AP World History: Modern

## Learning Outcomes

- Explain why the **Non-Aligned Movement** emerged during the Cold War
- Distinguish between **Bandung (1955)** and **Belgrade (1961)**
- Understand how newly independent states used nonalignment to protect sovereignty
- Compare **nonalignment** with simple neutrality
- Identify major NAM leaders such as **Nehru**, **Nasser**, **Tito**, **Sukarno**, and **Nkrumah**
- Explain how **Maoism**, **African socialism/Ujamaa**, and **Arab socialism** differed from Soviet communism
- Use this topic in AP-style causation, comparison, and continuity-and-change arguments

## AP World History: Modern Syllabus

For the AP World History: Modern, you are expected to understand how newly independent states responded to Cold War rivalry, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

![Non-Aligned Movement origins, Bandung and Belgrade conferences, major leaders, and alternative postcolonial ideologies during the Cold War.](https://static.pastpaperhero.com/images/ap-world-history-modern-the-cold-war-non-aligned-movement-and-alternative-ideologies_00.png)

_Cold War nonalignment among decolonized states is traced from Bandung to Belgrade alongside leading figures and regional socialist ideologies._

- Know that the **Bandung Conference** met in **Indonesia in 1955** and helped lay the groundwork for nonalignment
- Know that the **Belgrade Conference** in **1961** is commonly treated as the first official NAM summit
- Identify major early nonaligned leaders: **Jawaharlal Nehru**, **Gamal Abdel Nasser**, **Josip Broz Tito**, **Sukarno**, and **Kwame Nkrumah**
- Explain why many decolonized states wanted to avoid formal alignment with either the **United States** or the **USSR**
- Understand that nonaligned states often still accepted aid, arms, or investment from one or both superpowers
- Distinguish nonalignment from passive neutrality
- Compare alternative ideologies such as **Maoism**, **African socialism/Ujamaa**, and **Arab socialism**
- Understand how these ideologies blended anti-imperialism, nationalism, and development goals in different regions

## Test Your Knowledge

_Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, look more closely at that area during your revision._

1. What was the main goal of the **Non-Aligned Movement** during the Cold War?
2. What is the difference between the **Bandung Conference** and the **Belgrade Conference**?
3. Why did many newly independent states refuse to join either Cold War bloc?
4. How did **Maoism** differ from Soviet communism?
5. Name two alternative ideologies developed in postcolonial Africa or the Middle East.

## Introduction

The Cold War is often taught as a struggle between two superpowers: the **United States** and the **USSR**. That is true, but it is not the whole story. Many countries in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East did not want to become clients of either bloc. They had just emerged from colonial rule and were determined to defend their own sovereignty.

This is why the **Non-Aligned Movement** matters so much for AP World History. It shows the agency of newly independent states. These governments were not simply pushed around by Washington and Moscow. They tried to create a third path: anti-colonial, independent, and focused on development. At the same time, many also experimented with local ideologies that did not fit neatly into either Western capitalism or Soviet communism.

> **Key Term: Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)**
> A Cold War-era grouping of states, many newly independent, that sought to avoid formal alignment with either the United States or the Soviet Union.

### Why nonalignment emerged after 1945

Nonalignment grew out of the political conditions created by **World War II** and **decolonization**. European empires had been weakened, and many Asian and African peoples gained independence in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s. These new states faced a basic problem: how could they stay politically independent in a world dominated by two hostile superpowers?

The fear was not abstract. Joining one side might bring loans, weapons, and diplomatic support. But it could also bring dependence. A superpower might pressure a weaker state to adopt foreign policies that served outside interests rather than local ones. In practice, that could mean military bases, unequal aid relationships, or involvement in proxy wars.

Newly independent states were also shaped by anti-colonial experience. If a government had just fought to remove British, French, or Dutch rule, it was unlikely to welcome a new kind of outside domination. This is why opposition to **imperialism** and **neocolonialism** became central to nonaligned politics.

> **Key Term: neocolonialism**
> Continued outside domination of a formally independent country through economic, political, or military pressure rather than direct colonial rule.

A second cause was the desire for development. Most postcolonial states needed roads, schools, dams, industry, and technical training. Their leaders wanted aid, but without surrendering independence. Nonalignment offered a strategy: accept assistance from different sources while avoiding permanent attachment to either bloc.

