"T A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents
189
TABLE 1 Where Have Women Ruled?
A Woman in Charge of the Country?
Women Prime Ministers and Presidents­
A (Not Quite) Global Phenomenon
Farida Jalalzai
Geographical Area
Number
Sub-Saharan Africa
9
7
Bangladesh (2), Pakistan, India (2), Sri Lanka (2)
S. East Asia
3
IndoneSia, the Philippines (2)
Central/Pacific Asia
3
Mongolia, South Korea (2)
Caribbean
5
15
Finland (2), France, Germany (2), Iceland (2), Ireland (2), Malta,
Norway, Portugal, Turkey, Switzerland (2), United Kingdom
Eastern
10
Bulgaria, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania (2), Macedonia, Moldova,
Poland, Ukraine, Yugoslavia
Latin America
9
Argentina (2), Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, Guyana, Nicaragua,
Panama, Peru
Middle East
2
Israel
Total
188
Dominica, Haiti (3), Jamaica
Europe (26)
Western Europe
Canada
North America
Reprinted by permission,
Burundi. Central African Republic, Guinea Bissau, liberia,
Mozambique. Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe (2), Senegal
Asia (13) South Asia
2
New Zealand
67 women
50 cou ntries
Oceania
Chile, Liberia, the Ukraine, Haiti, Ireland, NOIway, Indonesia, and Pakistan-What do
these countries have in common? Seemingly little upon first glance. However, if you look
a little closer, these countries have all had at least one woman at the helms of power as
prime minister or president. Now notice that the United States is missing from this list.
While Hillary Clinton captured the world's attention as she vied for the Democratic nomi­
nation for the American presidency, she failed to do what several other women have done
around the world-lead their country.
This essay explores a subject of increasing interest to the general public and political
pundits alike--women presidents and prime ministers. Of particular concern is under­
standing where women lead regionally and over time. However, the major focus is
assessing the many factors contributing to their ascensions in the first place. This spans
cultural, structural, institutional, as well as personal factors. Paths and powers available to
women are of utmost concern. Finally, their leadership styles are also addressed, though
to a lesser degree. Women presidents and prime ministers are increasingly becoming a
global phenomenon, straddling many different types of contexts including the countries
listed at the opening (see Table 1). These women are generally highly educated and
politically experienced prior to assuming executive office. However, they are still generally
concentrated in weaker positions of authority. Those exercising more substantial forms of
power are nearly all relegated to political families. Once in office, there is no one way a
woman leads her country. Leadership styles are thus varied but Signal the ability of a
woman to rule, regardless of traditional gender barriers. Overall, though increasing,
women executives are still rare and generally limited in paths and powers attainable. They
Countries
are also absent in many politically consequential countries including the United States,
and are thus not quite yet a global phenomenon.
WHERE HAVE WOMEN RULED?
From 1960 through May 2009, sixty-seven women have occ.upied the presidency or prime
ministerial post of their country. This figure includes thirteen women serving as interim
leaders. Forty (60%) are prime ministers while only twenty-seven (40%) are presidents.!
Strikingly, sixteen countries have had multiple women leaders. Haiti now heads the pack
with three different women leaders. Another fifteen countries have had two women
leaders: Argentina, Bangladesh, Finland, Germany, Iceland, India, Israel, Lithuania, Ireland,
New Zealand, the Philippines, Sao Tome and Principe, Sri Lanka, South Korea, and
SWitzerland. 2 In fact, Finland and Sri Lanka had women serving Simultaneously as preSident
and prime minister. Further, women have directly succeeded other women in Bangladesh,
Ireland, and New Zealand. These patterns suggest that once the executive ceiling cracks it
sometimes stays open for other women to come through.
Women leaders hail from geographically diverse locations. With twenty-six cases,
Europe takes the lead. However, Asia, Africa, and Latin America also have large numbers.
Among the European cases, sixteen are from Western Europe, leading many contexts
where women have generally achieved high levels of political representation and where
the public holds relatively egalitarian attitudes including Finland, NOlway, and Iceland.
