Connect with us

Features

Universal qualities of successful leadership

Published

on

by Anoja Wijeyesekera

Today the world is facing a crisis in leadership, as one leader after another fails to meet the expectations of his subjects and is forced to either resign, or is defeated at the next election. Those who manage to cling on despite being unpopular, are the despots who live in fear of their own people and use every means to crush the very people they are supposed to serve. What are the fundamental causes for this failure of leadership in the 21st century?

Leadership exists at different levels, at state and national level, at the level of organisations or business units or in a family situation. The Oxford English dictionary defines a leader as “the person who leads, commands or precedes a group, organisation or country.”

The world is replete with examples of good leaders and bad, the latter gaining notoriety on account of the mass media that zooms in on examples of failure. In the modern world, at the basic level, the following are regarded as some requirements expected of a good leader. These are:

Qualifications, experience, capacity and wisdom to fulfil the functions of the leadership role. Enthusiasm for the function to be performed and a vision for the future or the task at hand.Commitment and loyalty.Being a team player. Management experts now recognise that much more is achieved by dynamic teams rather than models of a strict hierarchy or autocracy.Flexibility and democracy.Hard work, dedication, knowledge and the desire and humility to learn.Respect for others and commitment to equality.Integrity, honesty and a generous spirit.

Despite these well-known attributes, which should be general knowledge, we see leaders fail. On close examination, it becomes increasingly clear that in addition to qualifications and experience, it is the qualities within a person, the intrinsic attributes of character, ethics, integrity, and values that makes a person a good leader and earns the respect and adoration of others.

The Buddha identified these essential qualities that a leader should possess which are referred to as the Dasa Raja Dhamma [10 qualities of Kingship]. The Buddha gave prescriptions to different people, as a doctor would do, to heal different illnesses. To rulers he gave the prescription of the Dasa Raja Dhamma, a universal and timeless prescription that is valid today, as it was 2600 years ago.

They are:

Dana – generosity/liberality. This refers not only to charity but also to a generosity of spirit. Giving away one’s own wealth and possessions and sacrificing for the greater good of the people, as opposed to seeking power and self-benefits. It refers to a charitable and generous attitude of giving credit to others and placing the welfare of every single citizen before one’s own. It means promoting the Human Rights of every single citizen regardless of any consideration of caste, creed, race, political inclination, gender etc. In simple words it means putting country before self, and making whatever sacrifice required to achieve that including sacrificing one’s life.

Dana also means paying special attention to the needs of the poor and the marginalised, and uplifting their lives and steering the economy for the benefit of all. This does not mean the practice current among politicians today, of using public funds to give away goodies before an election. In Western countries this takes the form of tax cuts or more state benefits. Here in Sri Lanka it takes a more blatant form of outright handouts in addition to tax cuts, thus rendering the exchequer dry. This is not Dana. It is bribery and it is a crime.

In the early years of independence, most leaders in Ceylon, spent their own private funds to run for election and became impoverished as a result. At the end of their political careers, many who were wealthy individuals before they entered politics, ended up with virtually nothing. Dudley Senanayake, a former Prime Minister, had a mere Rs. 200 in his bank account at the time of his death. He did not travel in luxurious cars or ever flaunt his power and position. Judging by the largest ever gathering at his funeral, the judgement of history is that he was the best loved Prime Minister of Sri Lanka.

It is public knowledge that Prime Minister, W. Dahanayake came to Temple Trees with one suitcase, in a Morris Minor taxi, and after his tenure of office, left with that same suitcase, also in a Morris Minor taxi with no security guards!

Seela – morality and ethics. This at its basic level is the observance and practice of the five precepts or observation of a moral code. These precepts are universal and can be enumerated as follows:

respect for all sentient life,

honesty and integrity in all matters,

good behaviour/ impeccable sexual conduct,

honesty, integrity, transparency and upholding the truth,

not being addicted to intoxicating drinks and drugs.

In the case of a ruler, the last precept also means not being addicted to power, which is the most potent of all narcotics. The famous words of Lord Acton ring true. “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Examples of this are rife.

Parithyaga – sacrifice, altruism. A leader must be able to sacrifice him/herself for the sake of others. This is the total opposite of selfishness. It is the concept of the captain of the ship taking responsibility and being the last to leave a sinking ship, or the head of the organisation accepting responsibility for the mistakes of his staff or organisation, rather than “passing the buck”.

