…UN, more like a US
I came across a Foreign Policy article suggesting that Ban Ki-Moon, the secretary general of the United Nations, hasn't done much for a man in his position when the global leadership is urgently needed.
The author also mentioned that Ban "frittering away any influence he might command, become a kind of accidental tourist, a dilettante on the international stage", when people in one coutries were being slaughtered, for example.
I'm not sure whether I am to agree or disagree with the comment as I don't know much about what he has done and what he didn't do, but I don't think Ban can just order a nation leader to stop doing something, or order another nation to send in a troop to stop the killing.
At this point, I tend to disagre with the article as at least, Ban showed a quality of a good leader.
To me, he knows who he is leading and foresee the consequences (not being used by UN or US). Think about how much climate change/politics he has to handle, his job is to negotiate, develop understanding, bridge the gap between developed and developing countries, bring balance to the UN and to the world.
And it's not like he is managing his followers, because those people in the world forum are all leaders.
Leading leaders,....that must be tough. What would be a compliment quality to those who have to lead leaders?
The art of manipulation?