The emergence of a group of militarily uncommitted, non-bloc states in the early and mid 1950s posed a dilemma for Soviet statesmen and theorists. The orthodox Soviet outlook on international affairs could not accommodate the existence of independent states, free of involvement in the competitive ideological and political struggle between East and West. However, on another level the existence of the non-bloc states conformed to the doctrinal precepts on national liberation which were elaborated in the USSR following the death of Stalin. From this perspective the formation of the new non-bloc states heralded the destruction of Western colonial empires, undermined Western military structures and promised strategic dividends to the Soviet state. Under Khrushchev Soviet statesmen proceeded to encourage the emergent non-bloc neutralist impulse in Europe and the Third World, but sought to harmonise it with Soviet policy. Soviet politicians, scholars and international lawyers employed their specialist skills in an attempt to persuade the neutralist and non-aligned states that a truly autonomous course in international affairs could not be achieved, and that the pursuit of a programme to enhance the security of the new states required coordinated action, which foreshadowed greater integration, with the Soviet-led group of states.

This study has identified a range of Soviet influences and pressures on the strategy of neutralism or non-alignment developed by the non-bloc states.