Introduction
It is crucial to emphasize that the twentieth century was a milestone in world history. Therefore, there was unrest in colonial countries, which provoked uprisings and revolutions in different parts of the world, as well as significant changes in the political scene. The first black president of South Africa, Nelson Mandela, was a prominent symbol of democracy and fought for the equality of people all his life (Garba & Akuva, 2020). Nelson Mandela was one of the most respected statesmen in the world who led the struggle to overcome the apartheid regime in South Africa and establish a multiracial democracy. Thus, it is essential to provide reasons to consider Nelson Mandela to be the most outstanding leader in the world.
Mandela’s Conflict Strategy
Significantly, Mandela’s challenge as a leader was to prevent developments that would have been catastrophic for both sides but not to abandon the desire for freedom. Mandela clearly described the strategic dilemma he faced, which correlates with terms similar to Schelling’s variable-sum game (Read, 2010). Accordingly, during the struggle for black rights in South Africa, Mandela understood that avoiding conflict, war, and death was essential.
Moreover, the leader realized that the desire to live by democratic principles would lead to uprisings that would be impossible to control. Therefore, Nelson Mandela adhered to a consistent conflict strategy to avoid provoking armed uprisings (Read, 2010). As a leader who represented the interests of most people, Mandela attempted to provide information to the official authorities about their intentions. This was required to find a compromise or alternative solution to the problems, which was crucial to avoid risks for both sides.
However, as an educated leader, Mandela realized that a peaceful strategy to resolve the conflict would require concessions. In addition, the leader was not ready to reduce the number of rights he demanded of black people. Mandela’s colleagues in the African National Congress and the South African government understood this and tried to avoid the risk of surrender (Read & Shapiro, 2013). Consequently, neither side could make sufficient concessions to satisfy the other’s demands.
Therefore, Mandela’s strategy of using the burnings as an essential tool of leadership and a means of dispute resolution needed to be revised. This is because the effective implementation of this strategy requires the political will of both parties. While the official government’s actions indicated a desire to reduce the protesters’ demands, when this failed significantly, the government resorted to violent means of struggle (Read & Shapiro, 2013). Accordingly, Mandela’s peaceful strategy to resolve the conflict was created in the spirit of humble leadership and respect for human rights. Still, it did not prove effective due to the government’s unwillingness to resolve the dispute peacefully.
Methods of Struggle
Initially, Mandela utilized non-violent forms in his fight against the apartheid administration. Nevertheless, after the shooting of a protest of civilians in the township of Sharpeville and the banning of the African National Congress (ANC), Mandela became the leader of the armed branch of the ANC. In 1944, Mandela joined the Youth League of the African National Congress. Furthermore, Nelson Mandela, who joined the ANC and was elected president in 1951, considered a turn to armed struggle as early as 1952-53 (Lal, 2014). Lal (2014) notes that Mandela admitted that he asked Walter Sisulu to inform the Chinese “that we want to start an armed struggle and get arms” (p. 42).
Therefore, Mandela was trying to find a way for the organization to work effectively and defend the rights of black people that had been violated. Additionally, the leader’s associates believed that if adopting the principle of non-violence was effective under apartheid, they would aspire to use it (Lal, 2014). As a result, Mandela and his entourage attempted to choose the principles of resistance to restore people’s rights.
Moreover, a rational reason for evaluating the methods of struggle was necessary to create an actionable strategy. The explanation is that Mandela started actively battling for human rights and against the apartheid approach followed by the National Party administration (Garba & Akuva, 2020). The nature of the apartheid regime was that the non-white individuals of the nation were denied almost all civil rights and were obliged to live in segregation. Black Africans were prohibited from arriving in “white” municipalities (Lal, 2014).
There were also different clinics, academies, coasts, and general transport; the difference in assistance in organizations for black Africans was poor. There were not enough hospitals for non-whites and no libraries, theaters, cinemas, or restaurants (Garba & Akuva, 2020). Accordingly, Nelson Mandela recognized that the fight against discrimination against blacks required various methods to achieve universal and equal rights for all people.