This is where students often miss an important distinction. Nonalignment did not mean isolation. It did not mean refusing all foreign contact. It meant trying to preserve room for independent decision-making.

> **Test Tip:**
> In an AP essay, do not describe the Cold War as only a two-sided struggle. Use NAM to show that decolonized states exercised agency and made the Cold War more complex.

### Bandung 1955 and Belgrade 1961: from Afro-Asian solidarity to NAM

The most important precursor to NAM was the **Bandung Conference**, held in **Indonesia from 18 to 24 April 1955**. It brought together delegates from **29 Asian and African countries**, many of them recently independent. Their shared concerns included colonialism, racism, sovereignty, and great-power pressure.

> **Key Term: Bandung Conference**
> A 1955 meeting in Bandung, Indonesia, where Asian and African states promoted anti-colonialism, sovereignty, cooperation, and peaceful coexistence.

Bandung mattered because it created a common language of postcolonial politics. Its principles included respect for sovereignty, nonaggression, noninterference, equality of nations and races, peaceful settlement of disputes, and opposition to domination by major powers. In AP terms, Bandung was the ideological foundation of nonalignment.

Why did that matter? Because these ideas did two things at once. First, they rejected old imperial control by Europe. Second, they resisted the idea that newly independent states had to join either NATO-style Western alliances or Soviet-led communist alignments. Bandung was therefore both anti-colonial and anti-Cold War-bloc.

The next step came with the **Belgrade Conference** in **Yugoslavia, 1-6 September 1961**, usually treated as the first official summit of the Non-Aligned Movement.

> **Key Term: Belgrade Conference**
> The 1961 conference in Yugoslavia commonly seen as the first official summit of the Non-Aligned Movement.

Students should keep Bandung and Belgrade clearly separate. Bandung was the earlier Afro-Asian conference that laid the groundwork. Belgrade was the later meeting that formalized NAM as an organized movement.

Key leaders associated with this process were:

- **Jawaharlal Nehru** of India
- **Gamal Abdel Nasser** of Egypt
- **Josip Broz Tito** of Yugoslavia
- **Sukarno** of Indonesia
- **Kwame Nkrumah** of Ghana

Each brought a different background. Nehru represented a huge postcolonial democracy. Nasser stood for Arab nationalism and anti-imperialism. Tito led a socialist state independent of Moscow after Yugoslavia’s break with Stalin. Sukarno linked nonalignment to anti-colonial struggle in Southeast Asia. Nkrumah tied it to Pan-African hopes.

The choice of **Tito** is especially important because it shows that nonalignment was not anti-socialist. Yugoslavia remained socialist while refusing Soviet control. That is a distinction AP students should know well.

### What nonalignment looked like in practice

Nonalignment sounded powerful in speeches, but how did it work in real politics? Usually as a balancing strategy.

India is a strong example. Under **Nehru**, India remained officially nonaligned, yet it accepted aid and maintained relations with both sides. It had contacts with the West, but also developed important ties with the USSR, especially in industrial and military matters. This was not a contradiction from the nonaligned point of view. It was the policy working as intended: gain support without surrendering full independence.

Egypt under **Nasser** offers another good case. Nasser first sought Western support, but when relations worsened, he turned toward Soviet assistance, including support connected to major development goals such as the **Aswan High Dam**. Egypt was not simply "Soviet." It used superpower rivalry to improve its own bargaining position.

Yugoslavia did the same in Europe. After breaking with Stalin, it remained socialist but received Western aid while preserving political independence from Moscow. That makes Yugoslavia one of the clearest examples of a country that was socialist, strategically important, and still nonaligned.

This is why nonalignment should not be confused with neutrality. Neutrality suggests staying out. NAM states were active. They attended conferences, issued declarations, supported anti-colonial struggles, and tried to reshape world politics.

> **Key Term: nonalignment**
> A policy of avoiding formal commitment to either Cold War bloc while pursuing independent national interests.

There were limits, though. Many NAM states drifted closer to one side or the other over time. Security threats, economic weakness, domestic instability, and regional wars often made pure independence difficult. So a strong AP answer should not romanticize NAM. It was influential, but it did not free states from Cold War pressure.

