US advice to others it could use itself

The two Afghan leaders pushed into a coalition last year by the US are visiting Washington, a reminder of how the US helps other nations bridge their political chasms even if it can’t do the same. One lesson for all: Lincoln’s ‘team of rivals.’

|
AP Photo
Afghanistan's Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah (left), Afghanistan's President Ashraf Ghani, Vice President Joe Bidden, Defense Secretary Ash Carter, and Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan stand together during a March 24 ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Arlington, Va.

A handy expression for any parent – “Do what I say, not what I do” – could well be said in Washington these days. Its elected leaders are so at odds that the government is adrift – hardly a model for the rest of the world. Yet the United States is quick to push other countries also stuck in a political chasm into forming coalitions of unity.

The US has long nudged feuding politicians in troubled nations to play nice and govern together, if only to prevent civil war or a national breakup. Just in the past year, President Obama has suggested Scotland not split with England. He has worked to reconcile factions in South Sudan and other African nations. He supported the creation of difficult yet amazing coalitions in Tunisia and Ukraine. In Iraq, he encouraged one leader to step down for another who is doing better at inclusive government.

This week, a good example of a US-concocted coalition is on display in Washington with a visit by Afghanistan’s two leaders, President Ashraf Ghani and chief executive Abdullah Abdullah. Last year, the two men were archrivals in a presidential race, each reflecting the country’s ethnic divide. When a dispute over the ballot count threatened Afghanistan’s fragile democracy, the US negotiated a power-sharing deal to form a national unity government.

So far, it seems to be holding. Many of Mr. Ghani’s cabinet posts and other positions have yet to be filled. But the uneasy partnership has endured several bumps.

What the US is teaching in these cases – while not practicing itself at the moment – is a type of leadership best illustrated in Doris Kearns Goodwin’s bestselling book “Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln.” After his 1860 election, Lincoln realized with inspired humility and wisdom that he needed to include his well-experienced political rivals in his cabinet. A divided Union needed a government of unity. He invited his campaign opponents to serve a cause larger than their ambitions.

“These were the very strongest men,” Lincoln told a journalist. “Then I had no right to deprive the country of their services.”

Lincoln still provides key lessons for today’s fractured governments in need of a “team of rivals.” He knew how to share credit and accept blame. He listened hard and welcomed dissent without retaliation. He could navigate negative emotions and rise above criticism by keeping his clarity of vision and his sense of humor. He could be contrite and confident for the sake of something bigger than himself.

Mr. Obama came into office with Lincoln’s model in mind. His campaign opponents, such as Hillary Rodham Clinton and Joe Biden, joined his team. Yet he and the Republican leaders in Congress have not been successful at working together. Despite the flawed model in Washington, the US often does well in exporting Lincoln’s leadership style. Maybe someday the children might influence the parent.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to US advice to others it could use itself
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2015/0324/US-advice-to-others-it-could-use-itself
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe