ABSTRACT
The most important feature of leadership is realization of goals held mutually by the leader and the followers. This makes it desirable for the followers since they are not forced to follow the leader but subscribe to the leadership project voluntarily and out of self-interest, but even more so for the leader who can exercise power without bearing the costs of forcing the followers into submission. And yet, leadership is not that easy to find in international politics. The chapter develops a theoretical argument that this is due to three paradoxes inherent in leadership. First, the costs of leadership often outweigh the benefits for the leader or the followers, unless the key instrument of a shared hegemonic discourse is employed by the leader. Second, that even if an opportunity for leadership presents itself, this opportunity is lucrative enough for the leadership to be contested by alternative leaders. This contestation of an incumbent leadership project could potentially defeat the benefits of leadership for all. And third, when such possibility of contestation is real, a non-hegemonic leadership (that leads without declaring its allegiance to hegemonic discourses) may arise as a form of reducing costs both for the alternative leader and the potential followers. The chapter concludes by describing these three paradoxes at play in contemporary Eurasia as the European Union (EU) naturally takes the position of the hegemonic leader, Russia contests EU leadership and seeks to undermine it while at the same time subscribing to the hegemonic discourse, and China enters the playing field as an alternative leader without imposing any hegemonic discourses onto potential followers.