> **Test Tip:**
> A high-scoring comparison point is: nonalignment was active and anti-colonial, whereas neutrality suggests simple detachment. Use that distinction if a question asks about diplomatic strategy.

### Alternative ideologies beyond the U.S.-USSR divide

Nonalignment was a diplomatic strategy, but many postcolonial states also developed domestic ideologies that did not fit neatly into either superpower model. These ideologies often combined nationalism, socialism, anti-imperialism, and local traditions.

**Maoism** is the clearest example in East Asia. Although Mao's China was communist, Maoism differed from Soviet communism in a major way: it stressed the revolutionary role of the **peasantry** rather than the urban industrial proletariat.

> **Key Term: Maoism**
> A Chinese form of communism associated with Mao Zedong that emphasized peasant revolution, mass mobilization, and anti-imperialism.

Why was that important? Because China was not a heavily industrialized society like the one Marx had imagined. Mao adapted communism to Chinese conditions. That made Maoism attractive beyond China, especially in poorer agrarian societies where peasants greatly outnumbered factory workers. In AP comparison terms, Maoism was a local adaptation of communism, not just a copy of the Soviet model.

In Africa, leaders developed versions of **African socialism**. These usually argued that African communal traditions made some form of collective social organization more natural than Western capitalism.

The best-known example is **Ujamaa** in **Tanzania** under **Julius Nyerere**, especially after the **Arusha Declaration (1967)**.

> **Key Term: Ujamaa**
> A Tanzanian form of African socialism associated with Julius Nyerere that emphasized village cooperation, equality, and self-reliance.

Ujamaa aimed to create national unity, reduce inequality, and build development through collective villages and shared labor. Its logic was partly economic and partly political. Economically, it sought self-reliance. Politically, it tried to weaken ethnic divisions by building a broader Tanzanian identity. But it also had clear limits: villagization could be coercive, and agricultural output often suffered.

In the Middle East, **Arab socialism** and **Pan-Arabism** offered another alternative. Under **Nasser**, this approach blended Arab nationalism, anti-imperialism, and state-led development.

> **Key Term: Arab socialism**
> An ideology associated with leaders such as Nasser that combined Arab nationalism, anti-imperialism, and state-led economic development.

The 1956 **nationalization of the Suez Canal** became a symbol of this ideology. It showed how postcolonial leaders used state power to challenge foreign control and fund national development. But here too there were limits. Arab unity was harder to achieve than its supporters hoped, and state-led politics often strengthened authoritarian rule.

A useful AP comparison is this:

- **Maoism** = peasant-centered communism in China
- **Ujamaa/African socialism** = communal, postcolonial socialism in Africa
- **Arab socialism** = nationalism plus socialism in the Arab world

All three differed from Soviet communism because each was adjusted to local conditions. That is the main idea examiners want: adaptation, not simple copying.

## Key Point Checklist

_This article has covered the following key knowledge points:_

- The Non-Aligned Movement emerged from decolonization and Cold War pressure after 1945
- Newly independent states wanted sovereignty and freedom from superpower domination
- The Bandung Conference in 1955 laid the ideological foundation for nonalignment
- The Belgrade Conference in 1961 is usually treated as the first official NAM summit
- Key NAM leaders included Nehru, Nasser, Tito, Sukarno, and Nkrumah
- Nonalignment meant avoiding formal alliance with either bloc, not withdrawing from world affairs
- Many nonaligned states still accepted aid, arms, or investment from one or both superpowers
- NAM shows that the Cold War was not only a U.S.-USSR struggle but also a story of Global South agency
- Maoism differed from Soviet communism by emphasizing peasant revolution and mass mobilization
- Ujamaa was a Tanzanian form of African socialism based on village cooperation and self-reliance
- Arab socialism combined anti-imperialism, Arab nationalism, and state-led development
- Alternative ideologies in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East adapted global ideas to local needs and postcolonial conditions

## Key Terms and Concepts

- Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)
- neocolonialism
- Bandung Conference
- Belgrade Conference
- nonalignment
- Maoism
- Ujamaa
- Arab socialism


The Cold War - Non-Aligned Movement and alternative ideologies