However, ten are from Eastern Europe, most coming to office after the fall of communism.
~
I
190
Chapter 6 The Executive Branch: Women and leadership
Asia follows Europe with thirteen cases, In fact, in spite of low levels of female Iiteraty
and legislative representation, nearly every South Asian country has been ruled by at least
one female leader. Southeast Asia also has women national leaders from the Philippines
and Indonesia, Though women in this area have generally acquired more economic and
educational opportunities than their South Asian counterparts, they are still greatly under­
represented in the political realm and continue to fall behind men in other domains,
Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa are currently tied for third place in women's
executive representation, having nine women leaders each, Among all areas studied, it is
African women who most lag behind in educational, economic, and political attainment.
However, in spite of this inauspicious backdrop, Africa has seen many gaim for women
from the 1990s onwards. Breakthroughs have generally been relegated to the prime minis­
tership with Johnson-Sirleaf being the sole African female nonacting president to date. Latin
America is another area of expansion for women presidents stich as Chile's Bachelet and
Argentina's Fernandez de Kirchner. Still, Latin American women have made many recent
gains politically and economically.3 The Caribbean has also witnessed several women
leaders, although nearly all are from Haiti. New Zealand had over a decade of women in
power, first under Jenny Shipley and more recently Helen Elizabeth Clark.
While there are obvious gains in women's executive representation, some regiom
have had few or no women come to power. The Middle East has only had two women
leaders, both hailing from Israel. While Meir was initially appointed acting prime minister,
she later assumed this position in a more regular capacity. Itzik only served as president
relatively nominal position) on an interim basis. Recently, Livni unsuccessfully competed
for the prime ministership. Although women have served in several Muslim countries
(TlIIkey, Pakistan, Indonesia, and Bangladesh), they have never done so in the Middle East,
where most states are ruled by male-only hereditary monarchies. Women have yet to rule
in some of the world's biggest players in Asia, including China and Japan, South Korea has
had two women prime ministers, but this is a weak position. In fact, Sang served only tem­
porarily until the legislature voted her nomination down, Campbell is the only female
leader from North America and was only very briefly prime minister of Canada.
Women also seldom lead powerful countries, The only G-8 countries that have had
women leaders are Canada, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, The United
Kingdom, France, India, Pakistan, and Israel are the sole nuclear powers to have been
ruled by women:' The United States, a major economic and military force, has never had
a woman president. Hillary Clinton came the closest but lost the 2008 Democratic Party
nomination.
A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents
14l-~~----------------------~
12..
.. ................. . 10
8
6
4
2
o
1970s
1960s
19805
19905
2000s
FIGURE 1 Women in Prime Ministerial Office over Time
I3andaranaike's ranks that same decade-Indira Gandhi of India (1966) and Golda Meir of
Israel (1969),Only two additional women came to power in the 1970s. Though better, the
1980s was not a time of tnajor expansion, It was not until the 19905 that a major increase
occurred tripling prime ministers from four to twelve. The first decade of the 2000s has
remained strong with another thirteen new cases including Germany's Angela Merkel.
Iceland's Johanna Sigurilard61tir broke another important barrier in representation becom­
ing the world's first openly gay leader.s
WOMEN IN PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE OVER TIME
Women's entrance to the presidency displays similar patterns to prime ministers though this
occurred later and subsequent strides are not as great. Isabel Per6n of Argentina became
the first woman president in 1974. Women's progress in attaining presidencies was
also slow until the 1990s when their representation more than quadrupled from two to nine
(sec Figure 2) Their prospects have remained encouraging in the 2000s with another seven
ascending to power. Still, their numbers are more stagnant though this has been offset by
15
10
WOMEN IN PRIME MINISTERIAL OFFICE OVER TIME
IWl
~j
I
i"
Restricting analysis to the fifty-four nontemporary leaders, thirty-four (63%) arc prime min­
isters and twenty (37%) are presidents. Thus, women serve more often as prime ministers
(see Figure 1). This position has only been held by a woman since 1960 when Sirimavo
Bandaranaike came to power in Sri Lanka. This did not hasten a massive increase
in women prime ministers around the world. Still, two important women joined
191
5
19705
19805
19905
20005
FIGURE 2 Women in Presidential Office over Time
192
Chapter 6
The Executive Branch: Women and leadership
the ascension of a number of high-profile women including Michelle Bachelet of Chile and
Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia in
CURRENT FEMALE PRESIDENTS AND PRIME MINISTERS
As of May 2009, fourleen women occupy national executive political office, evenly divided
between presidents and prime ministers (see Table 2).They head countries in Asia, Africa,
Europe, Latin America, and the Caribbean.