Sri Lankan history has examples of the Kings going to battle and engaging in one to one combat with the opponent, so that the lives of hundreds of soldiers could be saved. This degree of sacrifice disappeared a long time ago and today leaders remain behind their desks while troops face bullets on the battle front. The King of Bhutan joined his troops on the front line during a short war, to drive away a terrorist outfit from India, that was operating from its southern jungles. This took place in the early part of the 21st century. The King took great care to minimise casualties.

Irju – Righteousness and being perfectly upright. A leader must carry out his duties without fear or favour, regardless of caste, creed, ethnicity, gender etc. This is perfect honesty and integrity in all matters. In the ‘Sigalovada Sutta. (Digha Nikaya), the Buddha says that if a person maintains justice without being subjected to favouritism, hatred, fear or ignorance, his popularity grows like the waxing moon. What we sadly see today is the opposite of this – the systems of accountability and justice being manipulated by politicians.

Irju also means the ability to take tough decisions for the sake of greater good. A leader who practices the Dasa Raja Dhamma would have the support of the public in implementing the tough decisions, as the people will be convinced that it is for their good. The leader being sincere in his/her efforts will have the confidence of his subjects. Such a leader does not go for cheap popularity or what is now termed “populist” policies, which are triggered by prejudice.

Murdu – flexibility/ not being dogmatic. In terms of a leader this means being able to accept one’s mistakes and taking steps to rectify them. It means the ability to apologise and to accept blame. This quality is a sign of strength, not weakness. It is the wisdom to see one’s self more objectively and to have the strength of character to heed advice and expert opinion rather than arrogantly holding on to one’s own preferred options or preferences in matters of state and governance. Queen Elizabeth II is quoted as having said “I take my duties very seriously, but I don’t take myself seriously.”

Thapasa – self-discipline, subduing of passions and carrying out duties without indolence. The leader being completely disciplined, energetic yet frugal and non-ostentatious and a living example of dignity. It is the opposite of engaging in lavish ceremonies and media events organised at state expense. Rather it is the conducting of all affairs of state with poise and grace at minimum expense to the exchequer.

Akroda – non-anger, non-hatred. A leader must not be given to anger and aggression. He must be kind, understanding and compassionate and be devoid of aversion. He must be forgiving and considerate but conform to justice and the rule of law which must be applied equally. The Rule of Law is the basis of democracy and enhances the trust of the people in the system of governance.It is this quality that enables the leader to mobilise the best brains in the country and to obtain trust of those around him, so that they serve him sincerely and honestly giving him true and good advice rather than engaging in sycophancy.

Avhihinsa – non-violence. A leader must never use violence, even when provoked. This means negotiation in preference to war and dealing with difficult situations with utmost tolerance and wisdom. This means dismantling the weaponry of war and fostering qualities of unity and harmony among his own population, as well as fostering true friendship with neighbouring countries so that war and aggression are prevented.

Kanthi – patience/forbearance. A leader must practice forbearance and must never be vindictive. Today we see vindictive leaders using the weaponry of war to settle grudges. In the 21st century, humanity needs to evolve from reptilian disposition of aggression and move towards a world of peace. This means the total dismantling of the apparatus of war and the trillions of dollars spent on weapons which can be used for the upliftment of the poor and the marginalised.

Avirodha – non-enmity, non-prejudice. This is an appreciation of the oneness of man and is the opposite of arrogance and the promotion of self-interest, favouritism, cronyism and nepotism.A leader must necessarily appreciate opposing views and review his/her actions giving due consideration for those opposing views. Opposition is the basis of democracy. It is the respect that is accorded to the opposition that fosters critical analysis and healthy debate. In a true democracy the opposition has to be regarded as the alternative government and given due respect. A leader must see the benefits of considering opposing views to improve and modify a course of action. The opposition needs to be a mirror of public opinion that must be recognised and respected.

This quality necessarily entails press freedom, the freedom of expression and the freedom to engage in non-violent forms of dissent. It is clear that if a ruler observes the Dasa Raja Dhamma, his leadership would never result in a situation where people are forced to come out on to the streets to show their grievances.

