Non-alignment is a government policy of non-adherence to either of the major power blocs. To the extent that non-aligned nations do not support the policies of a particular bloc, they constitute a potential threat to that bloc, if only in that they may be more susceptible to align themselves with the opposing bloc.
A strong revival of nationalist sentiment in western European countries has raised the possibility of a 'swissification' prejudicial to NATO, the EEC/EU, and other Western defence and economic alignments.
It is only neutral countries who can call for a new international economic order, to lay the groundwork for the just and prudent use of global resources in the quest for world peace and prosperity. The model of economic cooperation that may be developed among non-aligned nations could be an example to the world.

Non-alignment and neutralism in regard to the super-power interests does not mean pacifism and impotence. In the western European region for example, a military alliance technologically led by France, Germany and the UK, has the capabilities of launching and arming satellites, manufacturing and installing nuclear missiles and enhanced conventional and non-conventional weapons in sufficient quantities to assure the destruction of the homeland of any aggressor. Moreover, mutual defence treaties can be negotiated in a number of directions, including Latin America, Africa and Asia. It is interesting to recall the World War II alignment of Spain, Italy, Germany, Japan and their supporters elsewhere, for example, in Argentina, Egypt and eastern Europe. A third major power bloc is therefore possible in a western European led intercontinental alignment, but it is also achievable by a peaceful pan-European economic grouping in which high levels of cooperation are achieved between the EEC/EU, EFTs and CMES.

Aggravated by 
(F) Fuzzy exceptional problems