Who is the Best World Leader?

[Thudlow Boink]

Inspired by the Who is the Worst World Leader (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=244618) thread, I'd like to know what head of state is actually making the world a better place and has earned respect within his own country and around the world.

[cowgirl]

The Dalai Lama.

Although, it is arguable whether he would be so marvellous if he actually had a country to run.

[Rune]

The Dalai Lama.

Although, it is arguable whether he would be so marvellous if he actually had a country to run.What has the Dalai Lama achieved in his many years as leader? He sure hasn't succeeded in getting Tibet back, or even much helping the conditions for the Tibetans there.

I think Kofi Annan has been a surprisingly good Secretary-General in difficult times. Putin, while certainly no without faults, has managed to turn around a sinking ship after the Yeltsin years, Aznar has been the leader of a booming economy under a harsh economic world climate, and propelled Spain into the limelight; didn’t manage to win the election though.

- Rune

[Dewey Cheatem Undhow]

It's all been downhill since Cincinnatus, really.

[Neurotik]

It's all been downhill since Cincinnatus, really.
Pffft. When your biggest legacy is Cincinnati you don't even make the list, IMO.

[noname]

Has anyone heard of Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani? He is the leader of the state of Qatar, and my nominee for the best world leader. Even though he is a monarch, he has given a lot of powers to his people and introduced many liberal measures for an Islamic country. Recently he opened branches of all hte prestegious American colleges in Qatar, so the the local people can have access to the best, locally.
And also worth noting is that even though Qatar supported US in the war on Iraq, there havent been any repurcussions for that so far. He has managed to strike the balance between the Islamic calls for non cooperation with US, and yet managed to get in its good books, the fruits of which, he is enjoying now.
Great, huh?

[HumptysHamhole]

It is the Illuminati and thier subordinates (the Skull and Bones, the Freemasons, and Opus Dei) of course. They are the only REAL leaders of the world anyway.

[fortytwo]

I'd suggest Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore) if we're not limited to the present leaders. Of course he hasn't given over the reigns completely to his successor (his son :) ).... he is still First Minister.
He did however make Singapore one of the wealthiest nations from a position of having no natural resources. True it's very strictly run, but on the other hand it has very little crime.
V

[dalej42]

Gehard Schroeder

[Really Not All That Bright]

Sultan Qaboos bin Sa'id of Oman.

Since ousting his father (admittedly in a British-supported coup) in 1970 he has repealed his father's Amishesque policies of banning electronics, heavy industry, and automobiles, opened up Oman's oil resources, satisfactorily concluded a thirty-year border dispute with Yemen, modernized the armed forces, turned a nation of dirt tracks into some of the world's best build and maintained roads...

He's also introduced somewhat representative government, by creating elected assemblies, and reintroducing the Arab governmental principle of Shura (consultation).

[Ravenman]

King Abdullah of Jordan is an impressive figure, at least to these Western eyes. Same with Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan.

However, their statesmanship may be tempered in the eyes of their citizens because of their decidedly pro-Western (or pro-American, if you prefer) bent.

[Michael Ellis]

The Jews. :D

[mcremons]

Pffft. When your biggest legacy is Cincinnati you don't even make the list, IMO.
Cincinnati's sweet, what are you talking about?

[KidCharlemagne]

Emir Sheikh Hamad Ben Khalifa Al Thani of Qatar scores the easy win. That guy is just incredible.

[Mambo]

Has anyone heard of Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani? He is the leader of the state of Qatar, and my nominee for the best world leader. Even though he is a monarch, he has given a lot of powers to his people and introduced many liberal measures for an Islamic country. Recently he opened branches of all hte prestegious American colleges in Qatar, so the the local people can have access to the best, locally.
And also worth noting is that even though Qatar supported US in the war on Iraq, there havent been any repurcussions for that so far. He has managed to strike the balance between the Islamic calls for non cooperation with US, and yet managed to get in its good books, the fruits of which, he is enjoying now.
Great, huh?

You beat me to it. The Sheikh is the perfect example of a sucessful benevolent dictatorship. He has taken Qatar from an oyster farming nation to a thriving city-state with all the modern amenities any citizen could ask for.

[Milum]

Huh?

Emir Sheikh Hamad Ben Khalifa Al Thani of Qatar. King Abdullah of Jordan. Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan. Sultan Qaboos bin Sa'id of Oman.

What? Am I missing something? Have Muslim leaders who don't murder become the current vogue?


Surely you Dopesters just strain your choices just to be original and cute.
If we don't bother to consider the magnitude of the challanges faced by our leaders then the greatest hero's of our time can easily be our grandmother or grandfather or the great Baptist preacher down the street.

