Leadership of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk - Term Paper Example

A real leader is capable of doing different tasks guided by his vision and reason coming from the historical experience. To make it plain, “leadership is the result of a complex set of interactions among the leader, the followers and the situation” (Cited in Byrne 20). Thus, a leader follows the most optimal way to succeed paying much tribute to his environment and the focal goals in mind. There are no leadership perspectives without goal-setting and planning elaborated by a leader. On the other hand, it is vital to touch upon the types of leadership and the notion of an effective military leadership.

The question is that the efficiency in the way a military leader follows comprises a global perspective along with the national ideals. There should be a detailed understanding of what the nation longs for and why such a problem stays unsolved. Byrne identifies effective military leadership as “the ability to inspire others to willingly participate in the achievement of a shared vision set out by the leader and to assist them throughout that transformational journey” (25). Hence, these solitary traits seem to be apparent in Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

First of all, he was a leader able to make a significant change against the Muslim perspective. By establishing the National Assembly in Turkey, he gained support of the Turkish majority in turning Turkey into a secular nation-state (Polelle 44). It was one of the first steps toward modernization throughout Turkey. Second, Ataturk broke the ice of the misconception in a larger Turkish society. He was successful in his leadership skills due to the fact that he possessed all types of transformational leadership evident in his “vision, courage, rhetorical skills, determination and integrity” (Byrne 25).

This is why every single step he did toward progress in providing reforms was more than just a breakthrough. It gave grounds for further modernization and constructive development of Turkey. Secularization and improvement in education were the two main goals of Ataturk’s mission. The thing is that the reforms were aimed at the following prospects, namely: secular governance, the replacement of Arabic script with Roman characters, monogamy, creating an industrial infrastructure, opening three western-mode state universities, establishment of a civil code in accordance with the European norms and standards (Reisman 7).

These reforms were hard to implement without keeping a strict eye on their execution. Today, there is hardly a national leader to complete all these reforms within a short span of time. To say more, Ataturk believed that a republican idealism would become a new civic religion for Turks (Hanioglu 182). His intellectual capacity made him believe in that Turkey may reach the new heights in its overall development once the religious views on governance came in place. The moral side of the question was at stake.

Mustafa Kemal was aware of that and could wait for some time to make Turks share the idea of republican idealism versus solely religious construct. Here, his rhetoric and courage complement his vision at the outset and ability to integrate toward new dimensions of national development of Turks. This is why he managed to create a new nation of Turkey based on the most progressive principles of civilian life. The authority of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk is too significant for every Turk, as he dared to transform “