Leadership (IL)Legitimacy - Lessons from Myanmar

Judging from the flurry of reports on the websites of major news agencies in the world, the recent events in Myanmar would have caught the attention of most people. This piece is not to cash in on the national tragedy in that beautiful country, hence, it has been delayed till things have quieted a little. Having been only once to Yangon, I do not claim to be a country expert. However, I saw general poverty and decay of infrastructure, that are not reflective of a resource-rich country like Myanmar. Yet, Myanmar is no different from countries run by dictatorships and juntas which have overstayed their welcome as rulers and provides important lessons for us who work with and as leaders in organisations.

Myanmar provides 3 classic lessons in leadership legitimacy (or in the country's case - illegitimacy).

1. How to stop people from giving you their consent to rule over them?

Leaders can come to power on the basis of a variety of reasons such as:

• Expert knowledge
• Charisma or Personal Attractiveness
• Access to power resources eg weapons, promise of rewards
  

However, these cannot yield legitimacy on their own. Because leadership legitimacy is not the same as coming to power. Legitimacy turns the power game into a relationship, because it is about consent to rule given by the ruled.

The military junta came to power because it had access to weapons and for a time, it could raise and wave the banner of champion of nationalism in this country of about 135 disparate, sometimes conflicting, ethnic groups. Due to years of economic isolation and mismanagement, infrastructure is in a poor condition, people impoverished, while only those with connections to the generals have flourished. How can the right to rule be extended by the people, if they can't be fed, clothed, and worse, detained, silenced and killed when they speak up against such conditions? (Oh, the Youtube videos of lavish weddings of regime leaders' children certainly don't help too...)
2. How to ensure that people are suspicious of your attempts to engage them in dialogue?
Effectively, since the last major people's uprising in 1988, the country has been run without a constitution. It was only a few days before the Saffron Revolution begun, that the long-drawn government-backed process of arriving at a blueprint towards democracy ended. (Even then, it's only a blue-print) The junta has also prevented the National League for Democracy, which won the military-organised elections of 1988 from taking power, and holding Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest for the greater part of time since then.

3. How to make sure that you don't have external support?
ASEAN and the UN have been continually frustrated in their attempts to seek improvement in how Myanmar is governed. ASEAN-EU relations are in a stalemate, because of Myanmar. This is not for the lack of trying. The junta is just not interested in engaging with other parties that don't march to its drums. The latest act in sending UN special envoy Gambari to the north to watch a pro-government rally, whilst preventing him from seeing key leaders in the first 2 days of his trip is a case in point.

The people of Myanmar are friendly, gentle and courageous in facing their future. It is unfortunate that we can learn so much about leadership in a situation where there is so little.

Noel Tan

(*All Text is copyright of Trailblazer Trainers Pte Ltd)