"Before long there will be heard throughout the planet a formidable cry, rising like the howling of innumerable dogs to the stars, asking for someone or something to take command." (Ortega y Gasset)

In 1974, TIME magazine published a 38-page special section on leadership after assembling a list of 200 young (45 or under) Americans who already were having a positive impact upon the American society and who might play pivotal roles in the American nation. Ironically in 1979 American perception felt the issue of leadership was more acute than ever as Jimmy Carter struggled to rally a nation troubled by recession, inflation and the energy shortage.

In his first 30 months of his presidency, motorists formed predawn gas lines, like clients at methadone clinics, to await the fuel that has been abruptly become precious. Americans could idle there and wonder if their houses would freeze in the winter, when the last heating oil guttered out of their tanks. They gave Jimmy Carter the second lowest rating of presidential approval in the history of American poll taking (ABC News-Louis Harris poll in mid June was 25% compared to Harry Truman 23% in the Gallop poll during the Korean War).

The American citizens were blaming him for the exhaustion of oil-fields, the greed of Arabs and their own insatiability. They were blaming him for much more history than he should be held accountable for. Still the American citizens were right to judge Carter harshly as a leader. Carter seems to have grasped the shortcomings of his administration but the public perception of his methods to correct the national problems seemed at time peculiar and erratic. In the first 30 months of his presidency, Carter has appeared able to see only unimaginable disorder which sent him niggling after details.

While Carter's admirers projected him as a honest, decent, compassionate man, his critics was also correct in thinking him of his leadership capabilities as fatally limited. A sympathetic observer like Massachusetts Congressman Robert Drinan once remarked of Carter: "There is something missing in Carter, something intangible."

Perversity of Malaysians

Parallel to the American scenario of yesteryear, is Malaysia currently facing a fundamental problem of leadership? Are Malaysians facing one of the perversities faced by Americans? Americans always want what they do not have: a moral president when they have an immoral one; a cunningly, enthusiastically and effective amoral president when they have a moral one.

In 2002, leader-in-waiting Abdullah Badawi gave his first interview since Dr Mahathir announced in June that he would resign, told an Asian magazine: "We will put it to the Malaysian people to decide what way of life they want to choose. I am confident the majority of Malaysians will continue to choose a political leadership that upholds the virtue of tolerance, pluralism, modernity and moderation, and not a party that had distorted the teachings of Islam in order to pursue a narrow, dogmatic and politically motivated agenda."

In a publication titled, "Empowerment: The Role of the Citizens", the Malaysian prime minister was quoted to have said, "My invitation for you to work "with" me empowers you. If opportunity and inclusion through empowerment is what you want, my message is simple: empower this Government to empower you." He also vouched to integrating the multiracial population, fighting corruption, combating crime, developing the youth, enjoining the women to excel, building a civil society, and making our nation remarkable, as he termed, "we owe it to ourselves to make them all happen."

Today, severe criticisms are filling pages after pages of non-delivery on grand promises and tall orders. To many Malaysians, Abdullah's vision without action is mere illusion. The direction of excellence, glory and distinction embodied the 2004 General Elections' manifesto, according to severe criticisms still remain rhetorical and hypocritical. Contrary to his popular image and credentials as "Mr Clean" and Mr Religious" which had earlier brought his BN coalition 198 out of 202 seats in the 2004 General elections, the problems of corruption in the country is perceived by many to be as severe as at any time in recent memory.

On the homefront, PKR programme director Din Merican's writing in Malaysiakini column questioned, "Has the Abdullah government failed to fulfill the promises of that vision 2020? Why has it delayed this by another 50 years, by launching a series of fantastic "corridors of growth" throughout the length and breadth of our country? We have heard this before- it's not even original."

Kenya Senator Barack Obama, a critic of his president Mwai Kibaki, said: "If the people cannot trust their government to do the job for which it exists to protect them and to promote their common welfare, all else is lost." Speaking during his two-week trip through four nations in Africa, the African senator added, "It is a crisis, a crisis that's robbing an honest people of the opportunities they have fought for, the opportunity they deserve. Corruption has a way of magnifying the worst twists of life."

Obama said, "Corruption erodes the state from the inside out, sickening the justice system until there is no justice to be found, poisoning the police forces until their presence becomes an insecurity rather than comfort.

Tribal politics: Setback for nation

At the same time, Obama said, "A tradition of ethnic-based politics built around tribal factions has set back Kenya's development. It is an ancient system, rooted in the bankrupt idea that the goal of politics and business is to funnel as much of the pie as possible to one's family, tribe or circle with little regard for the public good."

