We expect our leaders to act with gravitas. When they don't, we need to speak up

From ancient times, one quality we traditionally associate with great leaders is gravitas – a Latin term that translates as possessing dignity, decorum and seriousness. If one thinks of a Nelson Mandela or Abraham Lincoln, a Saladin or Demosthenes, one thing that unites them is a strong moral purpose, and a sense of compassion and what is right that translates into respect for others – including opponents – and for the boundaries of acceptable political discourse. This, sadly, seems to be in short supply among many world leaders today. Recently, we have seen Brazil’s president, Jair Bolsonaro, cancelling a meeting with the French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian – in order to have a haircut. Mr Bolsonaro’s spokesman claimed there was an “agenda clash” but the meeting was scrapped only an hour before it was due to happen and the Brazilian president then broadcast the snipping of his locks live on Facebook. The snub was deliberate and public. Last month it was painful to witness the rudeness and ignorance that US President Donald Trump displayed when visited in the Oval Office by Nadia Murad, the Yazidi human rights activist who won the Nobel Peace Prize last year. The US president didn't move from his seat while she stood close by, barely looked her in the face and appeared to be unaware of why she had been awarded the Nobel prize. When informed by Ms Murad that ISIS had killed her mother and six brothers, Mr Trump’s response was to ask: “Where are they now?” This, some will argue, is Mr Bolsonaro and Mr Trump being authentic, unvarnished: that at least what you see is what you get, unlike with the compromised career politicians of old. But authenticity does not necessarily mean truthfulness , nor is it always, self-evidently, more noble. Its abrasiveness might thrill core supporters but the power to shock should be accompanied by warning signs. Even some occasional proponents of this tactic are aware of its dangers. As UK prime minister, it is highly unlikely that Boris Johnson will react to being told that manufacturing groups have concerns about leaving the EU by uttering expletives, as he reportedly did last year. Going further back, China’s leadership has generally tried to be more diplomatic in dealing with its neighbours over the last few years, compared to a notorious incident in 2010, when foreign minister Yang Jiechi astounded a regional gathering by declaring: “China is a big country and other countries are small countries, and that is just a fact”. Of course, there are instances of dignitaries overstepping the bounds of civility that we can forgive or laugh off. It was unfortunate, to take an example from the 1980s, that after then German chancellor Helmut Kohl excused himself from a meeting with then British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, citing an urgent commitment, he should be spotted sitting alone in a cafe tucking into a large cream cake. Likewise, Britain’s Prince Philip has became so well-known for his off-message gaffes that his hosts now anticipate and are braced for his inappropriate comments. I recall when he and the Queen visited my school 30 years ago, he stopped to ask one pupil his name. “Gavin,” said the boy. “Oh, bad luck,” replied the duke. Similarly, the world at large was bemused rather than offended in 1992 when former Russian president Boris Yeltsin played the spoons on the balding pate of Askar Akayev, the president of Kyrgyzstan. To Russians, however, Mr Yeltin’s often inebriated antics were no joke. Nor should Brazilians find Mr Bolsonaro’s slighting of the French foreign minister, who had travelled a long way to see him, remotely funny. As for Mr Trump’s treatment of Ms Murad, I’m afraid that we have become so used to his behaviour – from the less serious, such as calling Apple chief executive Tim Cook “Tim Apple”, to the appalling, such as telling four ethnic minority congresswomen to “go back” to where they came from – that we have become somewhat inured to it. I have argued before that there is no sense in spending every hour being outraged by Mr Trump's presidency. There is especially no point in obsessing over the less harmful ways in which he veers off the path of his predecessors. But when he crosses a line that cannot be excused by even his most devoted fans, as he did by employing a timeworn and blatantly racist trope , the condemnation must be unequivocal. Saying that the US president was “onto something” in his attack, as the Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell did, is a craven abandonment of the battlements of decency – made even worse in Mr McConnell’s case by the fact that his own wife, Mr Trump’s transportation secretary Elaine Chao, is an American of Chinese origin. Recognising and defending these ramparts, whether to push back at the xenophobic and dehumanising rhetoric of the Italian deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini or the anti-Semitism of Hungary’s Viktor Orban, is absolutely necessary. This is the politics of the gutter. Forget whether these leaders have gravitas. They harm their own polities and weaken the bonds of their societies with words that seek to sow division and reap hatred. I will always defend the right of voters to choose leaders such as Mr Orban and Mr Trump , if that is what they want. In democracies, no one else gets to decide the results and voters have every right to choose bigots and far-right populists if they wish to do so. But that doesn't mean that I or anyone else have to suspend all judgment . On the contrary, we must never do so. For it is not the election of childish, petulant or extremist leaders that leads to the poisoning of politics in any country. That scenario might well be hastened, however, if the decent majority do not speak up and these shameless demagogues are allowed to define the new normal. Sholto Byrnes is a commentator and consultant in Kuala Lumpur and a corresponding fellow of the Erasmus Forum

We expect our leaders to act with gravitas. When they don't, we need to speak up

By indulging in the politics of the gutter, today's leaders are weakening the bonds of society and sowing divisions