To understand their backgrounds, it is essential to analyze how these women differ
in age, education, and prior political office. 6 The average age of women executives when
they come to power is fifty-three. Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan became the
youngest woman executive
., at the age of thirty-five while Janet lagan of Guyana, first
served at seventy-seven.'
TABLE 2
I
I
I
Current Female Presidents and Prime Ministers (as of April 1 , 2009)
Country
Name
Argentina
'Bangladesh
Chile
Finland
Germany
Haiti
Iceland
India
Ireland
Liberia
Moldova
Mozambique
Philippines
Ukraine
Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner
Sheik Hasina Wajed
Michelle Bachelet
Tarja Halonen
Angela Merkel
Michele Pierre-Lou is
Johanna Sigurilard6ttir
Pratibha PatH
Mary McAleese
Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf
Zinaida Greceanii
Luisa Dias Diogo
Gloria Macapgal-Arroyo
Yuliya Tymoshenko
Election
2007
2009
2006
2000
2005
2008
2009
2007
1997
2006
2008
2004
2001
2007
Office
President
Prime Minister
President
President
Chancellor
Prime Minister
Prime Minister
President
President
President
Prime Minister
Prime Minister
President
Prime Minister
'This is the serond time Wajed has served in this office. She last served from 1996-2001. Source: 'Women World leaders, 1945-2009: http://www.terra.eslpersonaI2/monolithlOOwomen.htm (accessed March 30, 2009). 1
A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents
WOMEN LEADERS AND EDUCATION
Having attained a master's degree or higher, thitty (56%) out of the fifty-four women
possess high levels of education (see Table 3). In fact, several have PhDs, law degrees,
and even medical degrees. Twelve (220/0) completed a variety of college degrees. Thus,
most have good academic credentials. Six (11%) have high school degrees and LWO only
completed grammar school (4%). Lastly, four (7%) have no or limited information avail­
able. Differences in educational attainment surface over time. Women entering office
from the 20005 and beyond routinely have completed PhDs or professional degrees.
However, those arriving between the 1960s and 19705 often only completed a high
school degree. Thus, these differences may be related more to temporal factors.
In any particular context, executives arise from specific backgrounds. Women execu­
tives study in a wide range of fields. Many pursue law school and several recent examples
come to office with degrees in economics. Quite a few are also from science backgrounds,
some with medical degrees and others with PhDs in the sciences, including Merkel
(Germany). Degrees in government are also common.
European female national leaders almost universally have at least achieved a college
degree and even more the equivalent of a masters or doctoral degree in a number of
fields. Law and doctoral degrees are widespread. Though also largely well educated, Asian
women have more varied educational backgrounds. Some never completed college while
others have masters or doctoral degrees. Latin American women are also varied, but most
recent leaders have all earned professional degrees. African cases are also well educated
and generally have master's degrees. Several like Bhutto, Diogo, and ]ohnson-Sirleaf
traveled abr<Yad for their university studies.
WOMEN LEADERS AND POLITICAL EXPERIENCE
The vast majority of women national leaders have held formal political office, accounting for
forty-one (76%) cases (see Table 4). Women are members of the national government as
legislators or cabinet officers, and several have held leadership positions. Thirteen (24%)
TABLE 4
Women leaders and Political Experience
Prior Political Office
TABLE 3
Women Leaders and Education
Education
~
~!
•. ':.1,.
1,1
l,!