Is the current Umno leadership under Abdullah exhibiting more of a tribal chief or a model Muslim? Interviewed by the now defunct magazine the Far eastern Economic Review in 2002, the current prime minister was asked how do you assure people that patronage won't play a role in your administration ? He answered: "I intend to strengthen the current environment of fair play and transparency in the corporate sector. Apart from being morally reprehensible, cronyism distorts efficient allocation of resources and renders politically connected companies uncompetitive and dependent only on government contracts. This flies in the face of enhancing economic competitiveness. There is also the potential for moral hazard, which is why some of these companies were managed in the way they were in the past because there was an expectation of a bailout if they ran into problems."

Critics of his administration are saying that the prime minister has been playing with rhetoric and has failed to deliver his own aspirations. In truth, he is his own worse enemy. The longer he stood atop his political pedestal, the more time those making up the electorate had to study his utterances and revert to his "rhetorical history". The longer this lasted, the more dislike and resentment for his tribal politics the electorate stored up.

At the recent Umno general assembly, the Malaysian prime minister told a gathering of UMNOputra delegates that the 37-year old pro-bumi based new economic policy (NEP) must be continued as non-Malays were still topping the Malaysian rich list. This drew private criticisms questioning the prime minister whether he has lost focus on the aims of the NEP in alleviating poverty and was not meant to create millionaires or billionaires from the bumiputra race for wealth.

Majority of Malaysians are getting unnerving and outraged not because the predominant Umno coalition "big brother" is still basking in its past glories through government propaganda machinery but rather inclining towards a tribal type of governance. Some leaders and political families have been in power for so long that they have integrated themselves into the nation's identity that compromised democratic principles. There are leaders tending to reach their positions based on political connections rather than on specific policies or leadership qualities.

Once in power they can overwhelm any potential rivals and within the tribal hegemony often try to deflect public criticism of internal issues by focusing on "external enemies" through government control of media sources and can give its own interpretation of events without competing explanations. Another tribal brand of politicking that threatens individual freedom and human rights.

A critic wrote: "It is pathetic to see Umno, the dominant Malay race-based party trying to convince people that it is still the best party. The respect it commanded during its initial stages of existence, reinforced by the spirit of independence struggle, seems to be dwindling into obscurity."

To many, current Umno's politicking and policy-making under the Abdullah leadership for the past four years had more than exhibited the ancient tribal characteristics that has ironically been the divisive factor by spearheading racialised communitarian politics. Today's Umno leadership bears so much contrast of the yesteryear UMNO, that many Malaysian veterans across ethnic lines still fondly remember of its founding fathers who were all self sacrificing and had always put party and national unity above their self- vested interests.

'Bad leadership'

Indeed criticisms from the public on Umno leadership personalities are justifiable in view of numerous theatrical episodes. Notably regular fetish display of the keris to outrageous press statements, infamous Zakaria mansion or palace, outlandish quotes of less intelligent ministers pertaining to press freedom and ever growing emphasis on appearance over substance. This is the characteristics of Umno growing more tribal everyday and definitely not the direction towards the concept of Islam Hadhari .

Bakri Musa summed up Umno pretty well, saying, "Never mind that such a portrayal merely exposes the cynicism and scheming nature of these Umno operatives. Such a characterization means that they have not really changed, merely put on a cosmetic cover their ugly racist stripes, mascara as it were, to make themselves presentable to voters."

Bertrand Russell once propounded the theory that "bad leadership" in a democracy is a logical impossibility. The electorate always get the leaders they deserve. No matter how incompetent or venal the leaders are, the electorate must have been even worse to have elected them.

But in a tribal form of politics, even ministers and members of Parliament can be chosen on the basis of political horse-trading, cronyism, nepotism or family ties. Unlike in Singapore, leadership in government comprises some of the ablest people in the country, with the dedication, determination and integrity to set the direction for the nation. Foremost, it is meritocracy that political leaders are selected on the same principle.

Hence, when a Selangor Umno Youth chief (delegate) recently told Opposition parties and their supporters to leave Malaysia for Singapore, in fact, has unknowingly admitted that the Abdullah administration is far from perfect contrary to spinned propaganda. What do we expect from such a leader when he was quoted as saying that the demolition of Hindu temples in Selangor is a "small matter."

All the rhetorical display, leadership follies and sheer incompetence in governance for the past four years, the electorate will soon distinguish between development conscious leaders and those steeped in tribal considerations.

And a final advice from the greatest quotations by Eric Hoffer: "The only index by which to judge a government or a way of life is by the quality of the people it acts upon. No matter how noble, the objectives of the government if it blurs decency and kindness, cheapens human life, and breeds ill will and suspicion - it is an evil government."