The effectiveness of a country’s leaders is best measured by examining thewell-being of that country’s citizens.

In the history of the world, there are numerous examples of countries’ leaders with different characteristics. The fact is that the destiny of the countries and their people depends on their leaders. Thus, if leader improved the well-being of his country’s people he is considered a Father of the Nation and its hero, but if the leader followed just his own ambitions which are, not always, really valuable and positive, the destiny of the country and its people became a tragedy. In my opinion, I strongly agree that the welfare of the people of one country should be measured by the effectiveness of its leader.

To begin, there are many leaders in the history who fought for better lives of their people. These leaders often used cooperation instead of competitiveness which approved their effectiveness and resulted with a victory. For instance, Gandhi who was a leader of Indians, firstly in South Africa and later in India, by his approach of non-violent civil disobedience won against the British rule. His leadership model was followed in the whole world. For example, Nelson Mandela, the first black democratically elected President of South Africa, using non-violent civil disobedience model,
ended the apartheid in 1994. Helped by the previous President de Klerk, Mandela won against race discrimination in South Africa for which both, Mandela and de Klerk, won Nobel Prize for The Peace in the World. The third example of non-violent disobedience is Martin Luther King. He fought against discrimination of the African Americans in the United States. Martin Luther King was the youngest leader in the world to be awarded Nobel Prize for the Piece in the World too. The effectiveness of these leaders is obvious. They dedicated their lives for the freedom of their people which is the first human right without which human progress is impossible.

Further, in the conditions of peace, many aspects of the well-being of the people still depend on many conditions. These are physical well-being, public safety and social and economic equality, education, science, arts, cultural heritage. Countries considered the best regarding the well-being of their people nowadays are certainly countries where the effectiveness of the leaders is measured by instilling all these conditions of people’s welfare. For instance, Nordic countries are considered the best for the well-being of their people. Their success is in establishing in so-called ‘Nordic Model’ which implies social and economic policies followed by all Nordic countries Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland. This model ensures that the countries where it is implemented are safe and stable. Since there is no corruption, Nordic citizens have trust in the countries’ politics and police which are pivotal for the welfare of their citizens. Another great example of a country with good well-being of people is Canada. Their Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, employed economic policies and propagated healthy business in the time of recession which saved Canadians from feeling impacts of the recession. Other similar examples were much earlier employed by President Roosevelt in the time of ‘Great Depression’ when he introduced ‘The New Deal’ programs and projects which developed American economy.

In conclusion, the greatness and well-being of one nation can be seen in the quality of its leader. If the leader is negative, as it was Hitler, then his ambitions result in the tragedy of his country and the whole world. In contrast, examples as Lincoln and his Emancipation Proclamation can only improve the citizens’ welfare significantly.