THE RIGHT LEADER in the RIGHT ROLE at the RIGHT TIME....

Indian Army in action during an 'Ambush'
Source: Google Images

There are TWO very simple sets of traits that I have always truly admired in a LEADER: the first set of traits covers the personal aspect and is about genuine humility, being truly down to earth and having absolutely no airs; the second set covers the professional aspect and is about providing a clear and firm direction to the team amidst a dynamic environment, meticulously monitoring progress and tracking key actions to closure, ability to make quick and firm decisions with complete conviction, provide unequivocal support to the team and earn their unwavering trust. SUCCESS is all about doing COMMON things UNCOMMONLY well and there is no secret sauce to it. And true leaders simply adhere to this adage. While there are many successful leaders, I have a special and deep sense of respect and admiration for leaders who are a rare blend of the traits that I mentioned above.

The first image that usually comes to my mind when I think of ‘leadership’ is that of the corporate world and CEOs who made a huge impact to the world of business in terms of either their innovative strategies and visionary thinking; audacious or unique leadership styles; transforming or radically realigning a firm’s core business; complete turnaround of a sick firm and so on. Some of my top favorites over the years include the likes of Jack Welch, Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, John Chambers, Dhirubhai Ambani, Ratan Tata and N R Narayana Murthy. It is not necessary that all these leaders exactly fit the mold of the leadership style or have all the traits that I mentioned at the beginning. These are the leaders who inspired me for different reasons and left an indelible mark in my mind. While I was certainly cognizant that many great leaders also existed outside the corporate world in myriad fields such as government, politics, military, education, economics, fundamental research, medicine etc.; those leaders would not usually create a significant impression on  my mind perhaps owing to the way it has been conditioned over the years.

After exploring for leadership role models outside the corporate world for more than 2 years, Manohar Parrikar was one man whom I finally zeroed in on. I believe that he personifies most of the traits that I mentioned above and is indeed an embodiment of authentic leadership. For starters, Manohar Parrikar is the Union Minister for Defence Affairs, Government of India which means that he is at the helm of the Indian Armed Forces and has the bottom-line for both: formulating strategic, tactical and operational plans or policies on all defence related matters and ensuring their effective execution by providing leadership, essential wherewithal and support in form of legislative measures or budgets needed for the success of the same.

Around 2 years ago when I started my search for role models of strong leaders outside the corporate world, an  IIT graduate had just become the Chief Minister of an Indian state, in the aftermath of an anti-corruption movement that rocked the country following which, a new political party founded by him won the elections in that state. This was an epochal event in Indian history which marked the dawning of a new political era reflecting the changed mind sets and expectations of the Indian people. It was also widely celebrated by people across the country as well as the Indian diaspora in various countries. India did not have a great history of well-educated men and women joining politics and winning elections and hence this event attained a lot of significance. I was very impressed with this profile of leadership and believed that this has indeed sown the seeds for the future generation of Indian political leaders.

The fact that an IIT graduate became the Chief Minister of an Indian state created waves among the educated elite in India and encouraged many of them to join politics. Another striking thing about him which was widely being discussed in the media and citizens across the country was his humility and austerity. The new Chief Minister insisted on using his own vehicle and stayed at a modest government accommodation not befitting a Chief Minister of an Indian state. This style of functioning was unheard of in India, where the post of a Chief Minister brought with it all the accompaniments of a life style filled with grandeur and royalty. No wonder the Indian press went gaga about the Chief Minister with an IIT background who was also an embodiment of austerity and humility. The press indeed spared no efforts to ensure the person who had changed the history of Indian politics was given maximum possible coverage in across all types of media spanning across the length and breadth of the country. I was by now completely hooked on to this new leadership style. The only thing that worried me was the lack of administrative experience or even subject matter expertise in the fields related to executive governance, policy making and legislative affairs. For even the greatest strategy or plan to succeed, it needs to be supported up by an aggressive execution engine that is well oiled with experience. 

"This was a clear weak point that I felt could one day become the Achilles heel".

