Introduction
My interest in yoga stems from its connection to statesmanship, which intrigued me as a Political Science student. I took a course called “Yoga, Business, and Leadership” at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, where I discovered the valuable teachings of the Bhagavad Gita. The Gita’s stories depict how leaders should behave, showcasing the versatility of yogic principles. This broad perspective is something I find lacking in the more traditional Western worldview. In my study, I examined how the principles from the Bhagavad Gita may enhance political leadership, focusing specifically on Germany’s influential role within the European Union. I analyzed German leadership through five key concepts: īśvara, jīva, prakṛti, kāla, and karma. My research question centered on how these yogic principles manifest in German leadership.
Bhagavad Gita lens to German leadership
By focusing on the lack of policy or incorrect policy implementation, Germany has already demonstrated its understanding of several aspects of the Bhagavad Gita, primarily īśvara, leading by example, and jīva, being in control of the situation.
Regarding the concept of īśvara, according to the Bhagavad Gita, a leader should act like the Hindu gods Lord Krishna and Lord Vishnu, who serve the interests and well-being of others. Hence, a leader should strive for the benefit of others rather than for oneself as did the king of the heavens, Indra (Nayak, 2018, p. 3). It is interesting to consider this from the perspective of the Bhagavad Gita and the idea around īśvara. One could argue that Germany played the roles of both Lord Krishna and King Indra. Germany aided Greece and the eurozone during the crisis, bringing back stability, which was in the interest and well-being of all member states, even though letting Greece fall would have been easier. However, Germany did not explicitly take the lead in handling the crisis from the beginning and waited for some time. It only intervened at the last possible moment and under Germany’s conditions, which were based on strict fiscal discipline. This gives the impression that Germany was primarily concerned with its own financial stability, which would have been in danger if it had not intervened. This somewhat resembles Indra, who strives for his own satisfaction. The concept of the individual living entity is jīva. According to the Bhagavad Gita, the body itself is not a living being due to the existence of dead matter such as earth and water. The spirit resides within the body and constitutes the living being.
Caes: German leadership in the Eurocrisis:
soft power, restrained role and economic influence
Germany’s leadership in the Eurozone Crisis stands out from countries like France, Britain, and the USA due to its reliance on soft power rather than military strength (Müller & Van Esch, 2020, p. 1053). Former Chancellor Angela Merkel exemplified this style by effectively managing European affairs and crises, such as the 2008 financial crisis, the subsequent euro crisis, and tensions with Russia after 2014 (Müller & Van Esch, 2020, pp. 1055-1057). While other European nations have called for Germany to assume a stronger leadership role in the EU, historical factors pose challenges (Bulmer & Paterson, 2013, p. 1389; Müller & Van Esch, 2020, p. 1055). Germany’s post-World War II mentality prioritizes political-economic matters over geopolitics, shaping its economically oriented civilian power approach (Kundnani, 2011, p. 33; Bulmer & Paterson, 2013, p. 1390). Germany plays a significant role in shaping European fiscal and monetary policies, emphasizing strong institutions and multilateral cooperation, particularly with France (Kundnani, 2011, p. 35; Bulmer & Paterson, 2013, p. 1393).
The eurozone crisis and the 2015 refugee crisis revealed both optimism and fear regarding Germany’s position in the EU (Müller & Van Esch, 2020, p. 1057). Some argue that German foreign policy prioritizes national interests and selective multilateralism (Kundnani, 2011, p. 38). In times of crisis, Germany tends to adopt a wait-and-see approach, intervening only when it becomes clear that other countries cannot manage independently (Müller & Van Esch, 2020, p. 1061). Thus, Germany assumes a reluctant leadership role, responding to others’ demands but with limitations (Müller & Van Esch, 2020, p. 1061).
Germany’s authority among EU member states is primarily based on its economic power. As the largest economy in the EU and Europe, and the fourth largest in the world, Germany is seen by some as a natural leader during crises, particularly in fiscal matters (Schoeller, 2015, p. 12). Germany has demonstrated its ability to bring about institutional change and address the root causes of crises, not just solving them (Schoeller, 2015, p. 12).
To tackle the crisis, Germany employed various leadership strategies, including managing the agenda, building coalitions, and providing common knowledge (Schoeller, 2015, p. 12). However, German leadership varied depending on the issue at hand. In recent years, Germany has been more willing to impose its economic preferences on other EU nations, especially in financial matters, reflecting a zero-sum competition mentality (Kundnani, 2011, p. 41). This was evident in the Greek bailout during the euro crisis.
The central question regarding German leadership was not the bailout itself but the form and size it would take. Germany had two ideal-typical options. The first was an unambiguous commitment to do whatever it takes to keep Greece in the eurozone, aiming for stability and a cheaper bailout. However, Germany was unwilling to take a more active leadership role in this scenario, leading to the second option of delaying any decision as long as possible (Schoeller, 2017, pp. 1-9).
