The pragmatic leader

IN A RECENT New York Times article, Thomas Friedman refers to Asian autocratic leaders who essentially said to their people: "We are going to take away your freedom, but we will give you the best education, infrastructure and export-led growth policies money can buy." He also refers to Lee Kuan Yew, the founding father of the Singapore nation, as a moderniser who vaulted his people from nothing to a global middle class. The plan was simple: you give up your choice now for the longer-term success as envisioned by the leader, and eventually the country will be rewarded with a strong middle class and win more freedom.

Arab autocrats in comparison, he said, took away the freedom of their people and gave them the Arab-Israeli conflict instead to keep them distracted from local governance issues. Of course, he does not talk about the sheikhs of the UAE who invested their oil-induced wealth for longer- term development that has made the local 700,000 Emiratis very rich indeed and that the country is now posed to make a much bigger leap.

There is another country with a rather unique kind of leadership that he has not referred to, that has at times been autocratic but has mostly pandered to the conflicting whims of the powerful electorate. That is India. K Kesavapany in his April 3 article in Tabla likens India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Mr Lee on the basis of many shared objectives. Mr Modi described Mr Lee as a source of inspiration, whose achievements and thoughts give him confidence in the possibility of India's own transformation.