By Dr Bertrand Ramcharan
Previously Chief Speechwriter to the UN Secretary-General
Sometimes Fellow of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government
A global struggle is again under way between two antagonistic camps: the USA on the one side, and China aligned with Russia on the other side. The United Nations is under challenge from all three of these powers, for varying reasons.
The USA has stated plainly that its business is to advance its own interests and that it would not let the United Nations stand in its way. It has withdrawn from dozens of organizations and organs inside the UN system, including the World Health Organization and the International Law Commission.
China and Russia rail against the so-called liberal international order as reflected in the UN, act in their own interests, and profess varying degrees of support or non-support for the United Nations – or parts of it. Russia’s military onslaught on Ukraine has been widely deprecated in the UN General Assembly as being in flagrant breach of the United Nations Charter.
China and the USA are in an open arms race, building up weapons of frightening destructiveness. Arms, methods of war and war-fighting are all being infused and suffused with Artificial Intelligence and no one can vouchsafe that Artificial Intelligence will not act independently of their human owners or controllers. It is a dangerous world not made any easier by climate change and searing temperatures across large parts of the globe. Humanity is under siege.
NATO is in liquified mode and its European members are scrambling for self-protection, fearful of Russian encroachments and unsure of America’s commitment to the Alliance or its Article 5 commitment of one for all and all for one. The future of a liquified NATO remains to be seen.
With some notable exceptions, such as North Korea and some Trump acolytes in South America, the overwhelming majority of States in Asia, Africa,Europe, Latin America, Canada, the Caribbean and Oceania are in support of the United Nations and its Charter. They are all scrambling for cover and to negotiate their way in the new world disorder.
Historically, the Non-Aligned Movement that began with the Bandung Conference in 1955 was from the outset a rallying forum to militate against the risks of a nuclear clash between NATO and the then Warsaw Pact countries. The Non-Aligned Movement was always an amorphous one, full of ambiguities and contradictions. But Bandung represented a spirit, the Bandung Spirit, the NAM spirit: let there be no nuclear or major clash between the two antagonistic camps, armed to the teeth.
The Non-Aligned Movement certainly made positive contributions during the first Cold War, encapsulating as it did the Bandung Spirit. After the first Cold War ended, the NAM existed still on paper but drifted into disuse. The ‘Group of 77’ took on more of a rallying role in favour of developing nations. Now, with the advent of a second Cold War, nations caught in the middle between the two contemporary antagonistic camps, the USA on the one hand, and China-Russia on the other, are scrambling for philosophical shelter.
Professor Manjari Chatterjee Miller, of the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, argued in the Financial Times on Thursday 9 July, 2026, that President Trump ‘has brought non-alignment back from the dead’: Non-alignment, or ‘strategic autonomy’ in today’s parlance, she wrote, calls for countries to put their own interests above great power politics and refuse to take sides.
Prof. Manjari argues, rather strangely, that ‘a US administration that has threatened to pull out of NATO, made clear that all alliances are transactional and shown sympathy for Russia’s territorial ambitions is embracing the substance of the non-aligned doctrine’. President Trump may indeed have contributed to the return of the philosophy of non-alignment, but not in the way, or for the reasons, suggested by Professor Manjari. Rather, it is because the independent states of the world are scrambling for cover and are struggling to uphold their independence and not to be pressurized or subjugated by either of the contemporary camps in a new cold war.
One does not expect to see an organizational reactivation of the Non-Aligned Movement as it operated during the first cold war, but rather a commitment of the overwhelming majority of independent States to the philosophy of non-alignment grounded in the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations Charter. The philosophy and principles of contemporary non-alignment would include the following, drawn from the UN Charter itself:
1. The duty of every state to fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by Members of the UN in accordance with the UN Charter (Article 2)
2. The duty to settle international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered (Article 2)
3. The duty to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations (Article 2)
4. The principle of the dignity and worth of every human being (Preamble).
5. The equal rights of men and women (Preamble).
6. The duty of universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion. (Article 55).
7. The duty to take joint and separate action in cooperation with the UN for the achievement of the purposes set forth in Article 55 of the Charter.(Article 56)
8. The equal rights of nations large and small (Preamble)
9. Respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law (Preamble)
10. The duty to live together as good neighbours (Preamble).
11. Armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest (Preamble)
12. The duty to settle international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered (Article 2)
13. The duty to promote the economic and social advancement of all peoples (Preamble)
14. The duty to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace (Article 1)
15. The duty to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace (Article 1)
16. Respect for the principles of equal rights and self-determination of peoples (Article 1)
17. The principle of the sovereign equality of all UN Members (Article 2)
18. The duty to take appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace (Article 1)
19. The duty to achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character (Article 1)
20. The duty to achieve international cooperation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion (Article 1)
21. The duty to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the UN Charter (Article 25)
22. The duty of parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security to, first of all seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice. (Article 33).
23. The principle that legal disputes should as a general rule be referred by the parties to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the Court (Article 36).
24. Should the parties to a dispute of the nature referred to in Article 33 fail to settle it by the means indicated in that Article, they shall refer it to the Security Council (Article 37).
25. The inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the UN Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security (Article 51)
26. The duty to comply with the decision of the International Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party (Article 94).
27. The duty to respect the exclusively international character of the responsibilities of the Secretary-General and the staff and not to seek to influence them in the discharge of their responsibilities. (Article 100)
28. Every treaty and every international agreement entered into by any Member of the United Nations shall as soon as possible be registered with the Secretariat of the UN and published by it (Article 101).
29. In the event of a conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the UN Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the UN Charter shall prevail. (Article 103).
30. States shall apply as sources of international law:
a. International conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by them;
b. International custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
c. The general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
d. Subject to the provisions of Article 59 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law. (Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ).
Discussion