Non-Aligned Movement | ICSE Class 10 History & Civics Notes

This note covers the meaning and background of the Non-Aligned Movement, its objectives and architects, Panchsheel, Jawaharlal Nehru’s role, and the significance of independent choices in relations between countries.

What was the Non-Aligned Movement and its historical background?

Non-alignment was a policy of keeping away from the rival military alliances of the Cold War while making independent decisions in international affairs. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) brought together countries pursuing this approach. A military alliance is an agreement between countries for military cooperation.

The Cold War was the political, economic and military confrontation between two groups of countries led by the United States of America and the Soviet Union. Such a group was called a bloc. The two leading powers were known as superpowers because of their exceptional international power.

How did the international setting shape this choice?

India became independent when the world was recovering from the Second World War and the Cold War was beginning. Many new countries were emerging from colonialism, the control of a country by an outside power. Most new nations were trying to come to terms with the twin challenges of welfare and democracy.

Foreign policy means the approach a country adopts in its relations with other countries. For newly independent India, this policy had to respond to international pressures as well as domestic needs. Poverty, the effects of partition and unresolved international disputes were among its concerns.

Many developing countries supported the foreign policy preferences of powerful countries that provided aid or credit. Economic and security dependence occasionally influenced their foreign policy. Non-alignment offered a way to participate in world affairs while retaining control over national decisions.

Definition: Non-alignment meant remaining outside the rival military alliances of the Cold War and following an independent foreign policy. It did not require withdrawal from international affairs.

What made independence more than a domestic matter?

Sovereignty is a state’s authority to govern itself and decide its affairs independently. In March 1949, Nehru linked independence closely to control over foreign relations. If another power controlled those relations, a country’s independence would be reduced to that extent.

This explains the connection between political freedom and non-alignment. Winning independence raised a further question: who would decide the new country’s international choices? NAM’s concern was that countries should preserve the freedom to make those choices themselves.

Why did newly independent countries seek non-alignment?

The causes of non-alignment lay in the meeting of two developments: the emergence of newly independent countries and the division of world politics into rival blocs. The new states had national priorities that could not simply be reduced to the rivalry between the superpowers.

Why protect freedom after colonial rule?

Decolonisation means the process through which countries become free from colonial rule. India supported this process and established contacts with newly independent Asian and African states. Its own freedom struggle had formed part of a wider struggle against colonialism and imperialism, the extension of a power’s domination over others.

One objective of NAM was to protect the freedom of newly independent Asian and African countries from colonial influence. Formal independence would have limited value if external powers continued to direct essential national choices. Independent foreign policy was therefore closely connected with the protection of sovereignty.

Why did peace and development matter together?

Developing countries lacked the resources needed to press their concerns effectively in international affairs. They focused more on peace and development in their neighbourhood. Economic development meant improving the country’s productive resources and people’s living conditions, rather than treating military rivalry as the central national task.

Nehru’s three major foreign policy objectives were preserving sovereignty, protecting territorial integrity, meaning the wholeness of national territory, and promoting rapid economic development. He wished to achieve these objectives through non-alignment. Security and development were thus linked to a peaceful international environment.

How did cooperation provide another possibility?

India convened the Asian Relations Conference in March 1947 and an international conference supporting Indonesian freedom in 1949. Such contacts connected the struggle against colonial rule with cooperation among Asian countries. They helped place freedom and international friendship together in India’s approach.

Non-alignment did not remove the need for aid, trade or relations with powerful states. It sought room for independent decisions within those relationships. India could obtain aid and assistance from members of both blocs while, by and large, taking an independent stand on international issues.

How did non-alignment differ from neutrality, isolation and alliance membership?

Non-alignment described an independent approach to international relations during the Cold War. It is useful to distinguish it from neutrality, meaning non-participation in a particular war, and isolation, meaning withdrawal from involvement in international affairs. These terms answer different questions about a country’s conduct.

What choices did these terms describe?

India’s foreign policy pursued a peaceful world through non-alignment, efforts to reduce Cold War tensions and contributions of personnel to United Nations peacekeeping operations. The United Nations (UN) is an international organisation concerned with cooperation, peace and security. Peacekeeping involves efforts to help maintain peace in areas of conflict.