Freedom Charter
One of the significant moments in Nelson Mandela’s life was the development and adoption of the Freedom Charter. In 1952, Mandela was one of the organizers of the ANC’s Campaign of Disobedience. The particular value of the Charter lay in the fact that Nelson supported democratic principles, and the demands of the disobedient people were considered during the document’s writing.
The leader also organized the People’s Congress in 1955, where the Freedom Charter was adopted (Lal, 2014). It outlined the basic principles of building a free and democratic society in South Africa. The Charter of Freedom asserted the right to work and decent housing, freedom of thought, and, most importantly, the redistribution of the wealth of the wealthiest African country, home to, among other things, the largest gold mines in the world. The Charter thus evolved into the primary procedure paper of the ANC and other political institutions in South Africa that battled against the apartheid government.
In addition, the South African government, dominated by descendants of Dutch settlers and the British, banned the ANC and other political parties that sought to end apartheid. Throughout this period of brutal repression, people spread the Freedom Charter through the revolutionary underground so that it continued to inspire hope and encourage individuals to resist (Lal, 2014). Hence, despite the opposition of the official authorities, who had conducted a wrenching of the leading figures in the resistance, Nelson Mandela continued to spread information about the Freedom Charter and sought methods of its official implementation.
Representation of the Public Interest and Conflict Management
Mandela was always focused on society rather than personal values, emphasizing his leadership. He wrote about himself that “my hunger for the freedom of my people became the hunger for the freedom of all people, white and black” (Arslan & Turhan, 2016, p. 34). Thus, the leader thought of social freedom rather than personal freedom. Consequently, Nelson Mandela’s activities were based on social responsibility and creating a holistic vision for the people of South Africa.
Moreover, Mandela possesses traits such as forgiveness, dissolving vengeance, and empathy. This indicates that the leader, despite the struggle and armed uprising against the official authorities, retained the traits of a sincere and kind person (Arslan & Turhan, 2016). An example of the fact that the leader has positive qualities and used the armed struggle only to restore the rights of blacks is his speeches. For instance, in his second autobiography and almost 1200 speeches and interviews, there are 19 examples of using the spirit of forgiveness (Arslan & Turhan, 2016, p. 36). Accordingly, the leader tried to demonstrate to the world that the struggle for rights required radical measures, but when positive results were achieved, they should be strengthened and maintained.
Furthermore, although Mandela was imprisoned for his active public position and activities, he called on people to be role models. He could treat those who had unjustly imprisoned him for 27 years with a spirit of forgiveness and encouraged his followers to follow suit (Arslan & Turhan, 2016, p. 35). Indeed, as a highly experienced leader, Nelson Mandela understood that there were certain historical features of South Africa, so forgiveness was necessary to achieve success in reconciliation between black and white people.
Mandela also recognized the roots of the racial conflict and the consequences of the apartheid regime. Accordingly, as a leader, he persuaded the black population to consider the concession of accommodation to build a new state of law (Arslan & Turhan, 2016). However, for oppressed blacks, historical events were complex topics and caused them to want revenge.
Accordingly, the concept of reconciliation was adopted in South Africa through Nelson Mandela’s leadership and authority. Nevertheless, the situation could have led to mass executions or a bloody civil war immediately after the abolition of apartheid. As a result, Mandela’s significant achievements as a leader include transforming this anger into a peaceful and non-violent protest, despite other points of view (Arslan & Turhan, 2016).
In addition, the leader dared to help previously isolated black people integrate into the new peaceful system. Mandela often spoke and met with ordinary people to convince them to live peacefully with white minorities and work together to create a comfortable livelihood (Arslan & Turhan, 2016). Therefore, despite the policy of persecution and the short term, the leader consolidated the nation and declared democratic principles.
Another feature of Nelson Mandela’s leadership is the ability to accept contradictory points of view. According to Stengel, “the latter’s great achievement as a leader is his ability to show the smiling face of reconciliation rather than the frowns of bitterness and lost opportunity” (Arslan & Turhan, 2016, p. 35). This can be defined by the fact that Mandela, despite years of struggle and loss, did not lose his ability to empathize with people. Thus, the leader avoided focusing on failures but searched for ways to address them and demonstrated the incredible power of the will to his followers.
