently opposes imperialism, hegemonism and colonialism, works to strengthen unity with the people of other countries, [and] supports the oppressed nations and the developing countries in their just struggle to win and preserve national independence (...).'60 [emphasis added] In spite of the fact that the world has changed dramatically since 1955, the Final Communiqué of the Non-Aligned Movement's summit in Cartagena in 1995 closely resembled the Bandung Declaration. The assembled governments 'reiterated the continued validity of the right of all peoples to self-determination, the exercise of which, in the case of peoples under colonial or alien domination and foreign occupation, is essential to ensure the eradication of all these situations and to guarantee universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The participants strongly condemned 'ongoing brutal suppression of the legitimate aspirations for self-determination of peoples under colonial or alien domination and foreign occupation in various regions of the world.' They reaffirmed 'the inalienable right of peoples of Non-Self-Governing Territories to self-determination and independence in accordance with GA resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 regardless of the territory's size, geographical location, population and limited natural resources.'61
[ Homepage ] [ Present Situation in Tibet ] [Tibet Mission Report ]
|