Factors Affecting the Capacity to Lead

Despite the popularity of the history-making individuals model, we must be wary of ascribing too much importance to individual leaders. Their influence was summarized by U.S. President Bill Clinton in 1998 when he observed, "Great presidents don't do great things. Great presidents get a lot of other people to do great things."

Most leaders operate under a variety of political, psychological, and circumstantial constraints that limit what they can accomplish and reduce their control over events. In this context, Emmet John Hughes, an adviser to President Dwight D. Eisenhower, concluded that "all of [America's past presidents] from the most venturesome to the most reticent have shared one disconcerting experience: the discovery of the limits and restraints – decreed by law, by history, and by circumstances —that sometimes can blur their clearest designs or dull their sharpest purposes." Abraham Lincoln in 1864 summarized his presidential experience with the conclusion, "I have not controlled events, events have controlled me."

The question at issue is not whether political elites lead or whether they can make a difference. They clearly do both. But leaders are not in complete control, and their influence is severely constrained. Thus personality and personal political preferences do not determine foreign policy directly. The relevant question, then, is not whether leaders' personal characteristics make a difference, but rather under what conditions their characteristics are influential. As Margaret G. Hermann has observed, the impact of leaders is modified by at least six factors:

(1) what their world view is, (2) what their political style is like, (3) what motivates them to have the position they do, (4) whether they are interested in and have any training in foreign affairs, (5) what the foreign policy climate was like when the leader was starting out his or her political career, and (6) how the leader was socialized into his or her present position. World view, political style, and motivation tell us something about the leader’s personality; the other characteristics give information about the leader’s previous experiences and background.

The impact of leaders' personal characteristics on their state's foreign policy generally increases when their authority and legitimacy are widely accepted by citizens or, in authoritarian or totalitarian regimes, when leaders are protected from broad public criticism. Moreover, certain kinds of circumstances enhance individuals' potential influence. Among them are new situations that free leaders from conventional approaches to defining the situation; complex situations involving many different factors; and situations without social sanctions, which permit freedom of choice because norms defining the range of permissible options are unclear.

A leader’s political efficacy or self-image – that person's belief in his or her own ability to control events politically – will also influence the degree to which personal values and psychological needs govern decision making. This linkage is not direct, however. The citizenry's desire for strong leadership will affect it as well. For example, when public opinion strongly favors a powerful leader, and when the head of state has an exceptional need for admiration, foreign policy will more likely reflect that leader’s inner needs. Thus Kaiser Wilhelm II's narcissistic personality allegedly met the German people's desire for a symbolically powerful leader, and German public preferences in turn influenced the foreign policy that Germany pursued during Wilhelm’s reign, ending in World War I.

Other factors undoubtedly influence how much leaders can shape their states' choices. For instance, when leaders believe that their own interests and welfare are at stake, they tend to respond in terms of their private needs and psychological drives. When circumstances are stable, however, and when leaders' egos are not entangled with policy outcomes, the influence of their personal characteristics is less apparent.

The amount of information available about a particular situation is also important. Without pertinent information, policy is likely to be based on leaders' personal likes or dislikes. Conversely, the more information an individual has about international affairs, the less likely it is that his behavior will be based upon nonlogical influences.

Similarly, the timing of a leader's assumption of power is significant. When an individual first assumes a leadership position, the formal requirements of that role are least likely to restrict what he or she can do. That is especially true during the "honeymoon" period routinely given to new heads of state, during which time they are relatively free of criticism and excessive pressure. Moreover, when a leader assumes office following a dramatic event (a landslide election, for example, or the assassination of a predecessor), he or she can institute policies almost with a free hand, as constituency criticism is held in abeyance during this time.

A national crisis is an especially potent circumstance that increases a leader's control over foreign policy making. Decision making during crises is typically centralized and handled exclusively by the top leadership. Crucial information is often unavailable, and leaders see themselves as responsible for outcomes. Not surprisingly, therefore, great leaders (e.g., Napoleon Bonaparte, Winston Churchill, and Franklin D. Roosevelt) customarily emerge during periods of extreme tumult. A crisis can liberate a leader from the constraints that normally would inhibit his or her capacity to control events or engineer foreign policy change.