At that point of time, I happened to read an article in a remote corner of a news magazine with a contrarian perspective vis. a vis. the view in the national media. The article expressed a view that probably national media was placing an undue and even unwarranted emphasis on the new Chief Minister, his educational background and for that matter even austerity. And then it went on to talk about a person called Manohar Parrikar. I had never heard Parrikar’s name before, wondered what he had to do with the new Chief Minister and thus continued reading the article. I discovered that Manohar Parrikar was the Chief Minister of a western Indian state and was in that post for the last 7 years. He was a very simple and down to earth person who maintained a very simple and private life style, preferred to stay in a middle class house that he owned, never wanted media attention and enjoyed his privacy. He was loved and respected by the people of his state as he was not only extremely honest and sincere but also ensured that he got things done. A lot of development on many fronts had happened in that state which did not receive much coverage in the media as the leader of that state genuinely wanted to maintain a simple and low profile. Manohar Parrikar believed that his job was only to ensure the people of his state actually benefited from the welfare and development schemes and did not bother much about publicity.

As I went further down, I also learnt that Manohar Parrikar was an engineering graduate from an institute in a neighboring state called IIT, Bombay and that another gentleman by the name Nandan Nilekani was his classmate at that prestigious institute. Once I finished reading that article I felt very happy to hear about a truly humble, genuinely down to earth and a very well educated leader who also ensured that the goods were indeed delivered. I decided to keep a close watch on this gentleman named Manohar Parrikar.

The 2014 General Elections in India resulted in Modi Administration being swept to power with a huge majority.  That was a time when the eyes of the entire world were on India and how it would move ahead under the new administration. The new Administration triggered a few tectonic shifts in the overall direction as well as priorities of the nation. Foreign Policy and Defence Policy were two areas that were long due for an overhaul and these were actually very pivotal as these would play a key role albeit indirectly in: securing the economic future of the nation, maintaining an equilibrium and stability in South Asia, furthering ties with like-minded nations, increasing our bargaining power in the comity of nations, enhance our visibility and gaining respect in the international fora, encouraging foreign investment and technology transfer in critical areas etc.

When the new administration took over in May, 2014, the Indian Armed forces  were battling on many fronts against all odds despite challenges such as outdated equipment, inadequate financial resources and most importantly absence of a clear direction, definitive strategy and supporting policies from a government afflicted by severe policy paralysis and extremely slow decision making.  The new administration wanted to make a significant impact and changes in this area and this needed a very strong leader, with rich leadership experience in government together with an established and proven track record in delivering results, at the helm of the Indian Defence Ministry. Manohar Parrikar was appointed as the new Union Minister for Defence Affairs.

Manohar Parrikar knew that as the first step, morale of the troops on the ground had to be improved; their self-respect and honour increased multi fold. He took quick decisions pertaining to the financial resources and budgetary allocations needed for their welfare. Some of the initial gestures, such as asking the officers in uniform not to clap in response to his address as it would undermine their honour or asking the local armed forces officers not to receive him at the Airport, had a cascading effect down the chain. These gestures might appear symbolic but did have a significant impact on the honour and self-esteem of the Indian armed forces. Parrikar also took a very firm and decisive stand on the way the troops on the border out posts should react to foreign incursions and unprovoked firing which had been a common feature for several decades along the International Border and Line of Control. He made it very clear that India cannot afford to lose even a single soldier on the war front due to poor policies or weak response or slow decision making and steps were immediately taken to shift the locus of decision making closest to the battle field. He also assured the troops that he was completely behind them and he would assume complete responsibility and support them in the decisions taken by them in the interest of the nation. This goes a long way to improve the morale of the troops on the ground whose sacrifices over the years have kept our nation intact. I do not recollect any leader at the helm of the Indian Defence Ministry who clearly and firmly voiced his opinions on issues that really mattered in the battle field, in the real line of fire and also followed them up with concrete actions.

From what I understand, the troops on the border have had to exercise a lot of restraint when provoked by the enemy even till today. The Border Outposts and even the Regional Army Commanders many a time had to consult and seek the opinion of the decision makers at the Defence Ministry in New Delhi to decide on the extent of retaliation they could resort to even if it meant that precious lives were lost during the time taken by the decision making process. This placed our troops at an uneven footing as they had to abide by a very restrictive set of rigid rules and processes whereas the enemy did not have to abide by any rules or processes whatsoever. It was refreshing for the nation to see a lot of tweets in the last few weeks from the Border Security Force and Indian Army officers that the unequivocal support and quick decision making by the new administration has greatly boosted the morale of the troops manning the border and that this was never seen or experienced in the earlier years.

