Chairmanship of Non-Aligned Movement passes from Azerbaijan to Uganda

The chairmanship of the Non-Aligned Movement, a grouping of 120 countries, mainly in the global South, passed on Friday morning from Azerbaijan to Uganda.

President Yoweri Museveni was elected by acclamation as the chair of the 19th NAM Heads of State and Government Summit taking over from Ilham Aliyev.

Azerbaijani foreign minister, Jeyhun Bayramov, represented the outgoing president Aliyev. He congratulated Uganda and President Museveni for assuming the NAM chairmanship and promised that his country will extend all the necessary support to ensure success of the movement.

“Azerbaijan chairmanship has done its best to make the voice of our members heard in all possible platforms with successful initiatives and there’s no doubt that Uganda’s chairmanship will continue with this legacy, even further building upon it,” he said.

“At this historic moment, after four years of proudly chairing the movement, we are handing over the chairmanship to the Republic of Uganda with a rich substantial and institutional legacy and we are confident that Uganda will further enhance the development feasibility of the movement and strengthen unity among its member states. I would like to reiterate that our passion and determination for the success of NAM will always remain strong and we will continue to contribute to the just cause.”

Bayramov also highlighted some of the successes they have achieved during their chairmanship. He said during their term, they played a key role in the institutional development of the movement as well as putting up a number of initiatives to combat Covid-19, among other challenges affecting member states.

“During its chairmanship, Azerbaijan took practical steps to uphold the interests of member states at the international arena, guided by the principle of cementing solidarity and extending mutual support,” he said.

On the other hand, Bayramov revealed that at the Ministerial meeting held in Baku in July, 2023, they agreed to forward the request of South Sudan, the only non-member state of NAM from the African continent, for a fully-fledged membership in the movement.

“The admission of South Sudan will be the first expansion of NAM membership in 13 years bringing the number of members to 121. This proves the increasing importance of our movement in the international relations system.”

In his speech, President Museveni informed the Heads of State and Heads of Delegations that Uganda’s stand is that the world should concentrate on the common human problems ─ prosperity through trade, the advance of science and technology to deal with human problems, the environment, crime and terrorism. He said such ideas are in line with the Bandung Principles, a basis on which NAM was formed.

“It is on these principles that NAM was founded. We, the resistance fighters of Uganda, can testify that by synthesizing the package of ideas, we have got very good results. Using the ideas of the free market, combined with the ideas of selective State intervention in the economy in some sectors like banking, energy, transport, etc. and also bringing back some aspects of the pre-capitalist institutions such as reformed cultural institutions, Uganda, although starting from a very low base, has had growth rates of 6.2% per year, for the last 37 years.”

He further urged that the world should only have free associations of nations where people of a common or shared origin, interact for mutual advantage with the peoples of the World.

“The future is bright if we act right,” he said.

The President further disclosed that as the resistance fighters of Uganda, they are flabbergasted and look down with contempt, at the philosophical, ideological and strategic shallowness of some of the actors in the World who use their scientific advancements to oppress others. He also cautioned leaders against imposing their narrow uni-ideological orientation to a society they live in , let alone the world.

“The oppressors miscalculate when they use their temporary advantage in science and technology to think that they can use that to indefinitely oppress other people.  The oppressed will learn, catch up and defeat the oppressor.  That is why Empires always collapse.  The idea of Empires is an evil idea,” President Museveni asserted.

“Why do you not seek to influence people by your good example, instead of manipulation, lectures and threats? Chauvinists of race, religion, tribe or gender, should stop wasting our time and opportunities, with their shallow schemes. Action will, inevitably, invite counteraction. Oppression will invite Resistance. We are, therefore, not impressed and cannot be part of the morbid bigotry of uni-ideological thinking of this or that type.  The universe has been here for the last 30 billion years, and human society has been here for the last 4½million years,” he added.

On the other hand, the President advised that the strength of NAM should be used to exercise considerable influence particularly at the UN for the effective transformative process for a better common future.

“In the negotiations for the Pact of the Future, the outcome document of the upcoming United Nations Summit of the Future to be held in New York in September, 2024, we should clearly define priorities that favour developing countries by maintaining unity, solidarity and collective coordination among our Member States, in line with the Bandung principles.  I assure you all that my team, led by the Permanent Representative in New York has my full support to chair the Coordinating Bureau of the Non-Aligned Movement,” he emphasised.

source: commonspace.eu with Ugandan media and agencies
photo: Azerbaijan foreign minister Jeyhun Bayramov formally handing the chairmanship of the NAM movement ot the President of Uganda, Yoweri Mouseveni (picture courtesy of the press service of the Government of Uganda)

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)