The combined strength of the countries is about 4.6 billion people, almost two-thirds of the world's population, and their GDP is estimated to be $9.4 trillion (the GDP of the 106 countries need to be put in perspective against the GDP of the US which is larger than that of the 106 combined, i.e. GDP of the US is more than $11 trillion).

Indonesia's President Dr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono stated that the purpose of the conference is to rebuild the bridge across the Atlantic from Asia to Africa. It is to connect both the continents and the conference will serve as a "missing link" of the Asian and African people.

The Bandung conference of 1955
It was for the first time, the leaders of the Third World met on April 18-24 in 1955 in Bandung (Indonesia), in the backdrop of the Cold War and emergence of new nations from colonial rule. The idea of the Asia-Africa Summit in Bandung was to remind the super-powers that the Third World should have a role in their decision-making process that affected global affairs.

It was a bold move initiated by five Asian countries -- Indonesia, India, Myanmar, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The charismatic Indonesian leader Ahmet Soekarno introduced the idea in 1954 at the Bogor conference to the Asian leaders. Prime Minister of India Nehru was initially skeptical of the value of the conference, partly because Pakistan, a partner of the US military alliance, was associated with it. It was reported that Prime Minister of Pakistan Mohammad Ali Bogra enthusiastically supported the idea, and this made Nehru uncomfortable with the idea. However, later India agreed.

China's participation
It was India that suggested Indonesia to invite communist China to the Bandung Conference. China's Prime Minister Zou En-lai agreed. The participation of China during the heightened phase of the Cold War to an international Asia-Africa summit drew sharp attention to the rival super powers -- the US and the Soviet Union.

China came under communist rule in 1949 and China's policies at that stage were not clear to the Asian and African countries. Furthermore, China totally aligned with the Soviet Union during the 50s. The question that troubled at the time was whether China would advocate the export of communism to other countries.

In the light of the above background, it was politically brave for the leaders of non-communist Asian and African countries to invite China to their meet. There were many hypotheses to involve China at the summit and some of them deserve mention.

One was that many countries in Asia and Africa had active domestic communist parties that had large following among the people. They were concerned of the impact of the communist parties in domestic politics. They believed that good and friendly relations with China would have beneficial impact on domestic politics. Second, if China had been exposed to wider contacts, it would be able to move away from the Soviet orbit. Third, China is an Asian country and could not be left out because of its size and future potential.

At the end of the Bandung Conference, the final communiqué had several parts: (i) Political cooperation, (ii) Cultural cooperation, (iii) Human rights protection, (iv) Promotion of world peace, and (v) Problems of dependent peoples.

The most important contribution of the Bandung Conference was that it prompted the formation of the Non-Aligned Movement in Belgrade in 1961 by India, Indonesia, Egypt, and Yugoslavia to keep the Third World countries "non-aligned" from the rivalry of the super-powers -- the US and the Soviet Union.

2005 Asia-Africa summit
It appears none of the commitments made at the 1955 Bandung Conference were taken seriously by the Asian and African countries, and as a result they remained as pious wishes only. Soon after, when all Asian and African countries achieved political independence, they started fighting with each other, tacitly supported by the rival super powers, in wars known as "proxy wars."

The world has dramatically changed from what it was in 1955. Furthermore, the Iraqi war led by the US in 2003 has not only undermined the credibility of the UN but also instilled a sense of insecurity among the Third World countries.

Many of the leaders of Asian and African countries have demonstrated unaccountability of their actions. Poor leadership, inefficient management, and lack of democratic institutions has eroded economic and political bases of development. Some of them considered public property as their own property.

Many of the people in Sub-Saharan Africa live on less than a dollar a day. The idealism of Asian and African leaders to make their countries prosperous did not occur. Some authors have suggested that many African people were better off in colonial days than they are now.

The Asia-Africa Summit in Jakarta was to take stock of what went wrong with their economies, nature of their governance, and issue of reduction of poverty. Governance of a state is of crucial importance in the process of economic growth. Neither satisfactory growth nor poverty alleviation can be achieved if the state of governance is poor. Among the aspects of governance in most Asian-African countries, corruption and decadence of public morality have been the focus of a great deal of concern and controversy.

Why were they not able to govern their countries with transparency, accountability, and with democratic traditions? It is an occasion for self-examination for their failures and the causes.

The conference provided an opportunity to the new generation of leaders as to what is required to govern with accountability, vitalize their economy, alleviate poverty, and how not to become debt-ridden with loans from donors.

In 1955, the clarion call at Bandung was freedom from colonial rule, while at present the call is "protection of human dignity, good governance, and accountability." Human dignity implies poverty alleviation, gender equality, and empowerment. Empowerment gives creativity, innovation, and improvisation to people. Empowered people give their best to improve their status and position.

The leaders recognize that although the countries are politically independent, they are not economically independent. The former colonial masters continue to act in a disguised manner to control the economy of the Third World. The present economic system perpetuates an arrangement where developed countries will sell manufactured goods at a higher price, while developing Asian and African countries will sell raw materials at a cheaper price. This new international division of labour appears to be one of the essential components of economic globalisation.

The leaders must recognise that over-centralisation in administration and planning was responsible for their lack of economic development. Insufficient attention was paid to development through mass participation. Women's role in development was ignored.

Land reforms which lead to equitable patterns of ownership and more efficient use of land were neglected.

Challenge for Asian and African leaders
The challenge to the Asian and African nations is to mobilise and deploy their resources more effectively -- nationally and collectively -- to energise their development, draw strength from joint cooperation, exploit global opportunities and to make the international system more responsive to their people. Policies need to be changed, institutions reformed, and new mechanisms created. What is needed is transparency and accountability of the actions of the rulers in Asia and Africa.

The new vision is to achieve a people-centred development: a form of development that is self-reliant, equitable, participatory, and sustainable. Development is achieved through active participation of the people, in their own interests as they see them, relying primarily on their own resources, and carried out under their control. Commitment to gender equality, raising the social and economic status of women along with primary health care services should be designed.

There were many pious and motherhood statements made by the leaders at the conference. The reality is that the economy of many of Asian and African countries are competitive in many respects and they compete with each other to sell their commodities and products to the US and Europe.

Some observers cynically have stated the Asian-African alliance will tantamount to what in 1956 H.S. Suhrawardy termed the alliance of the Middle East countries -- "zero plus zero" -- unless they are able to govern with accountability and pool their resources to advance their technology and scientific research and design a new system of market economy where they can sell their goods to each other. Economic cooperation among them will lack its firm edifice under the existing mind-set and as a result their cooperation will remain a pious wish.

Conclusion
Although the leaders have committed to make rapid social and economic transformation through sustained cooperation, it will be seen in 2009 at the next conference in South Africa how much they have translated into action of their well-meaning words at the Jakarta conference.

One of the positive outcomes of the Asia-Africa meet was the meeting on the sidelines between the Chinese President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan to reduce bilateral tension that became a concern in Asia, because if two Asian economic giants fight, interests of other Asian countries suffer. Furthermore, it is reported that support from several countries for Bangladesh joining the Asian Regional Forum of Asean has been achieved, and for Bangladesh this can be considered a good political outcome.

Barrister Harun ur Rashid is a former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.