Moreover, empathy became a part of Mandela’s life philosophy. As a true leader, he attempted to ensure the well-being of all South Africans, even the Africans who committed the crime of apartheid. It is explained by the fact that Mandela did not threaten to expel them from the country because he realized that they had a limited view of the world.
The leader considered that white people perceived blacks only as servants because of the state’s policies (Garba & Akuva, 2020). That is why, after the end of apartheid, Nelson Mandela called on all residents to unite and not lose the gains they had made. Hence, Mandela’s position demonstrates the use of leadership skills to unite different South Africans and ensure they coexist peacefully.
Potential Mistakes in Mandela’s Decisions
It should be noted that this strategy of peaceful conflict resolution could only have worked if Mandela had been personally willing to take the risk. However, this had serious consequences for him, such as the loss of support from his colleagues and decreased followers (Garba & Akuva, 2020). Under the assumption that both sides of the conflict wanted to find common ground and that people who supported Mandela did not understand the seriousness of further escalation, the leader had to take responsibility (Garba & Akuva, 2020). Thus, a compromise could have been reached if Nelson Mandela had continued implementing the negotiation policy and peaceful dispute settlement. Consequently, this could have contributed to further oppression and restriction of black rights and the leader’s imprisonment.
Additionally, if Nelson Mandela and his followers had spent more time preparing and securing the support of other countries, they would have had more influence on the situation. Instead, Mandela’s primary strategy was based only on supporting the black population, which joined the struggle but had a slight advantage in terms of means and strength. Hence, these shortcomings can be considered potential mistakes of Nelson Mandela as a leader.
Nevertheless, even though Mandela may have made errors, he always tried to act in the nation’s interests. Besides, after the shooting of the civilian demonstration and the ban on the African National Congress, there is no doubt that the leader made the right move when he rejected the pergola strategy (Garba & Akuva, 2020). This is because the regime used a position of strength and, despite Nelson Mandela’s diplomatic attempts to resolve the conflict, tried to suppress the people’s rallies.
Additionally, during the struggle for rights in South Africa, the South African Union provided foreign and economic support for apartheid. The Union had considerable influence in the region and was an essential partner of many countries, which made it almost impossible for Mandela to achieve support from external partners (Garba & Akuva, 2020). Hence, the potential shortcomings in Nelson Mandela’s policy are not significant and hypothetical. Accordingly, this demonstrates that the leader made every effort to restore the rights of black people and used all possible means to achieve this.
Conclusion
Therefore, Nelson Mandela is the most prominent world leader who led the struggle against apartheid in South Africa. He emerged as a prominent political figure who made a considerable contribution to global democracy and the struggle for human rights because he initiated the creation of the Freedom Charter. In addition, the leader tried peaceful ways to resolve the conflict with the official South African government, such as negotiations and compromises. However, the armed reaction to them forced Nelson Mandela and his followers to consider non-peaceful ways to resolve the conflict. Accordingly, Nelson Mandela became a symbol of democracy and a role model for many people because he united the country and never sought revenge but promoted forgiveness and understanding of the rights of all people.
References
Arslan, H. K., & Turhan, Y. (2016). Reconciliation-oriented Leadership: Nelson Mandela and South Africa. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy & Peace, 5(2), 29–45. Web.
Garba, D., & Akuva, I. I. (2020). The leadership styles of Nelson Mandela as a pattern for African leaders. Covenant University Journal of Politics and International Affairs, 8(1), 1-10. Web.
Lal, V. (2014). Mandela, Luthuli, and nonviolence in the South African freedom struggle. Ufahamu: A Journal of African Studies, 38(1), 35–54. Web.
Read, J. H. (2010). Leadership and power in Nelson Mandela’s long walk to freedom. Journal of Power, 3(3), 317-339. Web.
Read, J. H., & Shapiro, I. (2013). Transforming power relationships: Leadership, risk, and hope. IHS Political Science Series, 135, 1-39. Web.