Lift your eyes from your navels and look out onto the big world beyond.
At this very moment History is writting hosannas to these two very courageous men of this eventful new Century so grimly born...

George W Bush and Tony Blair

In that order.

[rjung]

Tony Blair and George W. Bush lied to start a war.

Great leaders do neither.

[pravnik]

From a standpoint of enjoying respect within and without his country and having made the world a better place, I vote for Vaclav Havel (http://fmv.vse.cz/cz/cz/havel.html), Czech Playright, former dissident, and President of the Czech Republic.

[Rashak Mani]

Well if "retired" leaders count: NELSON MANDELA

Milum... please take your pills please. Even rabid bushites don't think Bush is the best leader.

[Ravenman]

I wonder if Milum knew that Blair is from a leftist party and is unabashedly in favor of socialized medicine, if that would affect his views.

[GorillaMan]

Jose Maria Aznar, for his unswerving support on the War On Terror, which will in time become supported by his citizens as they realise this is the only choice they.......errrrr......oh fuck.........

[GorillaMan]

...Blair is from a leftist party...
Millions of former Labour voters would argue otherwise

[kiwiboy]

How about East Timor's president Xanana Gusmao (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xanana_Gusmao) ? He led hois country's fight for independence and was imprisoned by the Indonesians for six years. One of his visitors whilst in prison was Nelson Mandela.

[Really Not All That Bright]

I wonder if Milum knew that Blair is from a leftist party and is unabashedly in favor of socialized medicine, if that would affect his views.
And I wonder if not having lived under a rock for the past, say, 12 months would affect his views.

[Kimstu]

I too am a little startled to see so many nominations going to actual or de facto dictators (albeit benevolent ones) of very small countries. Is industrializing a small Third World nation without repressing the citizens too severely really the best current example of "world leadership" that we can think of?

Actually, considering the shenanigans of the big politicians who actually are more or less leading the world, maybe the answer to that question is "yes". Gee, that's kind of depressing.

[Alan Owes Bess]

Originally from Milum

At this very moment History is writting hosannas to these two very courageous men of this eventful new Century so grimly born...

George W Bush and Tony Blair

Just one quibble. Tony Blair is not a Head of State.

Come to think of it, most European Heads of State are pretty ceremonial (the French Head of State excepted) and a waste of time, so they don't have the political power to be relevant in the context of the OP, unlike the joke South American countries which have a tradition in believing that one man can run a country and have organised their constitutions, such as they are, to conform with this childish belief.

If you are talking about the top Kahunas of countries, then I think you have made an excellent choice in the dynamic duo you have named.

They soundly disposed of a Weapon of Mass Destruction (or Weapon of Mass Murder, if you want to get picky) from Iraq and I really think some congratulations are in order here.

Not that I think much will come out of it in the longer term. Iraq will probably soon revert to the usual Middle Eastern form of government which mainly involves mass turmoil involving the dim bulb and excitable sub group of the Iraqi male population aged 18-35 - or about 10%-15% of the adult population - taking over the streets and concluding with the last man standing taking over. Either another Mad General or a Mad Mullah.

Still, "A" for effort to Dubya and Tony.

[duffer]

Tony Blair and George W. Bush lied to start a war.

Great leaders do neither.

Can't let this one go. Rjung, you're smarter than this. Bush and Blair went into the war based on what the govt's info told them. Parliament and Congress agreed to it. I know it's cute to make one sentence snipes on boards, but you know damn well it was the best info we had at the time (primarily (sp?) given by an ex-Iraqi WMD scientist.)

Keep in mind, we're still to this day learning of what the Nazi's were up to, and that was 60 years ago. Life doesn't always move along our broadband speed. Every now and then, we have to wait for the truth to emerge.

[Mambo]

I too am a little startled to see so many nominations going to actual or de facto dictators (albeit benevolent ones) of very small countries. Is industrializing a small Third World nation without repressing the citizens too severely really the best current example of "world leadership" that we can think of?

Actually, considering the shenanigans of the big politicians who actually are more or less leading the world, maybe the answer to that question is "yes". Gee, that's kind of depressing.


I personally believe that benevolent dictatorship is the best form of government. They have control of the treasury and total decision-making power. The problem is that very few dictators have been benevolent and capable. Also, benevolent dictatorship lends itself most easily to city-states such as Qatar, where the citizens are essentially one large tribe.

[John Mace]

I personally believe that benevolent dictatorship is the best form of government.

Very short sighted. The problem is, what happens when the next guy turns out to not so "benevolent". I have to agree with Kimstu on this.

