NEUTRALISM AND NONALIGNMENT: The New States in World Affairs

In an attempt to illuminate the international and domestic rationale for the adoption of ""neutralism"" by the new nations, Martin has assembled eleven essays written by R. C. Good (of the State Department), C. B. Marshall, V. V. Aspaturian, E. W. Lefever, F. O. Wilcox, George Lisks, Heinhold Niebuhr, Arnold Wolfers, and himself. Martin's introduction formulates the questions speculated upon in the several essays: ""Do we perhaps overemphasize the importance of the new states and underestimate the resources of our own camp? Do we exaggerate the danger that the neutrals may go over to the other side? ...Are we bemused by the ideological labels new states attach to what may be mere political opportunism? To what extent (does the world) need neutrals"" for the maintenance of a proper plurality in the United Nations? There are arguments for and against relativism in foreign policy, a study of the Congo affair, and elaborate inquiries into the role of the neutralists as a third force in the Cold War. There are lists: of six advantages of nonalignment, of five things the U.S. can do to strengthen its General Assembly position, of nine chief concerns common to all the new nations. The tone of these pieces is predominantly conservative; the emphasis is on problems, tactics, and strategies, rather than grandiose solutions. Unfortunately, with the exception of Martin's own contribution (a well structured analysis of the British Conservative viewpoint), the assembled articles are largely not only prolix, but viscid.