Traditionally ever since the Nehruvian days, India has maintained a “gentlemanly” attitude towards our aggressors. India has always been very soft with its aggressors and let them off scot-free without significant punitive actions. All through its history, India has never attacked a foreign nation. And when attacked by foreign nations, we defended our country very well and were successful in driving away the foreign troops. However we never leveraged our position of dominance vis. a vis. our enemy, which was usually the case towards the last stages of the war, to teach them a lesson so that they will never repeat their misadventures. It was our standard approach to seek UN intervention which usually led to diplomatic discussions and negotiations to resolve the issue on EQUAL terms and at times it even meant compromises from our side.  

 “We never took advantage of our dominant position in the war to negotiate from a position of superiority and benefit from that. We stuck to the tenets of the international law when the enemies were openly disregarding them even if it meant that it demoralized our troops and placed them at an uneven footing”.

In some of the earlier wars involving our neighbors, Indian Armed forces occupied vast swathes of enemy territory during the war which made the enemy to ultimately surrender and raise the 'white flag' fearing imminent defeat. Such occasions could have been utilized for driving a hard bargain on contentious and long pending issues with neighbors and resolving them permanently and for good. But the “gentlemen” that we were, we usually preferred to follow all the applicable protocols laid out by the International Law down to the last comma or semi-colon and always sought to negotiate on equal terms.

 “I am not at all trying to even remotely suggest that war mongering is good for the country or that we should adopt a hawkish attitude towards others”. I would never suggest that!! The point I am trying to make here is that "we are actually at the other extreme end and we need to swing the pendulum atleast to the middle". 

Let's look at a case in point. In the 1971 war, the Indian army was in a very dominant position of strength and the enemy was completely obliterated. India was clearly and certainly on a high ground both morally and militarily. It was a victory like never before and no one could even dare to question Indian superiority even for the sake of argument. The liberation of the territories of what was then called as East Pakistan and subsequent birth of Bangladesh was completely and unquestionably attributable to India’s might. And India naturally wielded a lot of power and influence over the liberated territory not only due to its role in the war but also because of the physical presence of its armed forces on that territory. It was a known fact that India had boundary related issues with East Pakistan in those days and the least we could have done is to have resolved them using our position of superiority and strength, closing them once and for all. We never chose to go along that path in 1971. And it was only last month that these issues got resolved after negotiations on equal terms, a good 44 years after the war for liberation of Bangladesh ended.

While we do not need to be a bully, we also need not be humble, soft and well-mannered gentlemen who always try to please others. Unfortunately the world only recognizes power and might, either economic or military or both. And if we have to be respected by the outside word, we as a nation should  strongly assert our self and let the world know by our actions in clear and no uncertain terms that we mean business and that we will not tolerate any attempt to attack our sovereignty, individuality or self-esteem. 

 “There are inextricable linkages between fear, respect and deterrence. Fear often leads to respect or deterrence or both”.  

The world should know in unequivocal terms that India is not a nation that anyone can take for granted or mess with either politically or economically or even militarily. And for this to happen we need to demonstrate by real deeds and actions on all fronts. It does not help to merely repeat what we have been saying for years. As a nation we need to adopt a “strategic” approach to our Defence and External Affairs. We have been stuck in a “reactive”, “wait and watch” or even “sitting on the fence” mode over the last several decades. This approach is at best tactical and usually operational in nature. Unless we carry out a complete makeover embracing the “strategic” mode in the critical areas such as Defence and External Affairs, the future of our nation will remain uncertain on all fronts. 

Our leaders should treat our country the way a CEO treats his firm in the corporate world and should clearly delineate the nation's strategy covering the following aspects at the minimum=>

TOP LEVEL STRATEGY

1.    What is the ‘vision’ for our nation on Defence and External Affairs front?

2.    What is the core philosophy or ideology that drives this vision and the policies that fall out from this vision?

3.    What role and influence do we envisage for our nation on the world and regional stages?

4.    Where do we aspire to see our nation going forward on these fronts in 5 years, 10 years and 20 years?

5.    What are the strategic defence plans to address the existing threats or potential threats that could occur to us in future? How do we prevent or neutralize their occurrence?

6.    What are the various permutations and combinations that could happen in the international defence alliance formations in response to a threat being realized and how do we brace up for the different scenarios or possibilities? What is our best bet and response for each possibility?

7.    How do we want the rest of the world to perceive our nation? What should our national brand or identity reflect to the outside world?

8.    Where do we want our nation to stand from an economic, diplomatic and military stand point vis. a vis. the comity of nations on the world stage and regional stage?

DRILL DOWN STRATEGY

1.    What is our stand regarding the formation of strategic partnerships and deep relationships with nations whose support we direly need to achieve our vision?

