IT takes a little more mental effort than many of us are given to, to understand that good and bad are not necessarily dichotomous. They are not always polar opposites; not two entirely different variables at either end of a spectrum with no commingling of the two. It is especially so in politics, and perhaps more so as the world becomes more open and unfortunately, more dangerous in many ways.

This is a VUCA world — Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous. Successful leadership and problem solving requires VUCA thinking and understanding.

Ideally, under the banner of social justice, for example, no one gets killed. My preferred secular definition of the term comes from the University of California, Berkeley: Social justice is a process, which:

1) seeks fair (re)distribution of resources, opportunities, and responsibilities;

2) challenges the roots of oppression and injustice;

3) empowers everyone to exercise self-determination and realise their full potential; and

4) builds solidarity and community capacity for collaborative action.

In Catholic teachings, social justice is a reflection of God’s respect and concern for each person and an effort to protect the freedom necessary to achieve his or her destiny. In an encyclical letter (1963) of Pope John XXIII on establishing peace on Earth, it noted that “any human society, if it is to be well-ordered and productive, must lay down as a foundation this principle: that every human being is a person; his nature is endowed with intelligence and free will. By virtue of this, he has rights and duties of his own, flowing directly and simultaneously from his very nature, which are… universal, inviolable, and inalienable…”

Whether one advocates from the perspective of the secular, the sacred, or both, one has to recognise that our world will be messy more often than it is ideal. In this context, people — even under the guise of righteousness — are capable of perpetuating terrible evil upon other innocent men, women and children. When that happens, it takes the compassion, courage and intellectual dexterity of the best of the best to determine when an awful option is still the best of all possible options.

President of the United States Barack Obama took that gamble four years ago when he briefly invaded a foreign country and took out one of the world’s worst terrorists. May 1, 2011, United States Special Forces, on orders from the Commander-in-Chief, stormed a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, killing Osama bin Laden, 54. Three men, including one of bin Laden’s son, and one woman were also killed. “In the name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful. Praise Allah and pray on his prophet..,” wrote bin Laden in a letter to a lieutenant five days before his takedown. Bin Laden reportedly prayed seven times a day, in-between passionate sermons to his wives, but he was responsible for the 2001 attacks which killed almost 3,000 civilians. One late-night American programme celebrated Obama’s audacity by branding him a thug because, if he could take out the biggest thug in the world, what does that make him? A bigger thug if you are a comedian; an infidel if you are Muslim fanatic; a lucky SOB if you are a Republican detractor; and a hero to those who understand even a fraction of the risk he took.

Political leaders, or the phenomenon around them, and social causes often cannot be fully explained or understood with one or two labels. Much depends on the lenses of the onlooker impacted by the perspective from which they come.

Responses to last week’s column about Rwanda’s progress since the 1994 genocide demonstrate the difficulty we face when problems and solutions do not fit into assigned boxes. Surprise that the country has made tremendous progress 20 years on was evident. That did not surprise me. The models of progress offered to us are limited, and few of us bother to look elsewhere, least of all Africa. Plus, many of the perspectives are characterised mostly by passionate reductionism, a problem in national discourse which head of the Mona School of Business and Management Professor Densil Williams warned about in a recent newspaper article. Others see Rwanda as problematic because President Paul Kagame is portrayed by critics as autocratic and there are questions of human rights abuses. The concerns are well founded. However, none of it negates the progress that has been made since Rwanda’s ugly watershed moment, nor do they negate the efficacy of Kagame’s management of the country’s affairs. Rwanda is stable, and far less people are homeless, hungry, diseased, or illiterate since he took office. Investors are flocking the country; Starbucks buys their coffee. It is 24 points ahead of Jamaica on the most recent Global Competitive Index (62 to 86). Tony Blair and Bill Gates are among Kagame’s advisors, supporters or friends, and he is a co-chair of the United Nation’s Millennium Development Goals Advocacy Group.

Substantively, the column was about a poor, recently traumatised country that is mastering foundational issues that continue to be problematic for us, such as: cleanliness, security, and holding public officials accountable for their performance and for public funds. It was also about resolve; if they can do it, why can’t we? And, it was about trajectory and timing; the path that they are on, and how much they have been able to accomplish in a relatively short time. A few people raised the issue of individuals rights, responsibilities and freedoms, since, as it is in Singapore, these concepts are constructed differently in Rwanda than in our environment. These are pertinent questions worthy of serious and thoughtful debates.

Obama’s visit tomorrow, with all the accompanying angst, should focus attention on his approach to problem-solving. For starters, he does not childishly pretend that problems do not exist. He is of Robert Kennedy’s persuasion: “Some men see things as they are and ask why. Others dream things that never were, and ask why not?”

It is an opportune time for a visit from an icon. Our Opposition needs inspiration, the Government needs an anointing, and the people need hope — and then some.

Welcome to The Rock, Obama!

Grace Virtue, PhD, is a social justice advocate.