I have previously written about our futile search for ‘saviour-like’ leaders. Today, I want to focus on another aspect — that of the making of a ‘leader’.
Even the most stable of countries, with the most robust of systems, have leaders who inspire, lead and develop the country further. However, these ‘leaders’ go through a rigorous process that develops their leadership qualities, tests their abilities and chisels these merits through experience. In Pakistan, of course, we want a highly able leader, but we don’t want to develop a process through which such a leader might emerge and cannot wait for innate qualities to mature through experience. We want a world-class leader and we want him now.
Unfortunately, such a miraculous leader does not exist. But even though we know that, we still ignore this fact and keep looking. That is why we base our choices on feel-good yet ultimately disappointing notions like ‘hope’. Lest we forget, one of the last times a leader was chosen on the basis of giving hope, we ended up with the Nazi party in power in Germany. This is not to say that ‘hope’ cannot also be coupled with rationality and creative solutions, but again in Pakistan we do not have the patience to hear long and complicated solutions (and our problems are complicated).
I do not want to talk about our current prime candidate for a ‘leader’ but allow me to point out how a certain leader is being ‘made’ in India — a country we share a lot with. In 2003, as the BJP in India announced elections, there was great speculation that Sonia Gandhi, the president of the Congress, might give way to her young and charismatic son, Rahul, so that he might lead the Congress Party into the 2004 elections, which saw an unexpected win for the grand old party. Despite the fact that Rahul did indeed join politics in 2004, he stuck very closely to constituency politics and focused on his ancestral constituency of Amethi, which he now represents. Again, speculation raved that with elections in 2009, Rahul might replace Manmohan Singh as prime minister — to no avail. Even now, Rahul’s only official position is that of an MP and general secretary of the Congress (a post he got in 2007) — he is still not even in the cabinet. Why this very slow progression?
The answer lies in the fact that India has now become a mature democracy. Rahul could have become president of the Congress years ago, and even become prime minister in 2009, but he, and especially his mother, realised that good and effective leaders are not simply born, but are forged through experience. Rahul began his political career with constituency politics, the essential bedrock of any democratic system, and is now focusing on organising the party nationally. He did not try to take a shortcut and bank on his family name, the success of his party and his one-term parliamentary experience to become prime minister. Rahul is waiting because he knows he has a lot to learn and experience before he can truly ‘lead’ the country — and this process might take another few years.
I wish that Pakistan also develops such leaders — our hapless country deserves better.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 15th, 2011.
COMMENTS (23)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Good example of Rahul. But here in Pakistan we have a brand name called Bhutto which can be adopted by anyone. Bilwal should be Zardari as the tradition goes in Pakistan that a son adopts father's family name. But that is not suitable to get Chairmanship of PPP. So he changes his name to Bilawal Bhutto Zardari.
A banana party with banana leaders.
LOL! I am ALL for handsome charismatic YOUNG leaders ;)
@Timorov (Taimur Malik): when did the author say that leaders have to be octagenarians.He talked of experience is politics starting with small responsibilties onto bigger positions;He gives the example of Rahul Gandhi-cartainly not an old man.Please read a little deeper into any topic before jumping guns.
@Jehanzeb: "800 million people live on 45 cents a day"
I will not pretend that poverty does not exist. But your numbers are way off. I think you arer mixing up 2 things:
1) The poverty line of 26 rupees for vlages and 32 rupees for cities that planning commission was trying to define. You have converted the 26 rupees to 45 cents. However at this definition of poverty, India had only 20% poor people NOT 66%.
2) There is a separate statistic that says 800 milion people make less than $2 a day
You have mixed both these things up.
"They have over half a million soldiers occupying and brutalizing Kashmiris! Mature democracy? Maybe you’ve forgotten that democracy means the empowerment and freedom of people"
India did not have soldiers in the valley until 1989 when Pakistan started pushing jihadis there. A claim that Pakistan also does not deny. .
You are clearly a fan of Imran Khan. Let me list things that he wants to accomplish that are already accomplished by India: 1) Country should not depend on aid of superpower 2) Tax to GDP ratio should be doubled 3) Army should not be hired guns for US - kill its own citizens or allow them to be droned at US orders 4) Country should not be a source of global terror 5) Education emergency - getting kids to school - (Despite having 6 times the population of school going kids that Pakitstan has, the absolute number of out of school kids in India is much smaller than Pakistan) 6) Declaring assets is a requirement for all people elected to Indian parliament. 7) Armed forces should never bomb its own people 8) Country should be deweaponized 9) Army and intelligence agencies should report to civilian government
YEs there are many areas that India needs to work on but as the list above shows, it is way ahead in governance compared to Pakistan
@Jehanzeb: "Yaqoob gave the example of Rahul Gandhi who has been in politics for 7 years. PTI and Imran Khan have stuck it out for 15 years. That is no small feat in our political atmosphere".
Good point - except Congress has governments n many states and also in the Centre. So Rahul knows the type of implementation bottlenecks that come up with well intentioned laws. He has also been a legislator in the ruling party and knows the issues involved in getting legislation passed. I do not believe that is something Imran or his core team have.