Such participation shows why non-alignment should not be confused with inactivity. A country could remain outside a rival military alliance and still discuss disputes, oppose colonial actions, support freedom struggles and work through an international organisation.

Note: Non-alignment did not mean refusing to take a position on international questions. Independent judgement and active efforts for peace were compatible with staying outside the rival military alliances.

Did it require identical relations with both blocs?

Independence of judgement should not be confused with an automatic requirement to respond identically to every action by either bloc. India’s policy was a difficult balancing act, and sometimes the balance did not appear perfect. Relations with the two sides did not follow a mechanically equal pattern.

The essential distinction concerns who makes the decision. Non-alignment sought to preserve national choice rather than allow bloc rivalry to determine foreign policy. Cooperation with a powerful country, or receiving its assistance, must therefore be distinguished from joining its military alliance.

What were the main objectives of the Non-Aligned Movement?

NAM’s objectives connected independence with peace, equality and cooperation. They addressed both relations between powerful and weaker countries and the conditions needed for development. An objective is a goal to be pursued; listing objectives does not mean that every goal was fully achieved.

How did NAM seek to protect freedom and equality?

Protection of independence: NAM sought to preserve the freedom of newly independent countries in Asia and Africa from colonial influence. This extended concern for independence beyond the moment when colonial rule ended. The ability to decide international policy remained important after freedom had been won.

Opposition to domination and discrimination: NAM condemned colonialism, imperialism and racial discrimination. Racial discrimination means treating people unequally because of race. These aims linked the movement with resistance to external domination and unequal treatment, rather than with acceptance of the existing distribution of power.

Sovereign equality: NAM advocated equality among states as independent political communities. Differences in size or resources should not determine whether a state’s independence deserves respect. This objective connected the freedom of each country with respect for the freedom of other countries.

How did NAM seek a more peaceful world?

Peaceful settlement: NAM advocated settling international disputes peacefully and encouraging friendly relations among countries. A dispute is a disagreement between states. The objective directed attention towards resolving disagreements without allowing them to become causes of war.

Removal of nuclear weapons and causes of war: NAM sought the elimination of nuclear weapons and of causes that could lead to war. Nuclear weapons are weapons that release energy from changes within atomic nuclei. Their elimination was an objective, not an accomplished result of the movement.

Support for the United Nations: NAM sought to strengthen the UN. Its commitment to an international organisation for cooperation helps explain why non-alignment did not mean withdrawal from the world. Countries could support common institutions while retaining independent foreign policies.

How did economic justice enter the objectives?

A fairer international economy: NAM sought a new international economic order based on equity, equality and justice. An international economic order is the arrangement of economic relations among countries. Equity concerns fairness, while equality concerns equal standing and treatment.

This goal connected economic relations with the wider concern for independence. Political freedom and economic development were both important to newly independent states. The movement’s objectives therefore extended beyond avoiding membership of rival military alliances to seeking fairer relations between countries.

Who were NAM’s architects and participants in its core leadership?

The word architects refers here to leaders who helped shape and establish the movement. NAM had a core leadership drawn from several countries. Jawaharlal Nehru was a co-founder, rather than the sole founder of a movement created by India alone.

Which leaders and countries should be associated?

What did their cooperation demonstrate?

These five leaders were together at a meeting of non-aligned nations in New York in October 1960. Their association demonstrates that non-alignment had a shared international leadership. The movement cannot be understood simply as another name for India’s own foreign policy.

The first NAM summit took place at Belgrade in September 1961. A summit is a meeting of national leaders. The 1960 meeting and the first summit are separate events: the existence of cooperation among the leaders preceded the first summit of the movement.

Photograph: NAM’s core leadership (NCERT Class 12, India’s external relations, opening page). The photograph shows five men standing together. Its caption identifies Nehru, Nkrumah, Nasser, Sukarno and Tito at the New York meeting in October 1960.

How should their roles be understood?

The names establish the movement’s shared leadership; they do not imply that every leader made an identical contribution. For India, Nehru’s role included shaping foreign policy, promoting Asian and African cooperation and co-founding NAM. These are specific contributions that explain his importance.

Afro-Asian unity means cooperation among African and Asian countries. It was an important part of the movement’s background, but the presence of Tito from Yugoslavia also shows why the core leadership should not be reduced to Asian countries alone.

