—Asha
On 11th August 2025, Prof Itty Abraham delivered a lecture in the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences on “Bandung at 70 or, What really happened in the world’s most famous International Conference”. As the title suggests, the talk delved into the enduring legacy of the Bandung Conference, an event that continues to stir scholarship in international relations and postcolonial studies even 70 years after it was first held.
Prof Itty Abraham started the talk by giving a quick overview of the background of the event. Seventy years ago, a remarkable event unfolded in the Indonesian city of Bandung that altered the trajectory of international politics. The Bandung Conference of 1955, often overshadowed in mainstream historical narratives, laid the foundation for what would later emerge as the Non-Aligned Movement and articulated a new vision for the Global South rooted in sovereignty, anti-colonialism and peaceful coexistence.
The origins of Bandung can be traced back to an informal meeting in Bogor, 1954, where leaders of the Colombo Powers, consisting of Burma, Ceylon, India, Indonesia and Pakistan, proposed a larger platform for post-colonial countries to discuss the global issues on their own terms, outside the binary of the Cold War’s power structure. What began as an informal meeting in Bogor, spearheaded by Indonesian PM Ali Sastroamidjojo, quickly evolved into a formal gathering of 29 Asian and African Nations. It was a monumental act of defiance, creating a space where the concerns of the newly decolonised world could be voiced collectively.
Crucially, a decision was made to invite only independent states, excluding liberation movements. This highlighted a strong emphasis on state sovereignty and formal recognition. The week-long conference began with a powerful declaration by Sukarno: “The affairs of the world are ours too”. It was a reminder that these nations are no longer passive subjects of imperialism but emerging actors on the global stage.
The Bandung Conference didn’t emerge in a vacuum. It was preceded by a series of events such as the Asian Relations Conference (1947), Asian Socialist Conference (1953) and the Bogor Meeting. The SEATO Conference in Manila also framed Cold War tensions that Bandung participants sought to counterbalance.
Among the lesser known aspects of the conference was France’s unwillingness to decolonise, which drew criticism and brought immense popularity to Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser, who would later become a central figure in NAM. The role of U Nu, the Burmese President, and the behind-the-scenes diplomacy further enriched the conference’s dynamics.
Prof Abraham’s lecture reviewed the extensive literature on the Bandung Conference and interrogated both its origins and its long-term consequences. Drawing from archival evidence and critical historiography, he explored myths and realities, successes and shortcomings. The conference’s achievements were indeed notable, for it introduced a third force in global politics, challenging the binary framework of the Cold War. It also denounced nuclear arms and colonialism in all forms, championing territorial sovereignty and advocating for non-interference.
Among its other key achievements were a unified stance on China’s inclusion in international affairs, support for full racial equality and peace, significant human rights victories, including the cancellation of dual citizenship laws that affected Chinese communities in countries like Thailand and Indonesia. The conference thus gave a powerful voice to the Global South, reframing global geography and pushing for the inclusion of marginalised nations on the world stage.
Yet, despite the monumental vision, Bandung was far from tensions. Ceylon’s PM Kotelawala openly criticised Soviet control over Eastern Europe, highlighting ideological divides within the group. Nasser’s bold stance on Palestine and the Suez Canal further split opinions, illustrating the difficulty in balancing unity and national interests.
Yet, its legacy lives on. The emergence of NAM, OPEC, G77 and even platforms like IBSA (India, Brazil, South Africa) are seen as extensions of Bandung’s spirit. While geopolitical shifts and tensions pose challenges today, Bandung’s emphasis on peaceful, equal and just international relations remains a powerful vision.
A major theme of the lecture was the ongoing scholarly debate: was Bandung the beginning of a unified Third World resistance or the end of an era, as these nations shared little beyond their historical experience of colonialism? To the question of what was politically absent at Bandung, critics point to the lack of concrete strategies and overly abstract declarations. Prof Abraham’s analysis invited us to move beyond simplistic binaries. He proposed that Bandung’s importance lies precisely in its contradictions and complexities.
The political questions it raised remain relevant today: How do post-colonial nations assert agency in a global order still dominated by imperial legacies? Can solidarity be sustained across cultural, economic, and political differences? Was Bandung the beginning of a new world or the end of a fleeting vision? The answer, he suggested with a smile, might be both.
Article 19 