Marifeli Perez-Stable

Published in The Miami Herald
September 28, 2006

The Nonaligned Movement (NAM) met in Havana Sept. 11-16. Inveterate anti-U.S. foes — Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez and Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad prominently among them — captured headlines worldwide. So did the still-frail Fidel Castro, who, nonetheless, granted individual audiences to seven heads of state, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and an Argentine deputy. Until 2009, Cuba will lead the movement.

The Havana summit was, in part, a confluence of bravado. The timing certainly favored NAM radicals. U.S. and European efforts to curb Iran’s program of uranium enrichment had thrust the movement heart and center. NAM members make up nearly half of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The Hezbollah-Israel conflict also worked in favor of the radicals. And the Iraq war and President Bush’s unpopularity rendered anti-imperialism a facile banner.
Yet, reading NAM’s outcome only through radical lenses is a mistake. Less flamboyantly, the moderates also made their presence felt. While reaffirming the ”fundamental and inalienable right” to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, participants also declared the IAEA best suited to resolve the dispute with Iran. The IAEA, however, had already referred the issue to the U.N. Security Council, opposed only by Cuba, Venezuela and Syria.

If NAM condemned Israel over the recent conflict, President Emile Lahoud of Lebanon’s words at the gathering were unequivocal: ”Everything is negotiable.” Dialogue with Israel was imperative if a lasting peace was ever to reign in the Middle East. Noteworthy as well was that the United States went unmentioned — even if the implicit reference left no room for interpretation — in the condemnation of “preventive wars, secret jails, the invasion of countries and regime change.”

Last week, NAM leaders traveled to New York for the U.N. General Assembly. The radicals again captured headlines. While Ahmadinejad railed against the Bush administration and the U.N. Security Council, it was Chávez who stole the show. Calling Bush ”the devil” and claiming he could still smell the ‘’sulfur” at the podium, the Venezuelan generally elicited smiles, laughter and applause.

We won’t know if Chávez helped or hurt his cause until mid-October when the General Assembly votes on five of the 10 nonpermanent members of the Security Council. Venezuela and Guatemala are battling out the Latin American seat; if neither garners majority support, a compromise candidate may emerge.

Economic matters, which the Havana summit largely ignored, divide radicals and moderates in the NAM. The radicals — many oil-rich — berate imperialism and capitalism while predicting (what else?) that their end is near. The moderates, in contrast, tend to conduct their foreign policy so as to advance their economic development. Incendiary rhetoric is not their style, even if they offer no counterpunch or even nod and smile. Upon returning home, the economy again occupies center stage. Almost all seek constructive relations with Washington, though most are unlikely to be fans of Bush.

A recent issue of The Economist highlighted the power of the emerging world, which now accounts for up to 50 percent of world economic output. China, Brazil, India and Russia represent 40 percent of the emerging economies, which means that economic growth is widespread for the first time in history. If there ever was a time to discard the notion that capitalism and globalization are a zero-sum game, it is now. Radicals, however, are sticking to their old guns and, consequently, are sure to lose the most important battle of all: improving living standards and life opportunities for ordinary human beings.

The NAM is inaugurating a secretariat at the United Nations. Cuba — and the Comandante, his health permitting — will be in the spotlight, an opportunity that suits Havana fine. Cuba’s diplomatic corps, after all, is capable and experienced. How its NAM presidency will fare if the elder Castro passes or can’t continue ”issuing orders over the telephone,” as his brother Raúl has put it, is another matter altogether. Should the economy become the heart of a successor regime — not to mention if a democratic transition happens sooner rather than later — Cuba’s current foreign policy will unlikely survive.