Beyond College
College Degree
High School
Grammar School
Unclear
30 (56%)
12 (22%)
6 (11%)
2 (4%)
4(7%)
54
193
Yes
No
Africa
Asia
Caribbean
Europe
Latin America
Middle East
North America
Oceania
6 (75%)
7 (64%)
4 (100%)
16(80%)
4 (57%)
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
2 (100%)
2 (25%)
4(36%)
0(0%)
4(20%)
3 (43'),,)
Total (54)
41 (76%)
13 (24%)
0(0%)
0(0%)
0(0%)
Chapter 6 The Executive Branch: Women and leadership
194
lacked a formal political post, including Finnbogadottir (Iceland), McAleese (Ireland), Aquino
(the Philippines), and Bandaranaike (Sri Lanka) Only Chamorro (Nicaragua), Bandaranaike,
and Aquino are accurately characterized as housewives before ascending to power.
Much more typical are women leaders acquiring long portfolios including office
holding at mUltiple levels of government including Fernandez de Kirchner (Argentina),
Cresson (France), and Calmy Rey (Switzerland). About half served in the nationallegisla­
ture, often for several years. Of these, a substantial portion also held cabinet-level
appointments. Some also ohtained experience as opposition leader. Others lack legislative
experience, hut have held executive posts. The areas vary, but appear to cross the tradi­
tional houndaries of female/male issues and include finance, environment, education,
health and human services, justice, and even defense (Boye-Senegal, Bachelet--Chile,
and Campbell--Canada). Others were positioned as vice presidents of their countries and
succeeded their male presidents when an opening occurred (MacapagaJ-Arroyo, Per6n,
and Sukarnoputri).
While the vast majority held a formal political position before making it to the top, a
few came to power without this experience. However, several developed political experi­
ence through democratic movements or parties. Domitien spent several years as a member
of the MESAN independence movement in Central African Republic. Others were
hampered in their abilities to formally hold political office during times of conflict and strife
including Zia and Wajed (Bangladesh) but obtained party experience. Bhutto was repeat­
edly exiled or under house arrest. Panama's Moscoso de Arias Rodriguez led her parry for
ten years before winning the presidency.
FACTORS RELATED TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF WOMEN EXECUTIVE
This next section analyzes more specificdlly how women attain their positions and powers
they hold. Little scholarship has focused on women as national leaders, especially the extent
to which executive selection processes and powers relate to gender. Most studies concen­
trate on individual success stories. Larger comparative analyses of conditions related to
women's rise as national leaders are scant but derive several potential obstacles to women's
representation encompassing three categories---cultural, structural, and institutional.
CULTURAL EXPLANATIONS
Cultural explanations center on the general public's views toward women, particularly
gender stereotypes, much of which is conducted in the American context. Huddy and
Terkildsen (1993) distinguish between gender-trait and gender-belief stereotypes resulting
in men and women viewed as competent on differing policies B Belief stereotypes link
gender to perceptions of party and ideological leanings-men are associated with the
Republican Party and conservatism and women with the Democratic Party and liberalism.
Based on party stereotypes, Republicans are depicted stronger on issues like national
security while Democrats are better skilled at prOViding social services. Men are considered
,.
I
A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents
195
more proficient on defense and military issues and women superior on a host of
"compassion" issues including welfare and education.
Gender-trait stereotypes are based on male and female personality characteristics;
toughness associated with masculinity and compassion with femininity, again leading to
assumptions of men's superiority at handling military conflicts and women's supremacy at
alleviating poverty. Trait stereotypes also result in differing perceptions regarding their
suitability for specific political offices and leadership qualities. Toughness favors men in
9
executive positions while compassion is a liability for women These findings are bol­
stered by cross-national studies indicating that leaders are viewed as possessing masculine
lO
traits and that men are more likely to be seen as displaying these traits
However, most American and comparative research probing discrimination against
ll
women suggest that women win as often as men in the United States The few compara­
tive findings generally fail to confirm discrimination against women parliamentary candl­
dates by voters. 12 However, these studles are conducted in Western parliamentary systems.
