OHIO University in the 1980s had enumerated a list of leadership qualities. I can distinctly remember affability was not one of them. None of the factors relating to affability was selected as a quality a leader must have.
I think Ohio University did not see the contents of affability as important in sustaining leadership success. But I think it is. From colonial times to the present moment, the scholars in the Global South have not done away with the Eurocentric concepts, paradigms and descriptions that they have inherited from colonial academia and American institutions after the US replaced Europe as the global Leviathan after World War 2.
One of the influential academic platforms in the world is the journal, “Foreign Affairs.” At all of the universities I attended including our own UG, the lecturers chose articles from Foreign Affairs as required reading. But Foreign Affairs published by the Council on Foreign Relations is a shameless status quo academic school that is highly sophisticated pro-American intellectual propaganda. Every article since the 1950s is pro-American. No scholar’s submission will be accepted if it uses the term, “American imperialism.”
It is time the Global South invents its own intellectual descriptions in political theory, sociology, International Relations and philosophy. I am proposing that a case study of Irfaan Ali in Guyana would suggest that affability is one of the leadership qualities that make for success in governmental leadership.
The West Indies have not produced leaders with the quality of affability with Forbes Burnham the exception, but who has since been exceeded by Irfaan Ali. I cannot think of any colonial era West Indian leader and in the post-colonial period that possessed the quality of affability. From colonial times, West Indies leaders have been stiff, serious personalities without a sense of humour. From Bustamante and Norman Manley in Jamaica, Eric Williams in Trinidad, George Price in Belize, Barrow in Barbados, Vere Bird Senior in Antigua, Gairy in Grenada and all their successors have been people without a evocative sense of humour. Only Guyana has been the exception.
In Guyana, Burnham was the most easy going, humourous head of government in CARICOM. Cheddi Jagan was an extremely pleasant human that generated a sincerity about him that made you like him instantly. But Jagan was inherently an idealist and his idealism burdened him with philosophical thoughts of wanting to change the world. He would smile, but lightness was not part of his personality. Jagan was seriously contemplative for the greater part of his life.
It was Burnham who could smile, joke with the citizens and let loose a reign of funniness that attracted people to him. But he lacked what the current president, Mohamed Irfan Ai has – he didn’t have the culture of a working-class evolution that provides the politician with an exotic easiness, a sense of always being there to mix and mingle, and the congenital instinct that you must be part of the milieu of the ordinary man and woman. I think the word, “world” is more appropriate than “milieu.”
Affability is a requirement in leadership if you are going to achieve a sustained presence among your subjects. The mysterious factor in President’s Ali personality make-up is that affability is more a product of the urban setting than the rural environment. And Ali was a product of the rural setting. He is from Leonora, but at that time, 40 years ago, Leonora was more seen as part of rural Guyana. A simple sociological factor explains this rural/urban difference.
Rural life is parochial and more demanding than urban worlds. In all countries in the world, the rural human is burdened with the ever-present desire to leave for social elevation in the city. In contrast, the urban landscape is more diverse, with a multiplicity of cultures, classes and people in general. Urban people have more time on their hands, so they produce more humour than you find in the countryside.
It is to President Ali’s credit that he has produced a personality of warmth, courtesy, approachability, modesty, lightness of touch, and personality ebullience that has never been present in the West Indies and still no sign of it in the CARICOM region. It is a misplaced academic exercise to compare Ali and Mottley of Barbados in this context. She does not have the ebullience of spirit, mind and body that the researcher sees in Ali.
The ebullience of spirit has set Mohamed Irfaan Ali apart from all West Indian leaders from colonial times to 2026. Even if he is not your political choice, the substance of his persona has allowed for a massive gravitation of his citizens to him and that cannot be denied by his detractors. In that context, his legacy has already been created.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.
