Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

The Panchsheel Conference of Bandung, Indonesia promised a lot but the members and their r4esolutions continue to be mired in controversy. Are such conferences futile ?

Tags: relationships, education, entertainment
Asked by prasoon, 23 Oct '09 03:11 pm
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (5)

 
1.

Isnt it unfortunate? All the effort and exercise including time and expenses down the drain. And all because of Pakistan and China. Because most other SE Asian countries did try to abide. The concept by Jawahrlal Nehru was truly an innovative one for peace and cooperation in spheres of politics and brotherhood.
Answered by sumita bhadrachaudhari, 23 Oct '09 07:56 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (0)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
2.

In most of the cases-----even the UN resolutions are failing ands not given due acceptance ----- remewmber what happened to Kyoto Protocol on world environmentb
Answered by HARIJIBAN BANERJEE, 29 Oct '09 10:53 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

It is not correct to say that Panchsheel conference did not yield any result. The conference took place in the early fifties. The outcome was non-alignment policy, which paid rich dividends to India and many other countries. To appreciate it, one has to understand the then international conditions. In 1945, UK won the war - but lost power. The new powers were the US & USSR. But it took time for UK to realize that. UK realized it only after their misadventure in Egypt after being threatened by Russia. Nehru was the first international figure to condemn the attack. Other countries started following Nehru. In 1947, India did not have money, technology, skilled manpower and many other resources required for development. So the choice was to go to the west or USSR. West means private sector and Nehru realized that opening up the country to private sector (at that point of time) would have dangerous consequences. So the only choice was to open the door to USSR and keep the door slightly ope ...more
Answered by Sankar Mitra, 24 Oct '09 05:21 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
4.

Unless member countries work jointly nothing will emerge fruitfully
Answered by saranathan Narasimhan, 23 Oct '09 03:14 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
5.

We cant expect all conference to be futile.. its a building block, has.. to start from somewhere nor the other and y think negative
Answered by PLAY BOY, 23 Oct '09 05:58 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (0)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining