Two prime ministers, on opposite sides of the world, delivered sharply contrasting performances last week. In New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern found the strength and understanding to give voice to a wounded nation’s horror and grief. Her address at a remembrance service in Christchurch for victims of the 15 March mosque attacks rose far above the merely dutiful. It was inspiring, consoling and defiant in equal measure.
Unexpectedly faced by an appalling atrocity, Ardern has shown exemplary leadership skills. Her instinct was to trust her humanity and the humanity of others. By quickly moving to meet, embrace and comfort the bereaved, by wearing the hijab, by taking swift action on gun control and by refusing to acknowledge the killer, she brought out the best in her fellow citizens.
What could have become an ugly slugfest of recrimination and blame, fuelling hatred as the attacker hoped, became instead a moment when a nation came together, honoured its differences, accepted its failings and united behind a future vision of a land where bigotry and racism are not welcome. “The answer lies in our humanity,” Ardern said. “We each hold the power – in our words, in our actions, in our daily acts of kindness. Let that be the legacy of the 15th of March.”
Ardern did not pretend to have all the answers. As in other countries, ignorance, prejudice and intolerance, fomenting social division and political extremism cannot be wholly eliminated. But in confronting these evils in so compelling, uncompromising a manner, New Zealand’s prime minister set a global standard that national leaders everywhere should follow. At present, too many do the opposite, purposefully exploiting fear of the other for narrow political ends – or simply because they, too, are ignorant and prejudiced.
Beneficent leadership skills can be instinctive – or they can be learned. Research conducted by Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner, co-authors of the 1987 bestseller, The Leadership Challenge, identifies five core practices. At their best, they say, good leaders “model the way” (establish principles and goals); “inspire a shared vision” (open minds to new possibilities); “challenge the process” (find innovative, imaginative ways to change the status quo); “enable others to act” (empowerment); and “encourage the heart” (maintain hope and belief).
Look around the world and it is hard to find leaders who tick all five boxes, though there are occasional flashes. Emmanuel Macron, France’s president, has done well recently in persuading disaffected voters there is a shared vision for their country. Mexico’s president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, shook things up last week by demanding Spain and the pope apologise for colonial era depredations.
In unheroic Brussels, Donald Tusk, president of the European council, continued his stand against Brexit. Having reserved “a special place in hell” for those in Britain who tell Brexit whoppers, Tusk engaged in a classic empowerment exercise last week, assuring Remain petitioners they would not be forgotten.
All of which brings us back to that other prime minister whose performance last week shattered any remaining illusions about her fitness to lead. Three consecutive parliamentary defeats, the latest on Friday, for her signature EU withdrawal deal say all that is needed about Theresa May’s political authority. Yet these humiliations point to a more fundamental problem of leadership.
From the start of the Brexit process, May failed to establish agreed goals and principles. She could not share a vision of Britain’s future because she lacked one herself. Rather than empower others to take part, she excluded them at every turn and, once committed, was unable to imagine alternatives. Far from inspiring, her cold and lofty personal style disheartened and dismayed. May tried to dictate, not lead, with eyes and ears firmly closed – and has deservedly found only oblivion.