What does the timeline show about the growth of non-alignment?

Non-alignment developed through policy choices, contacts between countries and international conferences. Its growth cannot be assigned entirely to a single meeting. Distinguishing these stages makes it easier to understand the relationship between Nehru’s early foreign policy and NAM’s first summit.

Which events connect the early policy with the movement?

Why distinguish Bandung from Belgrade?

The Bandung Conference was an Afro-Asian conference held in 1955. It marked the high point of India’s engagement with newly independent Asian and African countries during Nehru’s period. It later led to the establishment of NAM, but it was not NAM’s first summit.

Belgrade was the location of the first NAM summit in September 1961. The difference is both chronological and institutional: Bandung belongs to the movement’s development, while Belgrade identifies the first summit itself. Confusing them merges two distinct stages into one event.

The sequence also shows that India’s policy did not begin with the first summit. Nehru’s early statements and India’s conferences already expressed independent foreign policy and international cooperation. The summit gave a shared meeting point to a movement with earlier roots.

How did later events test India’s independent foreign policy?

The wider history of India’s foreign relations includes wars, peace agreements and choices about nuclear weapons. These events show the pressures surrounding non-alignment and the continuing importance of security, development and independent judgement.

What did Panchsheel mean and how did its principles express peaceful relations?

Panchsheel means the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. Peaceful coexistence means that countries live alongside one another in peace. Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai jointly enunciated, or formally stated, Panchsheel on 29 April 1954.

What were the five principles?

1. Mutual respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty: each country should respect the other’s territory and independent authority.
2. Mutual non-aggression: each country should refrain from attacking the other; aggression means an attack against another country.
3. Mutual non-interference in internal affairs: neither country should interfere in matters belonging to the other’s internal government and life.
4. Equality and mutual benefit: relations should rest on equal standing and benefits for both sides.
5. Peaceful coexistence: countries should live together in peace despite their differences.

The word mutual means that an obligation or benefit applies to both sides. It is important throughout this statement of principles. Respecting independence is a reciprocal responsibility, rather than a demand that one country makes while denying the same respect to another.

How does Panchsheel connect with non-alignment?

Panchsheel and non-alignment share a concern for peace and independent national choices, but their meanings should remain distinct. Panchsheel names five principles for relations between countries. Non-alignment describes the policy of staying outside rival military alliances and retaining an independent foreign policy.

The joint statement of Panchsheel was a step towards a stronger relationship between India and China. It should not be confused with the founding summit of NAM. The statement was made in 1954, whereas the first NAM summit met at Belgrade in 1961.

Understanding the principles also clarifies several NAM objectives. Respect for sovereignty connects with sovereign equality; peaceful coexistence connects with peaceful settlement and friendly relations. These connections explain the ideas without turning two distinct terms into interchangeable names.

Note: A principle states how countries ought to conduct relations. Its declaration does not establish that every later action will fulfil it or that future conflict has become impossible.

What role did Jawaharlal Nehru play in developing non-alignment?

Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister, also served as his own Foreign Minister. In these roles he exercised a profound influence on the formulation and implementation of foreign policy from 1946 to 1964. He linked India’s national interests with the pursuit of international peace.

How did he establish the policy’s direction?

Nehru wanted to preserve India’s hard-earned sovereignty, protect its territorial integrity and promote rapid economic development. Non-alignment was his strategy for pursuing those objectives. He sought to keep India away from the rival military alliances led by the United States and the Soviet Union.

In his January 1947 letter to K. P. S. Menon, Nehru explained a policy of avoiding entanglement in the rivalry of groups of powers. He favoured friendly relations with both leading groups without joining either against the other. He recognised that each side might suspect India of leaning towards its rival.

How did he promote cooperation and freedom?

Under Nehru, India convened the Asian Relations Conference in March 1947, before independence. It also convened an international conference in 1949 to support Indonesia’s freedom struggle against Dutch colonial rule. These actions connected India’s own experience with the freedom of other countries.

India supported decolonisation and opposed racism, especially apartheid, the system of racial segregation and discrimination in South Africa. Nehru’s support for Asian and African cooperation gave practical expression to concerns that also appeared in NAM’s objectives.

