By Robin Rhee
National leadership is an interesting concept. It is difficult to define and indeed people don't focus on it much until election year rolls round and they try to determine which of the candidates has the leadership qualities they want to see in their next head of state.
That is not to say people don't know what they like or dislike in their current leaders' performances. But the definition of effective leadership and how to elect the best leaders has been an on-going debate since the beginning of history.
Confucius mused that: ``He who exercises government by means of his virtue may be compared to the North Polar Star which keeps its place and all the stars turn towards it.'' While an old Chinese saying suggests, ``Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck, leads the flock to fly and follow.''
In the animal kingdom, among the animals that travel in herds, or live in groups, the dominant male is decided through combat. One male emerges as the strongest, stakes out his territory and defends his position as leader of the pack until ultimately he is defeated by a younger male.
Some would contend that a political election is a parallel form of determining the Alpha male, or female. After the final votes are counted there can only be one winner.
The winner, and the losers, will not have escaped the proverbial bruises, scars and character assassinations suffered as a result of the allegations leveled and the mud thrown during the campaign.
What makes men/women put themselves through such a grueling struggle to grab the brass ring of leadership? First they must have the ambition, the fire in their bellies, to sit at the pinnacle of power.
There is always the danger, however, that it is merely a desire to reap the perks of power, rather than a genuine desire to lead their country in a new, hopefully better, direction.
Also they must have the opportunity to vie for the prize. In most cases that means being in the right place at the right time and having the backing of a political party, as well as various populous regions of the nation.
A loyal cadre of campaign volunteers will surely coalesce, in anticipation of political payback should their candidate be declared the victor.
It is, of course, assumed that candidates have a vision and a course of action to steer the nation forward. The economy, education, social programs, as well as international relations, have to be component elements of the grand scheme of leadership.
Since no one person can be expected to have all of the answers, it is imperative that he/she is surrounded by the nation's best and brightest advisors.
Until a new leader is selected, however, voters must endure the campaigns. Speakers will make grandiose promises and tell the various special interest groups what they want to hear. Image makers and spin doctors will follow close behind their candidates.
None of this hype will guarantee the election of a superior leader.
Voters in the days leading up to the election might do well to ponder what some famous people have had to say about leadership:
``Divide and rule, the politician cries; Unite and lead, is watchword of the wise,'' advised Goethe.
Columnist George Will saw it this way: ``Leadership is, among other things, the ability to inflict pain and get away with it ― short-term pain for long-term gain.''
And John Kotter, Harvard Business School professor, stated, ``Leaders establish the vision for the future and set the strategy for getting there.''
The writer is a former weekly columnist for The Korea Times and currently resides in Centerville, Ohio. She can be reached at RRKORAM@aol.com.