How much does the belief in one’s personal immunity influence a leader’s decisions? Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah waved the wand from what he thought was a secure place, ringed by civilian residents. So, with the feeling of being above it all, did he take decisions that were objective, or would they have been different if he believed he could become a victim of the consequences? Israel has proved, once again, that the decision maker can be got at – that the perpetrators of violence should be aware of the karmic principle. Russia’s Vladimir Putin, for instance, is doing what he is because he feels he cannot be touched, as it could possibly result in nuclear war.
On the other hand, every system of governance seeks to provide protection to leaders so that they have the freedom to take difficult decisions. In democracies, however, there is an equal pressure for leaders to be ‘close’ to the people, within handshaking distance, metaphorically speaking. This is done in the belief that an elected leader’s position is symbolic, representative of an ideology and people’s mandate, so that another can take over in the case of a mishap without an imbalance in the power structure. Power is institutional, not personal. That is the distinction between ‘underground’ and ‘overground’ organisations.
Of course, the lines are not so distinct as they theoretically may seem to be. Even the most democratically elected leader has to take personal responsibility and be accountable for his or her actions. The difference is that– most of the time – they do not need to be ‘eliminated’ to be removed from power – casting of the ballot is enough. The autocrats, dictators and royals require, more often than not, to be removed physically from the scene.
If there was greater space for doubt in the public space, there would not be so many wars. A leader’s greatness is not that he or she sticks stubbornly to a position, however unviable, but to have the ability to step back when required; not to conflate policy with ego. There are many ways of getting something done. The redlines should be very few and far between. One should not be afraid of seeming weak. Consider how such an approach would impact the senseless conflicts ongoing in the world today. It needs to be realised that a seeming defeat at the tactical level may well shape a strategic victory.