I'd say right now there is only one World Leader: Bush (or whoever happens to be the US president). I can't think of anyone else who has the power and influence to affect the whole world as he does. So, that makes my selection easy. :)

[Ale]

Very short sighted. The problem is, what happens when the next guy turns out to not so "benevolent".

Well, then it wouldn´t be a "benevolent dictatorship" anymore... I guess that a benevoloent dictatorship is still the best form of goverment, or for that mattter, any goverment that is not compossed of self-serving or simply maniac politicians.

[Chimpy]

Rulers
The best rulers are scarcely known by their subjects;
The next best are loved and praised;
The next are feared;
The next despised:
They have no faith in their people,
And their people become unfaithful to them.

When the best rulers achieve their purpose
Their subjects claim the achievement as their own. ~ The Dao de Jing by Lao Tse

So who fills one of the top two in this world?

[clairobscur]

From a standpoint of enjoying respect within and without his country and having made the world a better place, I vote for Vaclav Havel (http://fmv.vse.cz/cz/cz/havel.html), Czech Playright, former dissident, and President of the Czech Republic.



I thought about him, when I read the OP, but thinking twice, I remembered he didn't anything really spectacular as a *political leader*. So, despite him being one of the rare politicians I have a deep respect for, It's more related to his personnal history than to his achievments as a head of state. So, I'm not sure he belongs to the list of the best world leader.


By the way, I'm amazed that so many people are voting for the rulers of small arabic emirates...

[rjung]

Can't let this one go. Rjung, you're smarter than this.
Glad to see you acknowledge it. :)

Bush and Blair went into the war based on what the govt's info told them.
Sorry, doesn't fly. Bush and Blair can keep insisting they were fed (wildly) misleading intelligence, but all the available evidence indicates they knew the intel didn't support their claims, but went ahead with the snow job anyway. Heck, just look at how Bush is sabotaging (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1137539,00.html) the Congressional inquiry into Iraq war intelligence failures -- if he really was misled, wouldn't he be eager to help the commision get their resolts and exonerate him, before the November elections? (Conveniently enough, the Iraq intelligence investigation won't report their findings until 2005)

Or as Colin Powell said the night before he made his United Nations lie-a-thon, "I can't say this, it's bullshit."

Parliament and Congress agreed to it.
Yes, they made the tragic mistake of actually believing Bush and Blair.

[Mambo]

Very short sighted. The problem is, what happens when the next guy turns out to not so "benevolent". I have to agree with Kimstu on this.



That's how I feel too. The Sheik's father, whom he seized power from, was not at all a benevolent dictator. And it isn't likely that his son will be either. However, the progress Qatar has made under this guy is nothing short of extraordinary.

[Quartz]

I'll nominate Pope John Paul II as one of the main actors in the fall of the Soviet Empire and the freeing of Eastern Europe.

If we allow still living but retired leaders, I'll plump for Margaret Thatcher, for her role in the fall of the Soviet Empire, the turning around of Britain, the regaining of the Falklands, and her steadfast defence of liberty.

[Malthus]

Democracies tend not to produce "great leaders", except in times of true national danger - which this ain't. Instead, they produce consensus-makers, managers, and people capable of working the party machine.

I for one don't miss "great leaders".

[Rashak Mani]

Democracies tend not to produce "great leaders", except in times of true national danger - which this ain't. Instead, they produce consensus-makers, managers, and people capable of working the party machine.

I for one don't miss "great leaders".

The only "Average" performance of the Democratic system is better than the wild ups and downs of dictatorships and other systems.

I agree this is not a time of true national danger... in fact and curiously the Greenhouse Effect might make this a time of true global danger, yet is given so little or no attention. Who knows how badly the future will judge him on this issue...

[Neurotik]

I too am a little startled to see so many nominations going to actual or de facto dictators (albeit benevolent ones) of very small countries. Is industrializing a small Third World nation without repressing the citizens too severely really the best current example of "world leadership" that we can think of?
Actually, to be fair to the Sheikh of Qatar, he did a little more than just not repress his citizens too severely. Not only did he start the first independent Arab news agency (al-Jazeera), he has also begun a series of reforms - including the beginnings of a constitutional parliamentary democracy.

You don't often see an autocrat voluntarily moving his country to a stable democracy of his own accord and under his own initiative, and I think it deserves some props.

[Sine Nomen]

To sort of go along with what Neurotik said, I think you have to take into consideration the political context of these rulers. In the Middle East, for example, I would give higher ratings to a benevolent dictator who introduced democratic and free-market reforms over a period of time than one who promised 'power to the masses' at the expense of stability.

