BBC Radio 4 2016-09-20

Good morning. UKIP’s new leader, Diane James, regards the recently re-elected President Putin as one of her political heroes. She admires him, she says, because, he is a ‘strong leader’. And she’s not the only one. Donald Trump, Alex Salmond and Nigel Farage have all expressed admiration for him. In Russia he is widely credited with restoring pride to the Russian people after the humiliation of the loss of empire.

Most of human history has been dominated by the ideal of the strong leader. People have a huge investment in a single, iconic figure who commands respect, does not yield under fire, and stands up against opposition. We seem programmed to want this, especially at times of trouble. It makes us feel safe and even special. But all over the world there are examples of downsides to maintaining this kind of strong leadership. Its strength is more likely to require a curtailing of freedom, especially the freedom to question and dissent. And then it needs to be seen to be strong, which brings other dangers. The leader’s image must never be compromised; so illness often goes unreported, weakness is rarely manifest. A strong leader can become detached from reality and even come to believe that they are invulnerable.

Sometimes strong leadership is not as strong as it appears. An invisible contract between the leader and the led, carries a risk that both might end up consenting to an illusion. We might want our leaders to give us purpose and prosperity, but there are times when we can’t have what we want.

There are plenty of strong leaders in the Bible; some of the kings of Israel, for example.
But the institution of kingship was a concession by God to the people’s demand to be like other nations with their own king. So God gave them Saul who turned out to be a nightmare. The people had to learn that a king was not just a status symbol, his true authority derived from God’s law. The kings of Israel were finally judged on how far they had been obedient to it. It could be argued that the Bible encouraged the principle of accountability to take root in the Western world. One of the great virtues of the European enlightenment was an abiding suspicion of authority and an insistence that leaders must be bound by law.

In our own times context the strongest leadership is sometimes to refuse the mantle of lasting power; I think of Nelson Mandela who stood down after one term; forcing people to take responsibility and not invest him with overblown hopes. There are other models of leadership available apart from that of the traditional autocrat; there are leaders who seek strength in collaboration. There are leaders who deliberately empower others and leaders who do not shy away from delivering bad news and difficult choices. Unyielding leaders may seem attractive but the ones who really do good are supple as well as strong.