The 1955 Bandung Conference marked the high point of India’s engagement with newly independent Asian and African nations. Nehru was a co-founder of NAM, whose first summit met at Belgrade in September 1961. His role thus combined national policy with international cooperation.

How did peace and Panchsheel fit his approach?

Nehru jointly enunciated Panchsheel with Zhou Enlai in 1954. India also worked to reduce Cold War tensions and contributed personnel to UN peacekeeping operations. These activities show an active pursuit of peace alongside refusal to join either rival military alliance.

His influence did not mean that everyone in India agreed with the policy. Some leaders and political groups favoured closer relations with the United States-led bloc. Nehru nevertheless had considerable freedom to shape foreign policy, and non-alignment became central to his approach.

A balanced account therefore connects several roles: shaping policy, defending independence, encouraging peaceful relations, supporting freedom from colonial rule, promoting Afro-Asian cooperation and helping establish NAM. Calling him a co-founder recognises his importance while preserving the contribution of the other architects.

What was the significance of non-alignment and what limits did its practice reveal?

The significance of non-alignment lay in the attempt to combine national independence with active international cooperation. Newly independent countries did not have to treat the rivalry of the two blocs as the sole basis of their foreign policies. NAM expressed objectives centred on freedom, peace and equality.

What did India’s experience demonstrate?

By and large, India did take an independent stand on various international questions and could obtain aid and assistance from members of both blocs. This shows why independent foreign policy should not be confused with refusing cooperation or assistance from powerful countries.

India’s participation in conferences, support for decolonisation and contributions to UN peacekeeping also demonstrate active involvement. Non-alignment could accompany international initiatives. It did not require a country to remain silent whenever another country’s freedom or a question of peace was involved.

Why must the difficulties remain visible?

The policy was a difficult balancing act, and sometimes the balance did not appear perfect. In 1956, when Britain attacked Egypt over the Suez Canal issue, India led the world protest against the invasion. In the same year, it did not join public condemnation of the Soviet invasion of Hungary.

This difference matters when assessing the policy. It prevents an account that turns independent judgement into a claim of identical responses to both blocs. At the same time, the conclusion that India, by and large, acted independently must retain that qualification.

The United States was unhappy with India’s independent initiatives and non-alignment, and resented India’s growing partnership with the Soviet Union. There was considerable unease in relations between India and the United States during the 1950s. Avoiding alliance membership did not remove international suspicion.

How should aims and outcomes be separated?

Aims and outcomes are different: aims describe intended goals, whereas outcomes describe what happened. NAM’s objectives included eliminating nuclear weapons, protecting independence and creating a fairer international economic order. Stating these aims does not justify claiming that NAM fully achieved them.

Nehru’s foreign policy influence continued until 1964, while the movement he helped establish had held its first summit in 1961. Its significance rests on a shared assertion of independent choice and peaceful cooperation, with practical difficulties kept visible alongside those ideals.

What do historical sources reveal about independent foreign policy?

How did Nehru explain independence and relations with the blocs?

Nehru’s letter to K. P. S. Menon in January 1947 set out a policy of friendship with both the Russian and Anglo-American blocs without joining either. He recognised their mutual suspicions and acknowledged that each side might suspect India of leaning towards the other.

This letter records both a policy intention and an anticipated difficulty. It helps explain why staying outside military alliances did not mean avoiding friendship with powerful countries, and why an independent position could still attract suspicion from both sides.

Nehru’s Constituent Assembly statement of March 1949 connected independence with control over foreign relations. He argued that when another power took charge of those relations, independence was reduced. The statement explains why freedom of international decision mattered alongside domestic self-government.

How did Rajagopalachari assess India’s international standing?

C. Rajagopalachari’s letter to Edwina Mountbatten in 1950 presented India as gaining moral influence despite limited material resources. He described its views as receiving respect among powerful countries. The letter records his favourable assessment of India’s standing, rather than measuring military or economic strength.