The writer says, in Pakistan, "we want a highly able leader, but we don’t want to develop a process through which such a leader might emerge and cannot wait for innate qualities to mature through experience." How do you develop a process through which such a leader might emerge without trying to empower the best available leadership?
Yaqoob gave the example of Rahul Gandhi who has been in politics for 7 years. PTI and Imran Khan have stuck it out for 15 years. That is no small feat in our political atmosphere.
Lastly, Yaqoob says, "India has now become a mature democracy." Seriously? India has among the highest growth rates in the world, yet 800 million people live on 45 cents a day! They have over half a million soldiers occupying and brutalizing Kashmiris! Mature democracy? Maybe you've forgotten that democracy means the empowerment and freedom of people!
@Meekal Ahmed: "You make a good point but Sonia has held back because of security concerns" Sonia has held back due to constitutional reasons. The constitution of India says that a foreign born Indian national would have the same rights in India that an Indian born person with that country's origin would have. Since Italy does not allow Indian born Italians to become PM of Italy, neither does Sonia have that right.
It is only after this issue wa raised with the President by Subramanyan Swamy that sonia stepped back. She had made every attempt to become the Prime Minister in 1999 when she was unable to muster the numbers.
Thus it is the laws of the land that have prevented her from moving to PM position. This issue does not apply to Rahul.
@Ali Tanoli
So feroz parsi wasnot gandhi either what a country and what a dirty politics
Dear little know all. Sorry to disappoint you again, Feroze was the son of Faredoon Jehangir Gandhi.
So Feroze was as much a Gandhi as you are a Tanoli.Dirty or not. Take your pick.
@Ali Tanoli
Why Nehru family called themself gandhi for??? for vote may be
I have said it earlier and I will say it again, 'Please start READING'.
Now to your question. Indira Priyadarshini Nehru, got married to Feroze Gandhi and as is usual took her husband's name . Having done so she became Indira Gandhi. Rajiv being the son of Feroze and Indira Gandhi was named Rajiv Gandhi. Sonia Maino, too , took her husband's name and became Sonia Gandhi.
Capiche?
@Nothing but the truth, Let us be patient with Ali Tanoli...
@Ali, Indira, daughter of Nehru married a Parsi gentleman by name, Feroze Gandhi. So she became Indira Gandhi. (Not too many countries elected women to the top position in the 70s, more so, somebody who went against the grain). It just so happens that children take their father's family name and hence their son became Rajiv Gandhi. It also so happens that many, though not all, women take their husband's family name. When Edvige Antonia Albina Maino married Rajiv Gandhi, she became Sonia Gandhi. Rahul did not have a choice but to take his father's name and hence is called Rahul Gandhi. His sister, became Prinka Wadhera after her marriage. There is no connection between Mohandas Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi apart from the fact that they both were/are in the Congress
Phew
@American:
That is not entirely true is it? Narisimha Rao was PM who along Dr. Singh changed the course of the country wasn't it.
I am sure you will argue the Gandhi family is still in control of the party but history shows, due to pettiness Congress lost to BJP until Sonya took over. Whose fault is that? Sonya's or the petty idiots who took over as president?
@Ali Tanoli: You obviously know very little yet choose to pontificate on every topic!
Why Nehru family called themself gandhi for??? for vote may be
@ the author:
Oh not again! The pearls of wisdom from Mr. Bangash that fail to ebb away. You have yet again given us an example from history that is mired with various flaws.
There is a tremendous flaw in the Indian political system and its reliance on "seasoned" (read antiquated) people to run the ship. In fact the gerontocracy is now cracking and Mr. Ambani (India's richest man) just called for a new generation of young leaders at the World Economic Forum's India conference.
Young and dynamic leadership is the need of the hour. Of course experience is important too, but a healthy balance needs to be struck in matters of governance instead of the sweeping statements inadequately backed by historical example that the author has yet again given.
There is a reason why the minimum age of the United States presidency is 35 and not 55 or 65. In fact one of the most important and dynamic US leaders of the past few decades was John F. Kennedy who galvanized his nation to service and created such lasting institutions like USAID and Peace Corps etc
Dynamic, young, highly intelligent and reputable leaders are the need of Pakistan's hour!
Dear Writer, India enjoys a continuous process of democracy thus the faith in holding back for a better time, unfortunately we do not enjoy the same luxury. We have got used to the concept of immediate gratification, one man rule, waiting and hoping for the knight in shinning armor tom come and save us all with very little hardwork or sacrifices.
You make a good point but Sonia has held back because of security concerns -- even if she remains powerful in the background.
Rahul will face the same problem. How that can be over-come I do not know.
In Pakistan, we simply bump them off -- first all the men and then the women (BB).
We know how to "take care" of any leaders we have.
Agreed, its between young learning Rahul versus dynamic CEO of Gujrat state Narendra Modi. Both the cases future is indeed very bright.
Yaqoob,
Agreed. But you do should also realize that, inspite of having so many ready & experienced leaders, the congress party is not willing to go beyond the Gandhi family. I good leader need not necessarily have 'Gandhi' as surname. There are many good leaders in the Congress party who are simply bypassed.