History abounds with examples of the seminal importance of political leaders who emerge in different times and places and under different circumstances to play critical roles in shaping world history. Mikhail Gorbachev dramatically illustrates an individual's capacity to change the course of history. Many experts believe that the Cold War could not have been brought to an end, nor Communist Party rule in Moscow terminated and the Soviet state set on a path toward democracy and free enterprise, had it not been for Gorbachev's vision, courage, and commitment to engineering these revolutionary, system-transforming changes. Ironically, those reforms led to his loss of power when the Soviet Union imploded in 1991.

 

Exercises:

1 Answer the following questions:

1. What do people attach the names of leaders to?

2. What impression do leaders try to create of themselves?

3. What is the difference between procedural rationality and instrumental rationality?

4. Prove that the human factor in making decisions is very important.

5. What do leaders say about their own role in the world history?

6. What factor modify the impact of leaders?

7. What circumstances can enhance a leader’s influence?

8. How can public opinion affect a leader’s decisions?

9. How do leaders act, if the situation is stable/unstable?

10. What role does information play in a leader’s behaviour?

 

2 Give Russian equivalents for the following word-combinations:

history-making individuals, to reinforce the image, decisive determinants, to seek to create, to make assumptions, personalities of counterparts, to pose a dilemma, wide divergences, cost-benefit calculation, to yield the preferred outcome, to goad smb. into a military strike, fourth-rate military power, preeminent superpower, reminder of smth., to get people to do smth., variety of constraints, venturesome leaders, disconcerting experience, to blur designs, to dull purposes, question at issue, influential characteristics, to enhance influence, conventional approach, complex situation, the range of permissible options, to govern decision making, to favor a leader, to meet a desire, to be at stake, to tend to respond, pertinent information, assumption of power, the “honeymoon“ period, assassination of a predecessor, constituency criticism, potent circumstance, to handle decision making, crucial information, extreme tumult, to inhibit capacity, to abound with smth., seminal importance, free enterprise, to engineer changes, system-transforming changes.

 

3 Give English equivalents for the following words and word-combinations:

приписывать успехи и неудачи лидерам, весь континент, губительная политика, первостепенная цель, сумасбродный лидер, недостаток самоконтроля, религиозные убеждения, сдержанный человек, политическая действенность, прямая связь, отражать внутренние потребности, очевидное влияние, доступная информация, конкретная ситуация, занять положение лидера, относительно свободный, чрезмерное давление, подавляющая победа на выборах, освободить к-л. от ч-л.(2 глагола), играть решающую роль, изменить ход истории, ступить на путь демократии.

4 Make up nouns from the following verbs and adjectives using suffixes:

to equate, to initiate, to assume, to reinforce, to attach, to ascribe, to occur, to determine, to extend, to conquer, to survive, to engage, to diverge, to calculate, to proceed, to found, to imply, to connote, to describe, to apply, to suggest, to appear, to tempt, to convict, to observe, to vary, to constrain, to accomplish, to reduce, to conclude, to discover, to modify, to enhance, to permit, to link, to admire, to reflect, to allege, to entangle, to require, to restrict, to assassinate, to exclude, to emerge, to commit, to implode;

conscious, rational, similar, simple, omniscient, consistent, popular, probable, complete, legitimate, pertinent.

 

5 Give as many synonyms as possible to the following words:

 

to attach, to reinforce, to occur, to seek, to demonstrate, to pose, to predict, to be based on smth., to yield, to suggest, to observe, to operate, to reduce, to determine, to increase, to protect, to free, to define, to permit, to govern, to shape, to respond, to require, to restrict, to emerge, to implode;

decisive, ruthless, entire, disastrous, paramount, correct, similar, perfect, careful, possible, limited, important, preeminent, wary, reticent,disconcerting, severe, direct, certain, conventional, complex, strong, apparent;

behaviour, power, influence, conquest, defect, benefit, foundation, anger, affair, sanction, freedom, range, option, belief, linkage, desire, welfare, amount, predecessor, assassination, tumult, path, courage, loss.

