The question, which countries are better suited to develope a policy of non-alignation, could give a hint to the answer of this question. What´s obvious in this regard is the deep difference between the situation today and the one during the first Cold War, where many states were in complete dependency of one of the two major powers. This is nearly nowhere the case today.
The two central geographic stages of today are, just as before, the european continent on the one, the countries of East-Asia on the other side, both ends of the eurasian continent.
The states of western Europe were bound to Washington from the 1940th ´till the late 80th, as well as their economy. And the regimes of eastern Europe had to be protected by Moscow in order to survive. The situation of today is different. American military is still of overwhelmingly importance, but this is caused by european unwillingsless to deal with military issues by semselfes, not by necessity of international politics. And even while the US is still dominant in the economy, China is already far to important to ignore; a huge variation from the economy of the Sowjet-Union.
The economic situation in East-Asia is somewhat similar, but many states depend on the military presence of the United States, like South Corea, Vietnam and foremost Taiwan, even if only the last one must fear an attack by China in the foreseable future. Of special intereset will be a number of states that might get themselfes in a middel-position between both powers, namely Myanmar, the Philipines and possibly even North Corea.
So, when there´re no blocks, how could a non-aligned policy looks like?
Simon Dierich 