Leadership Deficit

The turmoil and crisis going on in nearly every part of the world, be it US or Europe or even Asia, signifies that leaders of substance are missing.

The new world disorder has created a demand for a commodity that is not only rare but almost extinct. If we were to give a global advertisement for this scarce resource it would run like ‘Wanted Real Leaders’. The turmoil and crisis going on in nearly every part of the world, be it US or Europe or even Asia, signifies that leaders of substance are missing. What we are witnessing is a strange era where most men in charge of countries or companies are failing to live the meaning of what it means to be a true leader. The leaders of today have a mindset of living on entitlements and not on conduct and behaviour. The leadership by title is in vogue, where your designation rules people rather than your own person. Thus what we see is a lot of presidents and prime ministers in the world who appear on the political landscape with the rhetoric of change and sway people’s emotions by convincing them of the same only to find the hierarchy and bureaucracy of the establishment and their own lack of courage to endanger their titles making them become position, power and status quo worshippers. Let us take a look at the present breed of leaders in the world and analyse their eligibility to qualify as a true leader.

The most promising candidate to qualify for the true leader category in the last few decades was Barack Obama. He had all the credentials of reigniting the political romance that George Bush had slithered with his clumsy, cruel and comic reign for the two terms of presidency before Obama blossomed on the scene. With an opponent who was so easy to dislike, the Obama charm mesmerised the world. A young, educated, black aspirant with an amazing rhetoric and unusual intellect was tailor-made for acting as the black knight out to rescue the White House damsel in distress. He came, he spoke and he conquered the minds and hearts and imagination of a world starved for some real heroism. But the honeymoon lasted for barely 100 days.

As it became difficult to live up to his promises of closing down the Guantanamo Bay, bring health care reforms, withdrawing from Iraq, very soon the world found out that a flowery style of communication is not a compensation for actual delivery of results. His attempts to revive the economy have been termed too myopic to bring a real turnaround and his war strategies have mostly backfired. Thus he falls short of vision and a passion to drive change despite the odds. The growing distance between his claims and his accomplishments has disappointed millions who are starved to find leaders with commitment and accomplishment. Obama thus looks like the same shining star that on close quarters is actually shining because it is burning out. Thus he barely scrapped through a re-election to the second term as American president.

 The likes of Quaid-e-Azam, or the last living legend of that era Neslson Mendela, are models that have become almost impossible to reproduce.
 The European leadership in recent times is more famous for personal scandals than any great leadership laurels. Sarkozy became popular due to his marriage to model Carla Bruni and has failed to either take France on a European leadership level or to manage the economic issues at home. Berlusconi is that old chronic playboy whose only claim to fame is his ability to be involved with girls his granddaughter’s age. Thus Italy is on the verge of bankruptcy. Angela Merkel, the proverbial iron woman of Germany, has done well for her country but is now sick of bailing out the ailing European economies as she finds cash reserves running out alarmingly. David Cameron is too staid and too British to really carry a big appeal and has found the recent London riots too tough to cope with especially on top of an economy that does not seem to budge from its stubborn spiral downward.

That brings us to Asia. The Chinese leadership style is always less obvious and more subtle yet with a strong impact. Hu Jintao, the president, has a strong background and training in the Communist Party but he is a fourth generation leader and has no experience of the revolution. Thus the style of leadership though strong and solid is more consensus-oriented than previous governments. The emphasis is squarely on technocratic competence and not on personalities and thus the growth of the economy has been a direct result of this focus. Premier Wen Jiabao is again a non-traditional leader who is renowned for his soft-spoken personality and popularity with the common man due to his deliberate focus on developing the smaller cities and the poor man’s life.

Thus what we see in China is a change from the typical autocratic control communistic regime to a relatively more open style of leadership. The West is of course obsessed with painting them as tyrants but the very fact that they prefer to work in the back ground and may not possess the flamboyant glamour of the Western leaders is a reflection that leadership is not all about the charismatic personalities that are nice to see, hear and add to your Facebook photo albums but are really all a veneer of very little beyond a pretty face or lovely speech.

Another example of a diminutive leader is India’s Manmohan Singh. His credentials to the post are unique as his qualifications and experience are perhaps the best suited to this chair in the world today. A man of few words he is heading an economy that along with China is a contender for the runners up for world prominence. However, many feel though his quiet style has made him ideal for dealing with the huge democratic bureaucracy within the Indian parliament, his unassertiveness has also made things slip away where control is required. The corruption scandals and the power of Anna Hazare’s protest against the government have revealed flaws in a style where you are trying to please the opposing parties so much that you do not know how to appease public anger against his style of letting things hide till they become too hot to ignore.

 The danger with today’s transitory style of leadership is that they take comfort from their positions and as the positions go so does their leadership.
 That of course brings us to Pakistan. There is no doubt that after Zulfikar Ali Bhutto the void of a charismatic leader who can pull strings to accomplish the difficult has been impossible to fill. The legacy of Bhutto rode Benazir to a level where she was leading the country twice but despite having such a platform to establish she let herself be driven by the circumstances rather than driving the circumstances. The autocratic brand of Musharraf again shows a man who had the power to make a real difference but instead of using that power to bring a change in the country he gave in to the typical weaknesses of holding on to power till he was disgracefully asked to quit. Nawaz Sharif became a leader prematurely and never seems to have the capacity to handle this position with a firm and professional manner.

Consequently, till today his struggle between the hardcore opportunist and the aspiring strategist is unresolved. His leadership wish list is often exposed by his desperate actions of compromises to remain politically afloat. With such abundance of mediocrity at the top the country has become a victim of people without the integrity and the ability to put their personal insecurities aside and charter the country out of the perpetual turmoil it is embroiled in.

The likes of Quaid-e-Azam, or the last living legend of that era Neslson Mendela, are models that have become almost impossible to reproduce. The reason is very obvious. Those were men beyond themselves; they had integrity to their mission and larger cause and had the passion to sacrifice all personal objectives to achieve that cause. It is the character and values of these leaders which make them larger than life and make them an inspiration for hundreds of years to come. The danger with today’s transitory style of leadership is that they take comfort from their positions and as the positions go so does their leadership. For the people of this world to rediscover peace and prosperity lost, it is imperative to renounce leaders with formal authority and support leaders with moral authority.

By: Andleeb Abbas

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.