By Eve Bennett
(Photo: Guido Bergmann)
“Wir schaffen das.”
Whether you speak German or not, if you’ve followed European politics to any degree over the last few years that phrase is likely to ring a bell. First used by German chancellor Angela Merkel at the height of the country’s migrant crisis in 2015, this assertion – roughly translatable as “we can do it” – is often said to encapsulate precisely what makes this former research scientist so formidable as a leader. Despite being faced with various political and economic crises since taking up office in 2005, her no-nonsense pragmatism and level-headed responses have earned her both praise and admiration from heads of state the world over.
From the first moments of her televised address to the German public on March 18th, it was clear that her approach to the coronavirus crisis would be no exception. “This is serious – take it seriously,” she levels squarely with her citizens, declaring the pandemic to be the “greatest challenge” Germany has seen since the Second World War. Her speech contains no political grandstanding, no shying away from the unpleasant facts: she makes no hesitation in reminding Germans that their hospitals “could be completely overwhelmed” if people fail to comply, urging them to see each death as not merely a “statistic” but as the loss of a “father or grandfather, mother or grandmother”. Merkel simply asks that the public behaves with discipline, and promises to do all she can to combat the virus in return.
And that’s precisely what she’s done. One month, 2.5 million tests and one of the lowest death tolls in Europe later, Germany has been spared the worst of the pandemic and is tentatively beginning to reopen its economy. The fact that Merkel’s approval rating has soared to 79% in recent weeks is testament to the success of her expansive track-and-trace policy and the sheer transparency of her government’s decision-making. Whether Germany will experience a second wave of the virus remains to be seen, but its response so far has led many to question whether its deft handling of the crisis may have anything to do with the gender of its leader.
Merkel is just one of the many examples of female leaders across the globe showing remarkable tenacity in the face of this global turmoil. In fact, according to a study recently carried out by the Telegraph, four of the ten ‘best-performing’ countries (Taiwan, Iceland, New Zealand and Estonia) had women at their helm, despite women accounting for less than 7% of the world’s leaders.
New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern, for instance, took no chances, imposing a nationwide lockdown before the country had even reached 250 cases. It is thanks to her quick response that the country was able to announce no new infections earlier this week, having flattened their curve and reported less than 1500 cases and only 20 deaths. Moving seamlessly between chatty Facebook updates streamed live from her couch to informative, straight-talking press conferences, it is no wonder the Financial Times has hailed her as a “a model of compassionate leadership in this crisis”.
Iceland’s prime minister Katrin Jakobsdottir seems to have taken a leaf out of the same book, swiftly implementing an expansive ‘test, trace, isolate’ policy that has seen over 13% of the population screened for the virus, the largest proportion of any country in the world. Meanwhile in Taiwan, shops, restaurants and cafés remain open and life continues almost as normal as a result of early intervention by its president, Tsai Ing-wen. The country’s National Health Command Center (NHCC), founded in the wake of the 2003 SARS outbreak, was almost breathtakingly quick in restricting travel from China and quarantining infected individuals, implementing 124 separate measures to bring the number of cases under control and avoid a nationwide quarantine.
There are, of course, female leaders who haven’t fared as well: Belgium’s prime minister Sophie Wilmés is faced with the world’s highest mortality rate as cases amongst her citizens top 50,000. It’s also worth mentioning countries with male leaders who are performing equally admirably (South Korea, Greece, Vietnam to name a few). Exceptions aside, though, it’s plain to see that there are very few female leaders sitting at the worse end of the spectrum.
Is this pure coincidence? Or is there something larger at play here? As is the case with most things at the moment, the precise answer remains unclear. There are naturally a myriad of factors to consider when examining what lies behind the success of these high-performing nations, but the stats do seem to suggest that the female leadership style may be more of a help than a hindrance.
A study published by the Harvard Business Review last year revealed that women were outscoring men in 84% of the most frequently-measured leadership competencies, demonstrating more resilience, initiative, integrity and self-development than their male counterparts. Despite excelling in almost all fields, however, women are still consistently more likely to underestimate their own competence, whilst men show levels of over-confidence that make them less open to advice or information that may challenge their views. See, for reference, the brash arrogance of Brazilian president Bolsonaro, who could muster nothing more than “so what” when told the country’s death toll had surpassed 5000, or the self-absorbed overconfidence of US president Donald Trump, advising his citizens to inject themselves with disinfectant and contravening the advice of his top-ranking scientists and economic advisers. Compare also the open, purposeful and clear public addresses given by Merkel and Ardern to the initial downplaying of the crisis by our own prime minister Boris Johnson, whose delayed and fumbling response to the virus has been riddled with backtracking, contradictory messages and a shocking lack of transparency.
Faced with the greatest crisis in living memory, what countries across the globe need most are political leaders capable of remaining cool during a crisis. Empathy, compassion and resolve are much more effective weapons against this virus than narrow-mindedness, egotism and ignorance. Such has been made evident to us once before, following the financial crash in 2008. “If it had been Lehman Sisters rather than Lehman Brothers”, laments IMF President Christine Lagarde, “the world might well look a lot different today”.
In the months and years ahead, as the winners and losers of the fight against this virus become increasingly clear, we may find ourselves drawing the very same conclusions. Any link made between strength of leadership and gender will, however, have to take into account a vast range of complicating factors: a country’s wealth, the strength of their healthcare system, their infrastructure and the way in which their population is spread are just some of the variables that will have a significant part to play. Not to mention the fact that there are cultural layers to this apparent phenomenon. Kathleen Gerson, professor of sociology at NYU, reminded The Hill that “[female leaders] are also likely to be nourished and supported within societies that themselves have a certain culture. […] If you have a political culture in which there’s a relative support and trust in the government, and it’s a culture that doesn’t make stark distinctions between women and men, you’ve already got a head start”.
Whether this emerging trend turns out to be a shining example of ‘girl-power’ at its finest or, actually, a rather insignificant observation, one thing is definitely clear: if all of our political leaders follow in Merkel and Ardern’s footsteps by demonstrating the leadership qualities conducive to successful government, our post COVID-19 world will be a much better place.