2.    Do we completely align with one or two leading powers fully and unambiguously on all fronts or do we have a tiered relationship or partnership model comprising of a basket of closely knit relationships whose nature is based on the strategic importance of each specific nation? 

3.    What is the nature of support that we will get from our partners on various fronts in the face of an external threat? How reliable is the partner and what is his level of commitment to us?

4.    Do we vocally and unambiguously stand by our top strategic partners at the time of need and stop worrying about how the other friendly nations would react? To what extent do we support our partners in the event of threat?

5.    Which nations should we partner with for defence related technology in the areas such as Fighter Jets, Aircraft Carriers, Long range Missile technology, Advanced Software Simulators and Weapon Control Systems etc.?

6.    How do we simultaneously develop the advanced technology know-how and manufacturing capabilities within our nation in the long term?

7.    How do we ensure we do not get overly dependent on one nation in any area and how do we ensure we always have a  few alternate options?

Today the world is increasingly becoming more and more interdependent and no one nation is completely self-reliant. Our national strategy should be crafted keeping in view as to how we could leverage our strengths and offer help and support in the form of services or goods to our partner nations. At the same time based on the above and looking at the gaps or shortcomings that we have in our defence arsenal, we should negotiate and obtain the goods and services from our partners to plug these gaps. No country can survive on its own in the world of today and a 'complex web of alliances' is the only thing that can act as a 'strong sail to help navigate the rough high seas full of unexpected threats and unknown dangers'.

Our political leadership should take a clear and unequivocal stand on these areas after carrying out a well thought out assessment of ramifications in a thread bare manner and finally arrive at a detailed and elaborate short term and long term strategic plans for our nation. They need to be bold and keep the long term benefits to our nation in mind while taking critical decisions on some of the areas that I mentioned above especially those involving a tectonic shift from our traditional or historical stance. Forging strong ties with foreign nations on various fronts would need our leaders to personally be involved in negotiations and discussions with their counter parts in foreign nations. It is not very easy to forge ties and partnerships with a nation even if we badly want to if there is a negative historical connotation to that relationship. To be able to effect tectonic shifts in our relationships with other nations and undo the negativity or mistrust caused by historical events, our leaders must personally negotiate and convince them of our genuineness of intent and change in nation’s direction or philosophy instead of leaving the task to bureaucrats. Such discussions will many a time need critical policy decisions to be taken or options to be chosen on the spot. 

We will also have to view the relationships with nations especially the ones we depend on for critical defence equipment and technology transfer from a purely long term and strategic view point and not be carried away by the Finance and Accounting principles based evaluation criteria. The intangible benefits that accrue to our nation in the long run from some of the partnerships could be very substantial and perhaps invaluable when looked at from a strategic perspective instead of just looking at the deal price of a specific transaction in isolation which might be on the higher side.

Manohar Parrikar has the right blend of skills needed for: negotiating with foreign equipment suppliers or defence ministers and take quick decisions, providing political leadership and support needed by the armed forces, thinking strategically keeping long term in view and forge the right partnerships, enact the legislations needed for successful defence operations, arriving at a clear vision as to the direction in which we need to move as a nation on the defence front and complement it by provisioning of the requisite enabling machinery be it people, equipment, finances or strategic alliances, coordinating with  the various  other ministries and state  governments etc. And being a Metallurgical Engineer from IIT Bombay is certainly an huge value add for a person who deals with  purchase, evaluation and quality assessment of defense related equipment, arms and ammunition.

However there is one critical point that we all need to remember. Areas such as Defence and External Affairs are very strategic and usually deal with extremely sensitive information. The strategic plans or operational plans would be treated as classified/top secret and highly confidential and only a limited few are privy only to these. Our leaders might not be able to share most of the details with common people like us. It may appear many a time based on our narrow and very limited view into the overall strategy that our leaders are taking a wrong decision/action or working against the interest of the citizens. However the action or decision taken by them in that context could have been the best possible one based on their complete insights and access to 100% information available. It is therefore important that we repose complete trust and confidence in our leaders especially in the areas like Defence and External Affairs and provide them unwavering support needed to carry out these crucial and strategic tasks in the best interest of our nation. I am very optimistic that we will start seeing the outcomes or fruits of all the hard-work being done in some form or other either directly or indirectly in the coming years.

.

JAI HIND!

Disclaimer: "The views and opinions expressed in the article are purely the personal views of the author in his personal capacity and have nothing to do with the firm he works for".