 

6 Give antonyms adding negative affixes if necessary:

equal, official, successful, decisive, impressive, important, conscious, rational, real, correct, easy, perfect, careful, possible, limited, consistent, popular, probable, clear, complete, constrained, direct, relevant, personal, legitimate, conventional, stable, available, logical, significant, responsible, normal, different.

 

7 Explain the meaning of the following adverbs and make up sentences with them:

routinely, consciously, decidedly, similarly, seemingly, repeatedly, likely, clearly, severely, generally, allegedly, symbolically, undoubtedly, conversely, relatively, exclusively, surprisingly, customarily, dramatically.

 

 

8 Insert prepositions where necessary:

1. History abounds … examples … the seminal importance … political leaders who emerge … different times and places and … different circumstances to play critical roles … shaping world history.

2. We reinforce this image when we routinely attach the names … leaders … policies, as well as when we ascribe most successes and failures … foreign affairs … the leaders … charge … the time they occur.

3. Despite … the popularity … the history-making individuals model, we must be wary … ascribing too much importance … individual leaders.

4. Many experts believe that the Cold War couldn‘t have been brought … an end, nor Communist Party rule … Moscow terminated and the Soviet state set … a path … democracy and free enterprise, had it not been … Gorbachev‘s vision, courage, and commitment … engineering these changes.

5. The assumptions they make … the personalities … their counterparts … turn influence their own behavoiur … them, as political psychologists who study the impact … leaders‘ perceptions and personalities … their foreign policy preferences demonstrate.

6. Most leaders operate … a variety … political, psychological, and circumstantial constraints that limit what they can accomplish and reduce their control … events.

7. That is especially true … the “honeymoon“ period routinely given … new heads … state, … which time they are relatively free … criticism and excessive pressure.

8. How do we square this kind … behaviour … the logic … realism, which says that survival is the paramount goal … all states and that all leaders engage … rational decision making?

9. This impact … leaders‘ personal characteristics … their state‘s foreign policy generally increases when their authority and legitimacy are widely accepted … citizens or when leaders are protected … broad public criticism.

10. Qaddafi‘s actions were consistent … his preferences, regardless … how “irrational“ it was … a fourth-rate military power to take … the world‘s preeminent superpower. 

9 Translate from Russian into English:

1. Граждане страны часто считают главу государства решающим фактором в определении внешней политики, приписывая ему успехи и неудачи во внешних делах, отождествляя руководителя с политикой страны.

2. Как считают политические психологи, изучающие влияние взглядов руководителей на их предпочтения во внешней политике, главы государств приписывают необычные качества другим лидерам, чтобы создать впечатление собственной важности.

3. Несмотря на то, что первостепенной целью всех государств, в соответствии с логикой реализма, является выживание, многие лидеры-двигатели истории решительно проводят нерациональную политику, губительную для своих стран.

4. Следует принять во внимание, что влияние личностных качеств руководителей на внешнюю политику страны значительно усиливается, когда они получают полную, всеобщую поддержку своих граждан, или, с другой стороны, когда лидеры защищены от широкой общественной критики.

5. Как показывает практика, если на кону стоят личные интересы лидера, то он, скорее всего, будет действовать в целях удовлетворения собственных нужд и потребностей, и, наоборот, если ситуация стабильна, и свои интересы не переплетены с политическими обстоятельствами, влияние его личностных качеств является гораздо менее очевидным.

6. Так как во время кризиса принятие решений осуществляется исключительно высшим руководством, великие лидеры, как правило, появляются в периоды большой смуты, и они считают себя ответственными за исход событий.

 

10 Questions for discussions:

1. The role of a leader in history.

2. The relationship between a leader and citizenry.

3. The impact of some leaders on the world history (Napoleon, I.Stalin, A.Hitler, M.Gorbachov, etc.)

4. Your favourite political leader, his/her outstanding personality.

UNIT 5