[furt]

The Emir of Qatar has to be the winner, with the caveat that he's not democratically elected.

Chen Shui-Bian of Taiwan deserves a mention, IMO, both for who he is (human-rights lawyer turned pol; has now survived 2 attempts on his life) and what he's done: completing and institutionalizing democracy there, getting Taiwan in the WTO.

[Really Not All That Bright]

By the way, I'm amazed that so many people are voting for the rulers of small arabic emirates...
<nitpick>Oman is a sultanate, not an emirate<nitpick>

Look, leaders who move from autocracy toward democracy generally DO NOT LAST VERY LONG afterward. Take Gorbachev, for example; gave an inch, and they took a mile.

In a "powder keg" situation like the one currently existing in the ME, there is something to be said for a gradual and orderly shift in power rather than a revolution.

Besides, Qaboos single-handedly led a country through 1200 years of economic development in about 14 real years. He didn't (and doesn't) even have that much oil to do it with. He's also led the Gulf states in the move to more diversified economies, and Oman has become the industrial powerhouse (such things are, of course, relative) of the Arabian Peninsula.

[OliverTwistofLime]

1. The leader of Israel

2. George Bush

[Zagadka]

1. The leader of Israel

Yea, that leader is a great person. He/she has done great things, like that one time. People just don't understand his/her beliefs. Leadership that has been done in that one country over there has been superb, and worthy of note, especially that other year when that stuff happened.

O_o

[Strutur]

I'd like to nominate pres. Museveni of Uganda. He has led the way in combating AID's in a country here talking about sex was a taboo and already had a very high infection-rate. He's been making life better for most Ugandans while fighting two rebel factions, both of whom he's been appeasing for some time now.

Milan Kucan of Slovenia also deserves special mention for turning his country into a western democracy. Yougoslavia was'nt to bad though to begin with though.

[Debaser]

I'd like to know what head of state is actually making the world a better place....

...and has earned respect within his own country and around the world.

Why are these two things tied together in the OP?

They aren't the same thing. In fact, I would think in many cases they are mutually exclusive.

Bill Clinton focused his administration on gaining approval ratings. Because of this he was very well liked both at home and abroad. He was very successful at "earning respect".

However, I don't think he actually did much to make the world a better place. In order to do that, he would actually have had to cash in some of his popularity to accomplish things. He wasn't willing.

[noname]

Looks like there is a tie between the leader of Oman and Qatar. Qatar is doing right now, what Oman was doing since long ago. Also, I may point out, both there countries have excellent religious freedoms. There is a Church in Qatar, and rumors are that a Hindu temple will be built here in a few years. Oman has had both for quite some time. Given that these nations are Islamic states, they dont just pay lip service to 'freedom of religion'.
Also, I wonder, if Pakistani Prez Parvez Musharraf can be considered. Agreed that he is usurped power, granted himself huge amounts of power, has been a close confidant of the Taliban, but he did manage to drag Pakistan out of the pariah state status that it had after the nuclear tests. Not only that, he has managed to get a "Important Non-NATO Ally" status for Pakistan, a $ 1 bn loan written off, and assured of $3 bn in the next five years, inspite of all the nuclear proliferation accusations, the support to Al Qaeda and Taliban.
He may not have done much for his countrymen, but the decisions that he made will be beneficial for Pakistan in the long run.

[Really Not All That Bright]

I'm bumping this thread because I wanted to see how much has changed in the 8-odd months it's been dormant.

Apologies, mods, but I was going to start essentially the same one and then remembered it already existed.

My vote is still for Qaboos.

[aahala]

A true leader is someone who can accomplish something without a lot of fanfare.

Hat's off to the leader of Palau, whoever that is. Not only is the country part of the "Coalition of the Willing", it remains part of the "Coalition of the Invisible."
(I still can't find it on the my map.)

[furt]

I'm amazed I didn't mention them earlier:

Chiang Ching-Kuo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiang_Ching-kuo),Lee Teng-Hui (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Teng-hui) and Chen Shui-Bian. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chen_Shui-bian)

Handed a dictatorship, Chiang legalized opposition parties and appointed a Taiwanese successor. Handed an autocracy, Lee made it into a democracy and offered himself up for election. He then brought down the richest political party in the world from the inside. Chen is a human rights activist who ascended to the presidency and was just reelected.

If I gotta pick one, it's Lee.

[ouryL]

Jesus?

[Blackacre]

George W. Bush. Fuck whoever has "earned respect within his own country and around the world," christ, Arafat won the Nobel Peace prize. =D

Cheers!
BA