In the intellectual and political chaos that ensues, the leading governments of different value systems around the world, or on occasion certain powerful and wealthy non-state entities, seek to arrogate global legitimacy through allusions either to secularity - the 'international community' - or the divine - the 'faithful and the infidel'. The debate of the past decade between Asian and Western values has been replaced, at least temporarily, with the struggle between fundamentalist Islamic values and their Western counterpart. A clash between civilizations has, in certain ways, existed for thousands of years and, as the world shrinks, the recurrent distemper between them rises more frequently to boiling point.

We are in such a moment today. With the destructive weaponry that is now in our hands, however, the challenge of learning to live together and fashion a global political system that can manage conflict and defuse tension has attained high stakes. For our common redemption and perhaps even survival in the long-term, we had better get it right.

What principles of leadership, at the global level, can be developed to guide our world leaders towards enlightened strategies in such critical times? What insights on how to think and act might they glean from the experiences and policies practised by past leaders?

History is by no means replete with examples of past acts of positive and visionary statecraft. Ever since Menes united Egypt five millennia ago and Sargon carved out the world's first empire eight centuries later, most leaders have dreamed of unity imposed through conquest rather than forged through reason. Two millennia ago, Asoka of India, and later T'ai Sung of China, laid down for their subjects the values of compassion and harmony that were fashioned along Buddhist and Confucian ideals, initiatives that were unprecedented in their import for political behaviour. But both men had, prior to their conversions, secured their empires through the uncompromising use of force.

Some five centuries ago Akbar underwent a similar conversion, seeking to found a new religion that might extract the 'best' from the various faiths practised by people in his pluralistic realm, but his innovation failed the test of time. Contemporaneously, Kang Hsi would send his monks abroad to learn from other civilizations, and they would return to impart their new knowledge to an enlightened monarch and his subjects.

In modern times, leaders with visions of unity through reason have wrought their deeds on the global stage. Wilson seized the moment of destruction and despair after the 'war to end all wars' to weave the concept of international organization, but he failed to carry his own country along. Hammarskjold stood firm on a clear-eyed vision of UN principle half a century ago, and was killed before one superpower could remove him. Boutros-Ghali sought to do much the same half a decade ago and was swept aside by the other.

Today, the practical reality of crisis requires leadership of the highest level of statesmanship, of the kind displayed by the present Secretary-General, latest recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. The leading nation-states must aspire to that same level of insight and wisdom.

Military surgery with associated 'collateral damage' will no doubt meet the first proclaimed objective of 'Operation Enduring Freedom' - the removal of the present infrastructure of the training camps of the organization believed to have planned and executed the September events, and of the regime that harboured and supported it.

It will inevitably fail to achieve its second objective - the permanent eradication of such organizations intent on repeating such deeds. Rather it will spawn a larger number of individuals prepared to cause global havoc through martyrdom. 'Draining the swamp' will simply send the water elsewhere. Yet a clear majority of American citizens wish to see military strikes executed in the full knowledge that this increases the likelihood of further attacks against themselves. So revenge and justice are inextricably linked, the battle is joined, and we have learnt nothing from history.

Prevention of the cancer of terrorism, whether perpetrated by individuals or organizations or states (one need not debate the 'excessive use of force' by Israel in Palestine but simply recall France in New Zealand in 1985) cannot be achieved by force - it is almost a contradiction in terms. In the global village only a healthy global lifestyle will remove such an illness - a more equitable trading system, full debt write-offs for the least-developed, attainment of the development assistance targets, full payment of UN dues on time rather than during the next crisis, and a commitment to global sustainability and environmental remedial action, accompanied by a reduction in over-consumption in the North.

These are not simply words but actual policies that affect lives - that eliminate the dire conditions that drive desperate young men to plunge into buildings. Changes in policy require a prior change in heart and mind-set: an avoidance of claims of civilizational superiority from national leaders and of the exemption of one's nationals from international jurisdiction. It requires a genuine compassion for all of humanity that extends beyond selective and piecemeal aid to ravaged continents, embracing even-handed policies towards all dispossessed peoples everywhere.

Christian pacifism and Gandhian satyagraha may not, in the nature of things, drive national and coalition strategies in our contemporary mortal world. But a realistic appraisal of the mistakes of the past, a rational perception of a Hobbesian need for survival through unity, and a genuine paradigmatic shift in our level of compassion to fit the requirements of the global village, force us all to change.

Once the Taliban are removed, let the world cease and desist from further military action. Let us build a peace park on the site of the World Trade Centre, funded by international contributions including from those who are critical of the host's foreign policy. May there be temples of all faiths built there, open to all. Let it be the venue for a permanent 'dialogue among civilizations' where world leaders, having delivered themselves of their official speeches in the General Assembly, come together for more informal discourse and mutual enlightenment. Allow the first leaders there, even on the smouldering ruins of today, to be President Khatami of Iran, President Havel of the Czech Republic, and Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore.

Others may follow - particularly young leaders from Israel and Palestine, from India and Pakistan, from the United States and China. May they clasp hands, united in pursuit of a common goal - a decent, diverse and harmonious, human civilization. This way perhaps, we can do justice to those visionaries who have gone before, dreaming of what humankind is capable in its better moments. Not all is yet lost.

Kennedy Graham is Director of the UN University Leadership Academy. His comments are expressed in a personal capacity.

Return to previous page