International organizations have a surprising ability to perpetuate themselves, even when they have lost their raison d'être. This phenomenon may explain the sustained survival of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). Founded during the Cold War with the alleged objective of establishing a body that positioned itself somewhere between Western countries and the Communist bloc, the NAM survived the East-West confrontation, becoming an umbrella under which emerging powers like India joined forces with developing democracies such as the Philippines and totalitarian regimes like North Korea. These seemingly contradictory partnerships also extended to Latin American countries, which included the Cuban dictatorship alongside democracies like Peru or Colombia. Such diversity guaranteed broad participation in the movement - up to 120 countries - but also ensured its irrelevance since such dissimilar members cannot reach a consensus on anything other than mere generalizations that do not have the ability to influence policy in the global arena.

Nevertheless, the upcoming summit of the Non-Aligned Movement is attracting considerable attention. This is not because the movement has suddenly gained internal cohesion or because the topics are less abstract (especially as the meeting's main topic will be “Lasting Peace through Joint Global Governance.”) The significance of the summit is its location: Tehran. In fact, the summit may become a diplomatic victory for the Iranian regime, that has become an international pariah as a result of its systematic support of terrorism and its illegal pursuit of nuclear weapons. The ayatollahs are undoubtedly satisfied that Tehran, despite its illegal activities and international isolation, will host delegates from dozens of countries and several heads of state.

To understand how this happened, it is necessary to review the progressive political mutation of the NAM and the main roles played by Venezuela and its partners in the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA). Beyond its aforementioned diversity, the movement has gradually accentuated its anti-American and anti-Western rhetoric. Under this ideological umbrella, tyrants of all types have chosen the NAM as a forum where they can sit among equals with the rest of the international community and appear to be respectable. The summit in Tehran is another step in this direction. Not only will the forum convene in a capital currently subject to UN sanctions, but the Islamic Republic has also sent invitations to Presidents Bashar al-Assad of Syria, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Kim Jong-un from North Korea and, of course, Raul Castro of Cuba.

To some extent, the transformation of the NAM into a refuge for autocrats is the result of the organization's seizure by an alliance of governments from the Middle East and Latin America, united by a radical political agenda. In the forefront are Iran and Syria; the second tier includes Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. This is a coalition whose main architects have been the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and his Venezuelan counterpart, Hugo Chavez. Thus, it is not a coincidence that Iran is scheduled to chair the NAM from the summit in Tehran until 2015, to be followed by Venezuela in the following three years. As such, it makes sense that Cuba, Nicaragua, Ecuador and Venezuela (all members of ALBA) were vice-chairs at the NAM Coordination Bureau held last May in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt in preparation for the Tehran summit.

The truth is that this alliance between the revolutionary governments of the Middle East and Latin America makes more sense when one considers that both blocs agree on the need to review key international issues. Both blocs are deeply anti-American and seek to diminish Washington's influence on their respective regions. Moreover, from Tehran to La Paz, they share an absolute vision of sovereignty and are in agreement that no entity - including the UN - has the right to interfere with their internal matters, be it restricting freedom of expression in Ecuador or crushing the opposition with military means in Syria. They are also united by their hatred of liberal democracy and a market economy, and, finally, they share the goal of altering the distribution of international power, to which end they want to increase their military power, including the development of nuclear weapons.

Cooperation among this coalition has begun to shift from pure rhetoric to strategic action. In complete defiance of UN sanctions against the Islamic Republic, Tehran and Caracas are developing a long-term program of military collaboration in sensitive fields, such as unmanned aerial vehicles and long-range missile technology. Likewise, the isolated regime in Damascus has been able to rely on diesel oil supplied by its Venezuelan ally to move the heavy arms with which it is slaughtering its own people. Finally, the ALBA countries, united with their partners in the Middle East, promise to turn the forthcoming NAM summit into a springboard to gain momentum against the sanctions the international community has imposed on Iran in an effort to halt its illicit nuclear program. The strategy is simple: how can the UN demand compliance with the measures against Tehran after several of its members visited the ayatollahs for the NAM summit?

In this state of affairs, it is not surprising that the ALBA countries will send high-ranking officials to the Iranian capital. In fact, the president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, and the Foreign Minister of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, have already confirmed their participation. It is likely that Ecuador, Bolivia and Cuba will also send high-ranking political representatives. The question is whether some NAM members will attend the summit. At the moment, it looks as though countries engaged in heated dispute with the Islamic Republic, like the Persian Gulf states, will not attend. Furthermore, the governments of some NAM members in Latin America, such as Peru or Colombia, and others that are NAM observers, such as Brazil, Mexico or Argentina, should consider not going to Tehran. Such a decision may ruin the summit for the ayatollahs and prevent the movement from becoming a puppet at the service of Ahmadinejad and Chávez. Otherwise, the NAM runs the risk of becoming a very undistinguished club.

Román D. Ortiz is the director of Decisive Point, a consulting company specializing in security and defense, and a professor of Economics, University of Los Andes, Bogotá.
Twitter: @roman_d_ortiz