| Home |

Thursday, March 28, 2024 | 5:52:25 PM EDT | About Kashmir Herald |

Kashmir Herald completes 14 years of News and Analysis Reporting........Kashmir Herald thanks its readers for their support !!!

OPINION

Questions before Indian Leadership
J. N. RAINA

Catch them young. India needs dedicated leadership in various fields of activity; be it political activity or economic activity. Rather ‘raise’ them young; like plant species in greenhouse nurseries, if it is meant well to generate better quality leadership, befitting this ancient nation ; like the ones we had during freedom struggle. We need to search for good youth—Indian Idols—and groom them from ab initio.

The quality of leadership is in dire straits. It has degenerated over the decades. The concern is universal. Obviously, the end result is rampant political corruption, which is eating into the vitals of the government and the society.

It is a good augury that a nation-wide search has begun and a debate on better quality leadership has gained momentum in right earnest. The process is continuing. On-again off-again nature of discussion, revolving around Indian leadership, is sweeping across the country, aimed at revitalizing the Indian society. It is ravishing .Kudos to a leading national news paper for initiating the move.

But the stark question arises as to what are the essentials for making a good leader. After all, what was so amazing in the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi, which had inspired millions of people when he launched freedom struggle. He had a knack of attracting people of calibre like Jawaharlal Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Sardar Patel, Dr Rajendra Prasad, Rajagopalachari, Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, Jayaprakash Narayan, Jagjivan Ram and several thousand others. They had gathered around him and dedicated their lives selflessly for the cause of the nation. They were imbued with good character to lead India, under the dynamic and charismatic leadership of Gandhiji, who was devoid of self, so essential for making and shaping a leader of his stature.

The Mahatma liberated this impoverished nation by simple means of non-violence, though he did not completely reject violence. To quote him: “It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence”.

Gandhiji and others of his ilk were men of character. They had certain principles. Gandhiji did not recommend his son Harilal’s name for a scholarship, because he did not want to be accused of nepotism .His private life was separate from politics. That is not the case history of present lot of politicians. Leaders like Shastri, Patel and Nehru were brought up in a different mould .They always tried to rise above ‘dynastic ethos’, according to historian Ramachandra Guha. They feared “They would be doing the country great disservice if they promoted their kith and kin. “ In contrast, nepotism is the order of the day, not just in politics, but in almost every field---from business to films to even sports”, admits Guha. The picture obtaining today is abysmal. We have won political freedom, but there are miles to go before we can achieve other sort of freedom in totality.

Lee Iacocca, a former CEO, has delineated leadership qualities. He calls them “Nine Cs of leadership”. They are: Curiosity, creative, communicate, character, courage, conviction, charisma, competence and common sense. According to him, a leader must listen to people “outside the Yes, Sir, crowd” syndrome. He must read voraciously. Both Gandhiji and Nehru were voracious readers and writers too. In comparison, the U S President George W Bush reads just headlines, as per his own statement, and sees the quality of his leadership. His people are scared of him.

According to Lee, a leader has to be ‘creative’ and try something different. “Think outside the box”, he avers. A leader has to face the reality and tell his people the truth. He must be a man of good character and should have guts to do the right thing. Former U S President Abraham Lincoln has well said: “If you want to test a man’s character, give him power”.

In the present Indian scenario, how many leaders can pass this test after assuming power? They get fully exposed. Corruption has become the hallmark of their success. Very few leaders are imbued with conviction. Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong had a great passion to take out the historic Long March in October 1934, when the Communists were about to be wiped out by Chiang Kai-Shek’s forces. Mao’s Red Army had travelled around 12,500 km in a year, through the harshest terrain. Mao believed in the policy of action.

Very few Indian leaders have charisma. Barring Sonia Gandhi, hardly any Congress leader is charismatic. Had it been so, the Congress would not have been bereft of ‘genuine’ leadership, which could galvanize the party. The Congress is at cross roads .But Sonia Gandhi lacks many other Cs like common sense, creativeness and competence. These qualities were well embedded in her mother-in-law Mrs Indira Gandhi. But Nehru did not have broad vision. Had he agreed to conduct a nuclear test prior to January 1, 1967, India’s stature would have considerably enhanced .India would have been conferred the status of a nuclear weapon country. The U S administration was willing at that time to help India. Their plan was to contain Communist China.

But Nehru was a paragon of democracy. May be, he had some inherent difficulties. Perhaps because he was running a nascent democracy and did not feel encouraged to take risks. India had been making loud noises and would guffaw at other nuclear power nations then for universal nuclear disarmament. So it was hesitant to go nuclear.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh lacks charisma, although he has curiosity, creativity and lot of common sense. He is the brain behind economic liberalization .Former Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee had courage to initiate peace talks with Pakistan, not once but twice. But sometimes he misjudged facts and could not foresee things properly. Charismatic Kashmir leader had guts to side with India, against all odds, when then Maharaja Hari Singh signed the instrument of accession with India. The Sheikh was in jail for over 17 years because he had conviction.

From a random survey conducted by the Times of India, it can be ascertained that people want their leaders to be ‘honest’ and ‘educated’. They are fed up with the present quality of leadership. It is mind-boggling that a section of political class has been creating hurdles in the functioning of investigative agencies probing role of criminals involved in terrorist acts. The national security is of little concern to them. They interfere openly in anti-terror measures. A chief minister of a north east region has been allegedly linked to ISI. How shameful it is.

A good leader should not suffer from xenophobia. Caste and dynastic politics should be discarded. It should have no room in a democratic setup. Vote bank politics is equally bad. Voting must be made compulsory for larger involvement of the electorate. There has to be an attitudinal change to serve the nation. Higher wages in private sector has created a gulf among the educated class. Scientists, the backbone of India, are feeling disgusted. Earlier, there used to be contentment. The concept of “santosh” (contentment) has died. Discontentment in the society can lead to chaos. It has in fact started happening. India has survived because of this concept of ‘santosho parmodharma’ .This is why there are a large number of suicides. It is partly because of widening income gap. Only 30 per cent of Indians enjoy the benefits of economic liberalization.



Printer-Friendly Version

Kashmir Herald - Questions before Indian Leadership

| Archives | Privacy Policy | Copyrights | Contact Us |
Copyrights © Kashmir Herald 2001-2010. All Rights Reserved.
[Views and opinions expressed in Kashmir Herald are solely those of the authors of the articles/opinion pieces
and not of Kashmir Herald Editorial Board.]