Glossary

• Non-alignment — A policy of avoiding rival Cold War military alliances while retaining independent decisions in international affairs.
• Non-Aligned Movement — A movement of countries associated with independent foreign policy outside the rival Cold War military alliances.
• Cold War — Political, economic and military confrontation between blocs led by the United States and the Soviet Union.
• Bloc — A group of countries associated with a leading power in international politics.
• Foreign policy — The approach a country follows in managing relations with other countries.
• Sovereignty — A state’s authority to govern itself and decide its affairs independently.
• Territorial integrity — The wholeness of a country’s territory, whose integrity other countries should respect.
• Colonialism — Control of a country by an outside power, restricting its independent authority.
• Decolonisation — The process through which countries become free from colonial rule and gain independence.
• Panchsheel — The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, jointly enunciated by Nehru and Zhou Enlai in 1954.
• Sovereign equality — Equal standing of states as independent political communities, despite differences in size or resources.
• Afro-Asian unity — Cooperation among African and Asian countries, closely associated with opposition to colonial rule.
• Summit — A meeting of national leaders to discuss matters of shared international concern.
• Apartheid — The system of racial segregation and discrimination in South Africa that India opposed.

Common errors and misconceptions

• Misconception: Non-alignment meant staying out of international affairs. Correct: India participated actively through conferences, support for decolonisation and UN peacekeeping.
• Misconception: Nehru founded NAM alone. Correct: He was a co-founder; Nasser, Tito, Sukarno and Nkrumah also formed part of its core leadership.
• Misconception: The Bandung Conference was NAM’s first summit. Correct: Bandung met in 1955 and helped lead to NAM; the first summit met at Belgrade in September 1961.
• Misconception: Panchsheel and non-alignment mean exactly the same thing. Correct: Panchsheel names five principles of peaceful coexistence; non-alignment describes an independent foreign policy outside rival military alliances.
• Misconception: Non-alignment required identical responses to both blocs. Correct: India’s responses differed, and sometimes the balance did not appear perfect.
• Misconception: Receiving assistance from a bloc member automatically meant joining its alliance. Correct: India obtained aid from both blocs while, by and large, maintaining an independent stand.
• Misconception: NAM’s objective of eliminating nuclear weapons proves that it eliminated them. Correct: An objective identifies a goal; it does not establish that the goal was achieved.

Exam-style questions with model answers

Q1. Non-alignment involved remaining outside rival Cold War military alliances while making independent foreign policy decisions, meaning decisions about relations with other countries. Using this information, state its two essential features. [2 marks]

1. Non-alignment involved keeping outside the rival military alliances that divided countries during the Cold War.
2. It involved retaining the freedom to make independent decisions about a country’s relations with other states.

Q2. For India, Nehru wanted to preserve sovereignty, protect territorial integrity and promote rapid economic development through non-alignment. Sovereignty means independent authority, and territorial integrity means the wholeness of national territory. Explain his three stated objectives using these details. [3 marks]

1. He sought to preserve sovereignty, so India would retain independent authority over its affairs rather than have its national choices determined by another power.
2. He sought to protect territorial integrity, meaning that the wholeness of India’s national territory should be preserved.
3. He sought rapid economic development and viewed non-alignment as a strategy through which India could pursue that objective alongside independence and security.

Q3. The five core leaders were Jawaharlal Nehru of India, Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, Josip Broz Tito of Yugoslavia, Sukarno of Indonesia and Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana. Using this information, identify any four leaders with their countries. [4 marks]

1. Jawaharlal Nehru was associated with India and was one of the five named members of NAM’s core leadership.
2. Gamal Abdel Nasser was associated with Egypt and was another member of the movement’s core leadership.
3. Josip Broz Tito was associated with Yugoslavia and was included among the five named core leaders.
4. Sukarno was associated with Indonesia and formed part of the core leadership of the Non-Aligned Movement.

Q4. NAM sought to protect newly independent countries from colonial influence, condemn racial discrimination and imperialism, uphold sovereign equality, settle disputes peacefully and eliminate nuclear weapons. Here sovereign equality means equal standing for independent states; racial discrimination means unequal treatment based on race; imperialism means domination by an outside power. Explain these five objectives from the information given. [5 marks]

1. NAM sought to protect the freedom of newly independent countries from colonial influence, preserving their ability to act independently after the end of outside rule.
2. It opposed racial discrimination and imperialism, rejecting both unequal treatment based on race and the domination of countries by other powers.
3. It advocated sovereign equality, meaning that independent states should enjoy equal standing rather than have their independence valued differently.
4. It favoured the peaceful settlement of international disputes, seeking ways to resolve disagreements between countries without turning those disagreements into war.
5. It aimed to eliminate nuclear weapons. This was a stated goal of the movement, and the information does not establish that the goal was achieved.

