Zelensky and Putin: a year of war for leadership

A year ago, few people knew President Zelensky outside of Ukraine. The country’s timid presence in the international context received almost no coverage in the West. Only such events as Euromaidan in 2013 or the invasion of Crimea in 2014 reminded us from time to time of the latent conflict that existed on the other side of Europe.

Zelensky was still far from politics at that time, devoting himself almost exclusively to his role as an actor and comedy producer, and it was not until February 2022, just four years after his political debut, that he unexpectedly returned to the lives and hearts of Western citizens.

Putin, on the other hand, was already a regular international acquaintance with extensive political experience and a reputation for and against his political decisions, which caused and continue to cause strong polarization. It should not be forgotten that Putin, who is reviled today, a few years before the invasion of Ukraine was a leader who was admired and respected around the world by various political and public figures.

A newcomer to politics, Zelenskiy, clearly inferior to his military, new to the role of ruler, and lacking foreign and domestic support (in March 2021, the Ukrainian president enjoyed the support of less than 40% of its population) faced the heavyweight Putin in February 2022. and assumed the moral leadership of his country against the powerful Russian invader.

Morality Tactics Against Authoritarian Leadership

Supported by a rhetoric of constant appeal to universal values ​​and freedom, his main activity since the beginning of the invasion has been countless speeches before national parliaments, as well as in his own and foreign media. In them, he conveyed his message of moral and physical resistance to the invader over and over again in order to garner support of all kinds, leaving the technical solutions in the hands of others. In particular, the military strategy is entrusted to its commander-in-chief, General Zaluzhny, who has so far directed the operations of the Ukrainian army with remarkable success, showing unprecedented flexibility, ingenuity and resilience.

The results of this leadership style show that this strategy is effective, since, on the one hand, the polls reflect a noticeable increase in the support of the population of Ukraine for their president, currently up to 91%, and on the other hand, weapons by different countries with little or no opposition at the European level.

Only one domestic political measure, carried out by Zelensky, is known to have involved the dismissal of a dozen high-ranking officials in his government for corruption, which greatly tarnished the image of democracy and is so undesirable for their entry into the European Union.

Putin, for his part, is continuing his style of authoritarian leadership that has produced such good results for him throughout his political career, and which he has demonstrated from the very beginning of what he called the “special military operation.” His manner of directing military operations personally was very characteristic, giving specific orders on military operations and methods, demonstrating his undeniable leadership to other influential figures inside the country (such as the Chechen Kadyrov or the head of the Wagner paramilitary group Prigozin) or even personally appointing and dismissing generals, such as General Surovikin, who headed the operational headquarters in Ukraine a month ago.

At the same time, the popularity of the Russian dignitary also experienced an increase in popular support among its citizens as a result of the war, as in January 2022 it was 69%, and in January 2023 – 83%.

Leader Mistakes

There are problems with both leadership styles. In Zelenskiy’s case, continued demand for more and more sophisticated military equipment could lead to a dangerous escalation of arms from Russia or to the exhaustion of donor countries if victory is not achieved in the short term. In the case of Putin, his authoritarian leadership has generated tactical errors that consistently result in a significant number of their own casualties due to the rigidity of the management and decision-making system and excessive internal cohesion in the Russian government’s high command that discourages criticism. y tactical and strategic procedures for their improvement in a realistic and practical way.

The current situation at the front tells us about the stagnation in the combat positions of both sides. On the one hand, there are few or no significant territorial gains expected in the short term that could give an advantage to one of the parties. On the other hand, the attitude of both high-profile individuals does not suggest a change in their leadership styles. The recent statements of both leaders remain in the same positions as a year ago.

Thus, it is difficult to foresee a change in the conflict situation. Both leaders know how to use their leadership qualities: one is based on the creation of personal charisma and the ability to involve others in conflict, appealing to empathy, a spirit of solidarity and universal justice; the other conveys a vision of strength, leadership experience and determination that will ensure control and support of their country until victory. We will see how the passage of time will affect each of these opposing leaders.

Luis Angel Diaz Robredo, Professor at the Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Navarra

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original.