A leader practicing the Dasa Raja Dhamma would be so close to his people that he would know the pulse of the nation as his own pulse. The Buddha said that a leader must regard every single one of his subjects as his own children and look after their needs and aspirations accordingly. This is the complete opposite of favouring one group over another. The Buddha said that the leader of the country must be a father to all his subjects regardless of any consideration.

In the 21st century, we see leaders rise and fall in quick succession. If we look at the reason for the fall, we see the character flaws and their lack of understanding of these 10 values, as prominent causes for their downfall. Those whom we consider good leaders are those who have come close to observing these principles which are universal values common to all mankind and not particular to any one religion or belief system.

The Buddha preached to all mankind and not to any one group of so called “believers”. Thus, even the term “Buddhist” is a misnomer. These qualities of leadership explained and propounded 2600 years ago are intrinsic to the character of the person and do not come from outside. They can be practised and perfected by anyone aspiring to be a successful leader. They are a universal formula for successful leadership.

One of the greatest leaders the world has known was Emperor Asoka who ruled India in the 3rd Century BC. Historians refer to him as the “Emperor of Emperors”. Prior to embracing Buddhism, he unified the whole of the Indian Sub-continent through war, but realised the huge loss of life that it entailed and resolved never to engage in violence. He embraced Buddhism which preaches non-violence and turned India into a country that practiced avihimsa – non-violence. He disbanded his armed forces. He embraced the Dasa Raja Dhamma and engaged in programmes to uplift the conditions of his subjects, introduced free hospitals for both humans and animals and brought a period of unprecedented prosperity and peace to the lands he ruled.

Sri Lanka benefited from Emperor Asoka’s generosity. He bestowed the gift of Buddhism to his friend, Devanampiyatissa, the King of Sri Lanka. To carry out this unique diplomatic mission, he sent his own son and daughter Arahant Mahinda and Arahant Sanghamitta, who had both ordained and gained full Enlightenment.

King Devanampiyatissa too followed the example of his friend Emperor Asoka and introduced universal free health care for both humans and animals and reigned over a period of peace and prosperity in Sri Lanka.

Closer to our own times, the 20th century has a few examples of good leaders. Nelson Mandela is one such person who was imprisoned by the Apartheid Regime for 27 years, his crime being his struggle to gain freedom and equality for his people. On being released from prison, Nelson Mandela stunned the world with his forgiveness. He forgave all those who tortured and tormented him in prison and unleashed appalling brutality and violence on unarmed people, thus killing large numbers and subjecting them to untold misery and hardship. He created the rainbow nation where all races, castes and creeds could live in harmony and enjoy a peaceful life. [The South African national anthem is sung in eight languages]. The world honours Nelson Mandela for his enlightened qualities. He is unique among leaders as he relinquished his right to be president for a second term. He displayed his magnificent humility in stepping down after just one term in office.

In general, although man has occupied the earth as its leading species for millennia and brought many benefits in terms of material comforts to his fellow beings through scientific discoveries, he has yet to make strides in the arena of human behaviour. Einstein famously said “the splitting of the atom has changed the world except the human mind”. The human mind that clings to his reptilian and mammalian characteristics, has utilised the global opportunities now available, to pursue his base instincts of greed, hatred and delusion.

It is said that World War II was fought to end all wars. Has this happened? Within a few years of its end the Korean War started, the Viet Nam war followed, internal conflicts in many parts of the world continued and today we have the Ukrainian war. If someone looks down upon the Blue Planet from outside, this little dot of dust in the universe, he/she will see nothing but humans fighting humans in this tiny bit of space. What we have to show for ourselves is a world of wars, nuclear weapons, environmental degradation, mass extinction of species and the prospect of our own destruction.

If man is to thrive, it is time that our leaders look within themselves and subscribe to these universal qualities of good behaviour. It is in this arena of the human mind that real change is possible. It is through the reduction of greed, hatred and arrogance that mankind will be able to save the blue planet on which we all live and save ourselves from extinction.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

‘The devil is in the details’ in West Asian peace

Published

on

President Donald Trump at the current G7 summit in France. Evelyn Hockstein/Getty Image

It is obviously too early for an outpouring of joy over the seeming cessation of hostilities between the main antagonists in West Asia. While the prospect of there being a measure of calm in the region is being welcomed by considerable sections of the international community, what is ‘on the table’ currently is only a Memorandum of Understanding between the US and Iran to give peace a chance. The hard part in the peace effort remains to be achieved.