Q5. Under Nehru, India kept outside rival military alliances, convened the Asian Relations Conference in March 1947, supported Indonesian freedom through an international conference in 1949, promoted Afro-Asian cooperation at Bandung in 1955, and helped establish NAM as a co-founder. Explain five aspects of Nehru’s role using these details. [5 marks]

1. Nehru gave India’s foreign policy an independent direction by keeping it outside the rival military alliances rather than joining one bloc against the other.
2. Under his leadership, India convened the Asian Relations Conference in March 1947, making Asian cooperation an active part of its international approach.
3. India convened an international conference in 1949 to support Indonesia’s freedom struggle, connecting Nehru’s foreign policy with opposition to colonial rule.
4. He promoted cooperation among Asian and African countries through India’s engagement at the Bandung Conference in 1955, strengthening this dimension of international relations.
5. He helped establish NAM as a co-founder. This recognises his contribution while also acknowledging that the movement had a shared leadership beyond India.

Q6. In 1956 India led the world protest against Britain’s attack on Egypt over the Suez Canal issue, but did not join public condemnation of the Soviet invasion of Hungary. By and large India took an independent stand, although sometimes the balance did not appear perfect. State the two contrasting responses and the qualified conclusion supported by these details. [3 marks]

1. India led the world protest against Britain’s attack on Egypt over the Suez Canal issue in 1956, taking an active position against that invasion.
2. In the same year, India did not join public condemnation of the Soviet invasion of Hungary, so the two responses were different.
3. By and large India took an independent stand, but sometimes the balance did not appear perfect. The qualification must remain part of the conclusion.

Q7. Panchsheel means the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. Nehru and Zhou Enlai jointly enunciated it on 29 April 1954. Using the information given, state its meaning and name the two leaders associated with the joint statement. [2 marks]

1. Panchsheel means the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, expressing an approach to peaceful relations between countries.
2. The two leaders who jointly enunciated it were Jawaharlal Nehru and Zhou Enlai.

Key takeaways

• Non-alignment combined remaining outside rival Cold War military alliances with independent decisions in international affairs.
• NAM pursued independence, sovereign equality, peaceful settlement, opposition to discrimination and domination, and fairer economic relations.
• Nehru, Nasser, Tito, Sukarno and Nkrumah formed the core leadership, showing the movement’s shared international character.
• The Bandung Conference of 1955 helped lead to NAM; its first summit met at Belgrade in September 1961.
• Panchsheel means the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, jointly enunciated by Nehru and Zhou Enlai in 1954.
• Nehru linked non-alignment with protecting sovereignty and territorial integrity, encouraging economic development and promoting international peace.
• India, by and large, took an independent stand, although sometimes the balance did not appear perfect.
• NAM’s stated objectives describe goals to pursue; they should not be presented as proof of complete achievement.

Test yourself

What freedom did non-alignment seek to preserve in international affairs?

It sought freedom to make independent foreign policy decisions while remaining outside rival Cold War military alliances.

Why was non-alignment different from isolation?

Non-alignment allowed active international involvement, including conferences, support for decolonisation and peacekeeping; isolation meant withdrawal from such involvement.

Which five countries were associated with NAM’s core leadership?

The five countries were India, Egypt, Yugoslavia, Indonesia and Ghana, associated respectively with Nehru, Nasser, Tito, Sukarno and Nkrumah.

How were Bandung and Belgrade different in NAM’s development?

Bandung hosted the Afro-Asian conference in 1955; Belgrade hosted the first NAM summit in September 1961.

What does Panchsheel mean?

Panchsheel means the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, jointly enunciated by Nehru and Zhou Enlai.

What were Nehru’s three major foreign policy objectives?

They were preserving sovereignty, protecting territorial integrity and promoting rapid economic development through the strategy of non-alignment.

What qualification should accompany India’s record of independent decisions?

By and large India took an independent stand, but sometimes the balance did not appear perfect.

Why is an objective different from an achievement?

An objective is a goal to pursue; an achievement means that a result has actually been attained.