Politics: Comparing Leadership Styles and the Importance of Restraint

Politics can have different contexts, but the message they convey is similar. A similar interesting parallel can be seen in Nepal's contemporary politics. At one time, when he was close to a two-thirds majority, KP Sharma Oli tried to reassure the public by showing ambitious dreams of running trains and ships in Nepal. It was alleged that his expressions reflected arrogance rather than confidence.

Today, in a different political context, Prime Minister Balen Shah described the current government as a 'breakless vehicle' at a program organized in Chitwan. The intention of his expression may be to indicate the government's swift decision-making capacity and unimpeded performance. However, the style of expression has once again sparked debate about political arrogance, overconfidence, and the attitude towards institutions.

One displayed arrogance by showing dreams of development, the other by showing dreams of good governance. But in democratic politics, the style of implementation is more important than the dream. What history has repeatedly shown is that arrogance may give momentary popularity, but it rarely gives long-term success.

Brakes are as essential as speed

Speed, energy, courage, and aspiration for change are indispensable qualities in leadership. These qualities are needed to break stability and inertia and move society forward. But along with these, patience, self-control, discretion, and respect for institutional dignity are equally important.

The value of any vehicle running on the road is not determined solely by its speed. It is also determined by the brakes, the driver's alertness, the road conditions, and sensitivity to other vehicles. In fact, the basis of a safe journey is not high speed, but the ability to control speed when necessary.

In politics, public support empowers leaders. But power cannot replace discretion. Majority makes it easy to make decisions, but the intelligence to make the right decisions does not come automatically.

Democracy also runs on this principle. The constitution, judiciary, parliament, constitutional bodies, independent media, and civil society are the braking systems of democracy. Their existence is not to stop the government, but they perform indispensable work to move it in the right direction.

Brakes are not the enemy of a vehicle; brakes are the guarantee of a safe journey. Similarly, institutional checks and balances in a democracy are not concepts opposed to the government; they are the protectors of democratic governance.

Relevant Parallels in Memory

Some time ago, I had the opportunity to travel on the Yamuna Expressway during a visit to India. The maximum speed limit on this road, considered one of India's best highways, was set at 120 kilometers per hour.

At night, our driver had pushed the car's speed up to 160 kilometers per hour. Even more worrying was that he was starting to doze off. Fortunately, another friend traveling with us realized the situation in time and alerted the driver. A potentially major accident was averted.

This incident is not just a travel memory; it is also an example that offers a deep lesson about leadership. Speed itself is not the problem. The problem begins when the driver considers himself invincible. He ignores risks and concludes that the need for control has ended.

In politics too, public support empowers leaders. But power cannot replace discretion. Majority makes it easy to make decisions, but the intelligence to make the right decisions does not come automatically.

Lessons from Wind and River

At the same event in Chitwan, Balen Shah said he was not like the wind. But there are countless lessons that can be learned from nature for leadership.

The wind sometimes removes obstacles as a storm, and sometimes provides relief as a gentle breeze. Its strength lies not just in its speed, but in its ability to transform itself according to the situation. The river is also a source of inspiration. But the river also has another form. Sometimes it causes destruction as a flood, and sometimes it dries up leaving only sand.

Therefore, the ideal of leadership is neither an uncontrolled storm nor an uncontrolled flood. The ideal of leadership should be a balanced flow, which provides energy, direction, and stability.

Constitution and Institutional Dignity

Recently, some statements made in reference to the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) have also created public debate. The Constitution of Nepal has established the CIAA as an independent constitutional body. Its duty is not to work according to the wishes of any person, party, or government, but to work independently according to the law.

The list of leaders in world politics who have fallen into crisis due to arrogance and overconfidence is long. US President Richard Nixon was in a very powerful position. But the mentality that he was above the law led to the 'Watergate scandal'. And, eventually, he was forced to resign.

In a democracy, if any institution appears incompetent, inactive, or weak, it can be criticized. Demands for reform can be made. If necessary, measures for action can also be taken according to the constitutional process. However, the tendency to pressure, control, or present in a threatening manner to make an institution work according to one's own will is not in line with democratic values.

This is even more so with a constitutional body like the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority. Because the foundation of democracy is not the individual, but the institution. Individuals come and go, but institutions remain as long-term pillars of the nation.

Moreover, interference from the executive branch in institutions established under the principle of separation of powers is even more serious. Therefore, in such a situation, no matter how fast the government is moving, it must use the brakes. This is a warning sign before becoming arbitrary, just as our friend alerted the driver when he started to doze off.

History's Warning

The list of leaders in world politics who have fallen into crisis due to arrogance and overconfidence is long. US President Richard Nixon was in a very powerful position. But the mentality that he was above the law led to the 'Watergate scandal'. And, eventually, he was forced to resign.

Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher led the country towards economic transformation. But over time, by ignoring the voices of dissatisfaction and disagreement within her own party, she was eventually displaced by her own party.

Another truth of history is that democracy is rarely destroyed all at once. It is gradually weakened by the idea of weakening institutions, the tendency to place individuals above institutions, and the mentality of viewing criticism as enmity.

Common Qualities of Successful Leadership

Looking at examples of successful leadership, one common characteristic is clear: a balance between confidence and humility. Even after spending 27 years in prison, Nelson Mandela did not choose the path of revenge. He prioritized reconciliation and tried to unite a divided society.

Lee Kuan Y took Singapore to heights of development, but that development was not based on the magic of an individual, but on the foundation of strong institutions. Angela Merkel's leadership is also remembered as a symbol of patience, balance, and discretion.

In Nepal, BP Koirala's national reconciliation policy is an excellent example of mature leadership. Despite facing imprisonment, exile, and political repression, he did not engage in politics of revenge. Instead, he put forward the concept of reconciliation, focusing on national unity, democracy, and national interest.

Confidence is a necessary element in leadership, but arrogance is not a symbol of success. Courage is necessary, but arrogance is not good. Speed is necessary, but not without brakes. The aspiration for change is necessary, but not by weakening institutions.

At that time, many considered his policy impractical or compromising. But BP had a deep understanding of the then national needs and international situation. In his view, the long-term interest of the nation was greater than immediate political revenge.

Today, history has proven that his national reconciliation policy was not just a political strategy, but a visionary approach to lead the nation from division towards consensus. All these examples say one thing: lasting success is not achieved by speed alone. It requires clear direction, patience, respect for institutions, and the courage for reconciliation when needed.

Confidence is a necessary element in leadership, but arrogance is not a symbol of success. Courage is necessary, but arrogance is not good. Speed is necessary, but not without brakes. The aspiration for change is necessary, but not by weakening institutions.

A breakless vehicle on the road is as dangerous as unchecked power in a democracy. The power to take the nation to the right destination lies not in speed alone, but in maturity that can ensure the right direction, right decisions, and control speed at the right time.

The true success of democracy depends not on the speed of any individual, but on the balance of the entire system. And only as long as that balance is maintained can the nation's journey be safe, stable, and prosperous.