Zelensky’s leadership is based on his personal charisma and his ability to involve others in conflict by appealing to empathy. Putin’s, in his image of experience and determination. Both have grown in popularity over the past year.
A year ago, few knew President Zelensky beyond the borders of Ukraine. The country’s timid presence in the international context barely made headlines in the West. Only events like the Euromaidan in 2013 or the invasion of Crimea in 2014 reminded us from time to time of the simmering conflict that existed at that end of Europe.
At that time, Zelensky was still far from politics, dedicating himself almost exclusively to his facet as an actor and comedy producer, and it was not until February 2022, barely four years after he made his political debut, when he suddenly came back into shape in life and hearts of Western citizens.
Putin, on the other hand, was already well known in the international sphere with extensive experience in politics and with a reputation for and against his political decisions that caused and continue to cause a lot of polarization. It should not be forgotten that a few years before the invasion of Ukraine, the now reviled Putin was an internationally admired and respected leader by various political and social celebrities.
The newcomer to politics Zelensky, clearly inferior to his armed forces, new to the role of ruler and without external or internal support (in March 2021 the Ukrainian president enjoyed support from less than 40% of his population) faced heavyweight Putin in February 2022 and assumed his country’s moral leadership against the mighty Russian invader.
Buoyed by a rhetoric of continued appeals to universal values and freedom, his most significant action since the beginning of the invasion has been numerous appearances before national parliaments and in his own and foreign media. In it, time and time again, he has conveyed his message of moral and physical resistance to the invader in order to gather all kinds of support and leave the technical decisions in the hands of others. In concrete terms, military strategy falls under the responsibility of the Supreme Commander, General Zaluzhny, who has led the Ukrainian Army’s operations to date with remarkable success, demonstrating unprecedented flexibility, ingenuity and resilience.
The results of this leadership style show that this strategy is efficient as, on the one hand, the polls reflect a remarkable increase in the support of the Ukrainian population for its president, currently reaching 91% and, on the other hand, the shipments of arms by various countries with hardly any opposition on European level.
Only one internal policy measure of Zelensky is known, which is related to the dismissal of a dozen senior officials in his government for corruption, which has greatly tarnished the image of democracy and is so undesirable for their accession to the European Union.
Putin, for his part, continues his style of authoritarian leadership that has brought him such good results throughout his political career, and which he demonstrated from the very beginning of what he called the “special military operation.” His way of personally directing military operations was very characteristic, giving specific orders on military operations and techniques, demonstrating his unquestionable leadership to other power figures in the country (such as the Chechen Kadyrov or the head of the Wagner paramilitary group, Prigozyn) or even the personal appointment and dismissal of generals, such as the head of operations in Ukraine, General Surovikin, until a month ago.
In this case, the popularity of the Russian dignitary has also experienced an increase in popular support among its citizens as a result of the war, as it was 69% in January 2022 and 83% in January 2023.
There are problems with both leadership styles. In the case of Zelensky, the continued demand for ever more modern military equipment could lead to Russia’s feared arms escalation or the exhaustion of donor countries if a victory is not achieved in the short term. In Putin’s case, his authoritarian leadership has led to tactical errors that continually cause a significant number of their own casualties due to the rigidity of the command and decision-making system and the excessive internal cohesion in the Russian government’s high command that prevents criticism. in a realistic and practical way the tactical and strategic procedures to improve them.
The current situation at the front indicates a stagnation in the military positions of both sides. On the one hand, there are few, if any, short-term expectations of major seizures of territory that could benefit either party. On the other hand, the demeanor of both dignitaries does not suggest any changes in their leadership styles. The recent statements by both leaders remain the same position as a year ago.
So it is difficult to foresee a change in the conflict situation. Both leaders know how to leverage their leadership traits: one based on creating personal charisma and the ability to involve others in the conflict by appealing to empathy, the spirit of solidarity and universal justice; another conveys a vision of strength, leadership experience and determination that will ensure control and support of his country to victory. We will see how the passage of time will affect each of these opposing leaders.
This article was published in ‘The Conversation’.
Source: La Verdad
I am an experienced and passionate journalist with a strong track record in news website reporting. I specialize in technology coverage, breaking stories on the latest developments and trends from around the world. Working for Today Times Live has given me the opportunity to write thought-provoking pieces that have caught the attention of many readers.