In the Middle East of today we have one of the most complex conflicts to break out in modern international politics and the observer would be naive in the extreme to expect a facile and early closure to the tangle. Yet, for the sake of the world’s publics who have been hurting badly in the prolonged hostilities one could only hope that the US-Iran MoU that is expected to be signed by the sides on Friday would lead eventually to a substantive peace. The world’s thanks are due to Pakistan in this connection for its sustained support in the peace drive.

While the sides have agreed to a ceasing of hostilities in the most general terms and have reached accord on the facilitation of uninterrupted oil and gas supplies to the rest of the world, for instance, the ‘devil will prove to be in the details’ in an envisaged comprehensive peace settlement. It is these details that would make or break peace if the negotiations go on in earnest.

Nevertheless, the details would need to be worked out consensually in a spirit of compromise with an eye to the greater good of the world community. Realpolitik or a narrow focus on solely the national interest among the protagonists, for example, would need to give way to a measure of humanity that would encompass within it a consideration of the overall well being of the world. In other words, it is statesmanship that would crucially matter.

The next few weeks would establish whether humanists are ‘asking for far too much’ when they broach the questions at issue in these terms. Yet it is essentially self interest and national security considerations of the first importance that drove the conflict from even prior to February this year and these questions would need to be taken up and resolved to the satisfaction of the US and Iran in the main if some headway is to be made towards a durable settlement.

The nuclear issue would prove to be the proverbial Gordian Knot. From a realistic viewpoint, Iran could not be expected to be without a potential nuclear deterrent in the face of perceived nuclear threats emanating for it from the West and Israel. In the short term, Iran would need to possess this deterrent to a measure, within a mutually agreed international legal framework maybe, until wide agreement is reached on the nuclear tangle. Specifically, Iran’s immediate threat perceptions with regard to her nuclear-powered rivals would need to be defused during initial negotiations.

Ideally it is a world free of nuclear weapons that must be aimed at but since this goal cannot be achieved in the near or medium terms, unfolding negotiations would need to ensure Iran’s absolute security in a world of powers that continue to swear by the nuclear deterrent, if it is to give up the suspected latter capability.

However, it is to the degree to which the present nuclear powers divest themselves of this capability that Iran could be put at ease on this score. Accordingly, it is nothing short of a complete elimination of nuclear weapons from the world that could dissuade keenly security conscious states from developing nuclear weapons of their own with a mass destruction capability.

This is the number one dilemma the international community needs to grapple with going forward and it is to the extent to which it resolves it that a nuclear weapons free world could be envisaged. No doubt, an uphill challenge.

Compelling Israel to support the present negotiatory process constitutes another grueling challenge for the US. Currently the Iranian position essentially is that a Middle East peace is inseparable from a normalization of the security situation in Lebanon. That is, the present Israeli attacks on the Hezbollah presence in Lebanon must cease if a comprehensive peace is to be realized in West Asia.

However, Israel is showing no signs of drawing back from its attacks on Hezbollah strongholds in Lebanon since the security of the Israeli state is being seen as threatened by the militant group. Co-opting Israel into the negotiatory effort therefore would turn out to be a matter of paramount concern for the US.

Moreover, elements in the rightist administration in Israel are seeing the current peace efforts as a ‘sell out’ to the enemies of Israel. They would have none of it. It is left to be seen how the US would be managing these virtual storm centres in the diplomatic process that could very well bring down the overall purported peace drive.

A recent pronouncement by US Vice President J.D. Vance points to yet another problem area in the US’ current peace overtures. He said that, ‘Regional peace and stability includes stopping the funding of terrorist organizations.’ He was obviously referring to the support extended by Iran to Hezbollah when he mentioned ‘terrorist organizations’ but he has given fresh life to the age-old conundrum of ‘Who is a terrorist?’ by these words.

To the Netanyahu government the Hezbollah and other militant organizations fighting Israel are ‘terrorists’ but from the viewpoint of the Iranian regime they are ‘freedom fighters’. This seemingly insurmountable definitional issue would not only stubbornly bedevil the peace effort but could even figure in bringing about its collapse, unless judiciously handled.

