Reflection Post:
Today’s class was interesting and I was especially intrigued
by the opening debate about American leadership during the Arab Spring. We
confronted the issues that the President himself had encountered and I agree
with most of the class that President Obama’s ‘hard power’ inducement for
Mubarak to stand down was too public, too aggressive, and too rushed. In the New York Times article, Obama’s senior
advisers criticized him for neglecting relationships with Arab leaders, and in
my opinion creating and maintaining those types of relationships within the
Arab region is crucial to remaining in alliance with countries like Saudi
Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, Israel, and of course Egypt. President Obama cannot
afford to have such impersonal relationships with other world leaders, because
it will be harder to further the U.S.’s agenda and to accomplish what needs to
be accomplished in the Arab region.
I also wanted to touch upon the lecture about transactional
and transformational leadership and the question, “Can transactional leadership
generate transformational change?” The answer is yes. Transactional leaders can
use different modes of transactional style to achieve transformational
objectives. Transactional leaders can use hard power to get what they want from
followers, in order to achieve a greater good that would benefit both that
leader and transformational objectives, as was the case with Lyndon B. Johnson
and the ‘Great Society.’ Overall, it was a very interesting lecture, but the
break was way too late in the class and my attention span was wavering…and, the
slides were way too fast.
I remember in the class we spoke about the usage of Hard and Soft power from the United States towards the Arab countries and I think thats what the whole topic was about. I agree with you when it comes to keeping a personal relationship. Wouldn't you agree that more soft power is required from the president Obama towards the situation?
ReplyDelete