Germany resisted providing financial aid to Greece until the last moment, imposing strict conditions to ensure fiscal discipline. They were concerned about moral hazard and setting a precedent of irresponsible financial behavior. By delaying assistance, Germany sent a strong message to other debtors that bailouts wouldn’t come easily, aiming to prevent fiscal free-riding within the eurozone.
There are three types of karma or actions: sakarma, which is pious action according to scripture or principles; vikarma, which is sinful action in contrast to sakarma; and akarma, which is transcendental action devoid of motive and performed solely for the satisfaction of the god(s) (Bhagavad Gita 3.16). However, the Bhagavad Gita argues that a leader should be a karma yogi, a leader who should not focus on the result but on the action itself (Bhagavad Gita 2.47). When too much attention is given to the end result, one may fail to see the course of action that leads to
the desired outcome. Another relevant aspect for leaders is found in Bhagavad Gita chapter 2, verse 47: “Never consider yourself to be the cause of the results of your activities, nor be attached to inaction” (Bhagavad Gita 2.47). This is an important point to consider, as many leaders tend to emphasize their indispensable role, even though it may not reflect the actual development of the situation. Sometimes certain things were already set into motion by a predecessor, and the current leader simply reaps the fruits of someone else’s labor.
Kāla represents time, and unlike the modern Western notion of time as a passive phenomenon, in the Bhagavad Gita time is an active force of change and the greatest destroyer of all things (Bhagavad Gita 11.32). Therefore, it is important for a leader to accept the discontinuation of all things and embrace change when it comes. The Bhagavad Gita illustrates this through the example of the four seasons, which come and go regardless of personal preferences, just like desire, pain, happiness, and anger (2.14). Hence, a leader has the task of being an example for society on how to handle the inevitability of change, so that the common people have someone to look up to and follow in terms of principles, ethics, or morals (Prabhupada, 1986).
We can see that German leadership aimed to prevent unnecessary consequences stemming from moral hazards and fiscal free-riding, incorporating elements from both kāla and karma. Germany waited before intervening, risking the potential collapse of the eurozone. On the other hand, Germany was cautious when intervening due to the potential short and long-term consequences.
Prakṛti represents the ‘nature’ of materials, which can significantly influence the personal or characteristic actions of an individual. The Bhagavad Gita mentions certain ‘ethics’ that can influence a person. It is interesting to note that the text distinguishes between personal ethics and character ethics. Personal ethics refer to how people present themselves as something separate from what they truly are, while character ethics seek to minimize the difference between the actual person and the presented persona by building up the inter-person (Nayak, 2018, p. 13). However, it appears that the concept of prakṛti is not fully reflected in the German strategy, as German leadership was not consistent with its stances and changed depending on the circumstances. It did not maintain the facade of a competent leader. Therefore, it can be said that while German leadership already reflects several aspects of the Bhagavad Gita, such as īśvara, jīva, kāla, and karma, prakṛti is somewhat lacking.
Conclusion
The main research question of this article was: How are yogic principles as described in the Bhagavad Gita demonstrated in German leadership? The case study of the eurozone crisis indicates that German leadership already reflects most of the aspects of the Bhagavad Gita. However, some aspects are clearer and more visible than others. Any future research done on this subject should amplify the scope of this study, look at more examples or take different or more countries into consideration. This study also demonstrated that the Bhagavad Gita provides directions and guidelines for a better conduct in political leadership.
References
- Bulmer, S. and Paterson, W.E. (2013). Germany as the EU’s reluctant hegemon? Of economic strength and political constraints. Journal of European Public Policy 20(10), 1387-405.
- Finlayson, A. (2007). From Beliefs to Arguments: Interpretive Methodology and Rhetorical Political Analysis. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 9 (4), 545–563.
- Nayak, A. K. (2018). Effective leadership traits from Bhagavad Gita. International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, 16 (1), 1-18
- Müller, H., & Van Esch, F. A. W. J. (2020). The contested nature of political leadership in the European Union: Conceptual and methodological cross-fertilisation. West European Politics, 43 (5), 1051-1071.
- Kundnani, H. (2011). Germany as a geo-economic power. The Washington Quarterly 34 (3), 31-45.
- Prabhupada, A.C.B.S. (1986). Bhagavad Gita: As It Is, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, Mumbai. Schoeller, M. G. (2015). Explaining Political Leadership: Germany’s Role in Shaping the Fiscal Compact. Global Policy, 6 (3), 256-265.
- Schoeller, M. G. (2017). Providing political leadership? Three case studies on Germany’s ambiguous role in the eurozone crisis. Journal of European Public Policy, 24 (1), 1-20.
- Srimad Bhagavad Gita. Retrieved from Gita Supersite: 23-May-2023. https://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in
EN 
NL