Thus, it’s the thorny details that need to be watched to keep the West Asian peace process afloat, once it gets going in earnest. There is no doubt that US President Trump would be receiving a considerable amount of support from the G7 in this historic peace undertaking and his personal appeals to the grouping currently meeting in France for continuous support are likely to elicit a positive response from it.

Likewise, Trump would need to appeal to also the BRICS countries if almost total global support is to be garnered for the peace drive in West Asia. BRICS’ solidarity with the US and the West is likely to carry considerable weight with Iran and other Eastern actors who are key to a sustained peace drive in the Middle East.

Continue Reading

Features

Sri Lanka’s elephant paradox: Govt. counts tourism dollars while playing a dangerous numbers game: Expert

Published

on

At a time when Sri Lanka is enjoying a resurgence in wildlife tourism, with elephants remaining the undisputed stars of the country’s national parks and one of its most marketable natural assets, elephant conservationist Supun Lahiru Prakash has sounded a stark warning: the nation is in danger of losing the very species that helps attract millions of tourism dollars while sustaining some of the island’s most important ecosystems.

Supun says repeated claims by authorities that Sri Lanka’s elephant population is increasing, despite the absence of a final survey report and amid continuing elephant deaths, risk creating a misleading narrative that could undermine conservation efforts and encourage retaliation against elephants.

According to Supun, the issue is not merely about numbers. It is about political priorities, scientific credibility and the future of one of Sri Lanka’s most iconic species.

“Repeatedly claiming that the elephant population is increasing appears to be an attempt to hide the Government’s inability to manage the rising annual elephant death rate and the complications of human-elephant conflict,” Supun said.

For decades, the Sri Lankan elephant has been a symbol of the country’s rich natural heritage. It is the centrepiece of wildlife tourism, drawing visitors from across the globe to national parks such as Yala, Udawalawe, Minneriya, Kaudulla and Wilpattu. International wildlife documentaries, tourism campaigns and social media promotions frequently place elephants at the heart of Sri Lanka’s nature tourism brand.

Yet, according to Supun, the country’s conservation policies do not reflect the value of the species.

“On one hand, the Government is enjoying increasing tourism revenue, and elephants remain one of Sri Lanka’s most important wildlife attractions. On the other hand, narratives are being promoted that could encourage retaliation against the very species that contributes significantly to the country’s tourism industry,” Supun said.

According to the First Countrywide National Survey of Elephants conducted in 2011, Sri Lanka had 5,879 elephants. However, official statistics show that 4,167 elephants died between 2012 and 2024.

Supun stressed that these figures represent only the deaths officially recorded by the Department of Wildlife Conservation.

“In a context where more than 70 percent of the country’s elephant population reported in 2011 has died within 13 years, it is difficult to accept claims that the population has increased,” Supun said.

The conservationist pointed out that elephants have the longest gestation period among land mammals and that scientific studies have reported increasing interbirth intervals among female elephants together with high calf mortality.

“When such biological realities are taken into consideration, claims of a dramatic increase in elephant numbers become difficult to understand,” Supun said.

Supun believes that repeated references to increasing elephant populations risk fuelling public hostility towards elephants, particularly among farming communities already affected by crop raids and property damage.

“Such claims can create the impression that elephant populations are exploding and thereby promote retaliation against elephants as well,” Supun said.

According to Supun, Sri Lanka’s elephant crisis cannot be understood solely through population estimates. The real issue lies in the country’s failure to address human-elephant conflict through long-term, science-based solutions.

Sri Lanka continues to record among the highest levels of human-elephant conflict in the world. Every year, hundreds of elephants and dozens of people lose their lives as competition for land and resources intensifies.

Despite the scale of the crisis, Supun says authorities continue to rely on strategies that have repeatedly failed.

Lahiru Prakash

These include driving elephants into protected areas, strengthening electric fences to confine them there and allocating additional manpower to maintain fencing systems.

Supun was also critical of several proposals that emerged from district-level discussions on conflict mitigation, including the sowing of paddy and corn using Air Force drones and the planting of fruit orchards within protected areas.

“Such proposals fail to address the real ecological and social dimensions of the conflict,” Supun said.

While welcoming reports that the Government intends appointing a national-level mechanism to tackle human-elephant conflict, Supun said the challenge required intervention at the highest level of government.

“Given the gravity, complexity and geographical spread of human-elephant conflict, appointing any committee other than a Presidential Task Force is not useful,” Supun said.

He argued that a Presidential Task Force chaired by either the President or the Secretary to the President would be better positioned to overcome the bureaucratic delays and institutional fragmentation that have hindered previous efforts.

Supun also stressed the urgent need to restore and protect elephant corridors and home ranges that allow elephants to move safely across landscapes.

He cited the Koholankala elephant corridor in Hambantota as one example where removing obstacles could help reduce conflict while improving habitat connectivity.

At the same time, Supun questioned policies that permit the allocation of forest lands in areas identified by environmental assessments as crucial elephant ranges and movement corridors.

“The opening of elephant corridors and the protection of elephant home ranges must be carried out scientifically and consistently if they are to succeed,” Supun said.

Beyond tourism, Supun emphasised the ecological importance of elephants.

“Elephants are ecosystem engineers. Through their feeding habits and movements, they help maintain habitats that support numerous other species. In many ways, they create safer and healthier environments for wildlife,” Supun said.

According to Supun, protecting elephants means protecting entire ecosystems and the biodiversity upon which Sri Lanka’s wildlife tourism industry depends.

“By protecting elephants, we are also protecting the biodiversity that makes Sri Lanka one of the world’s premier wildlife tourism destinations,” Supun said.

As Sri Lanka seeks to expand tourism earnings and strengthen its reputation as a wildlife destination, Supun believes the country faces a defining choice: continue with policies that have failed to stem elephant deaths and human-elephant conflict, or embrace a science-based conservation strategy that safeguards both people and wildlife.

Without a fundamental shift in policy and political will, Supun warned, Sri Lanka risks losing not only one of its most iconic species but also the ecological and economic benefits that elephants continue to provide.

“The suffering of both farmers and elephants will only intensify unless meaningful action replaces rhetoric,” Supun said.

 

By Ifham Nizam

Continue Reading

Features

Top Model of the World 2026

Published

on

Back-to-back victory for Colombia

Katherine Castaño of Colombia claimed the Top Model of the World 2026 crown, securing a historic back-to-back victory for her country. Angelica Sanchez of Puerto Rico was named first runner-up, and Eunice Deza of the Philippines finished as second runner-up.

Katherine was crowned by outgoing titleholder Natalia Garizabal Vera of Colombia.

Several special category awards, and subsidiary titles, were also presented during the Top Model of the World 2026 pageant.

These awards recognised excellence in modelling, peer support, and regional representation.

Primary Subsidiary Titles

Sri Lanka’s Netalie Withanage: Top 16 at
the grand finale

Miss Globe 2026: Valentina Tabares (Ecuador) — Awarded to the contestant who perfectly balances fashion modelling with traditional beauty queen qualities.

Queen of Europe 2026: Mia Danielle Williams (United Kingdom) — Given to the highest-ranking candidate from a European nation.

Special Awards Recognition

Audience Iconic Award: Charly (Dominican Republic) — Won via the official public online vote, granting her a fast-track direct entry into the Top 6.

Exotic Model of the World: Angel Emeka (Nigeria) — Awarded for exceptional editorial presence and strong runway performance.

Best Body Award: Thailand — Voted directly by fellow contestants at the Flow Spectrum Hotel. The highest-ranking runners-up for this category included Zambia, South Africa, Colombia, and Ghana.

Angelica Sanchez (Puerto Rico): 1st Runner-up

Final Placement

Winner: Katherine Castaño (Colombia)

1st Runner-Up: Angelica Sanchez (Puerto Rico)

2nd Runner-Up: Eunice Deza (Philippines)

Top 6 Finalists: Included contestants from the Dominican Republic, Romania, and Germany.

The pageant, known for focusing on professional modelling careers over just beauty, brought together 36 models from around the globe for two weeks of runway, photoshoots, and cultural events.

Sri Lanka’s Netalie Withanage walked among 36 of the world’s best and powered her way into the Top 16 at the grand finale.

Continue Reading

Trending