Dynamic" of voter stereotypes in other settings are relatively unknown. Comparative public
opinion data, though still limited in scope, find~ that respondents continue to believe that
men make better political leaders than women. This is particularly true in Eastern Europe,
Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Crucially, there is a strong negative relationship between the
13
belief in the superiority of male political leaders and women's proportions in parliament
Once again, there is a major gap in research in this area since most research on gender
discrimination centers on legislative candidates. How this translates into choices at the
executive level is still generally unclear but there is still a distinct possibility that sexism
a role in voting decisions among members of the general public and possibly party gate
keepers, although this varies from context to context.
At the same time, sexism may be countered by other voters who are mobilized to
14
vote for a female candidate in some part because she is a woman. Women's mobilization
contributed to the presidential victories of Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia,!' Bachelet of Chile,16
and I-Ialonen of Finland. 17 This scenario depend~ on how active female candidates are in
reaching out to women voters and whether they campaign on a pro-woman platform.
Voters must also be receptive to this message, which is certainly not a given, especially
keeping in mind the stereotypes discussed thus far. However, by highlighting their ability
to unify and heal a country, their honesty, and lack of corruptibility, women candidates
have the ability to exploit traditional gender stereotypes for their empowerment.
gender can sometimes work to women's advantage, though this again depends heavily on
the particular setting.
STRUCTURAL EXPLANATIONS
The importance of structural factors to women's successful incorporation in political insti­
and
tutions is repeatedly stressed. Early research found women's educational attainment
18
participation in the labor market related to their legislative representation Other work
demonstrates the association between women's political representation and their levels
in professional occupations. 19 If political leaders are drawn from highly educated and
196
Chapter 6 The Executive Branch: Women and Leadership
professional populations and women are disproportionately underrepresented in these
groups, their chances of electoral success are reduced, However, other research challenges
the assertion that women's education and labor force participation are related to their
political representation. 20
While literature focuses almost exclusively on legislators, executive scholarship
indicates that women repeatedly enter office where women's general status is very
limited in terms of educational, economic, and professional achievement 21 Sased on the
Gender Related Development Index (GDO, which assesses women's parity in relation to
men's in education, health, and income, equality is not related to the existence of
women executives. Still, as demonstrated in the first section of this essay, women
acceding to these positions are usually highly educated and conSiderably more privi­
leged than women in the general population, High educational and economic status of
women is still relevant to their advancement. However, while higher class and educa­
tional attainment is generally crucial for those rising to power, this can and has been
achieved where women's overall status is low.
The proportions of women legislators and cabinet officials may also be connected
to their success, Lower levels of political experience is a path to national leadership.
This connection may seem more evident in parliamentary than presidential systems
because of the neceSSity of working one's way up through party ranks, However, political
experience enhances credibility and positions one within networks from which one may
be tapped for candidacy in presidential systems also, While several women executives
came to pOwer during periods in which women's legislative representation is low,
women's greater legislative representation is related to the existence of a female execu­
tive in a country.22 According to one study, Countries with female prime ministers in
Europe also have slightly higher levels of women cabinet ministers 23 However, a much
larger analysis flnds no relationship between the number of women cabinet members
and the sex of the executive 21
Endeavors to reconcile the paradox of female leaders in contexts in which Women
are generally restricted in their educational, economic, and overall political power have
recognized the significance kinship ties 25 Women executives in certain regions are mainly
limited to relatives of previous executives or members of the opposition, many of whom
were assassinated.
As seen toward the bottom of Table 5, fifteen out of fifty-four women leaders are
either the wives or daughters of former executives or opposition leaders. This amounts to
over one quarter of the entire sample (26%). Among South and Southeast Asian cases,
only India's PatH (who holds a nominal post as president) lacks familial ties. Among
nontemporary leaders in Latin America, only Peru's Lucero is not from a political family.
However, she was only very briefly prime minister, a much weaker pOSition relative to the
president. 26 The first two women presidents and prime ministers--Per6n and
Bandaranaike, respectively-were the wives of leaders who died while in office. This path
to power is the rule-not the exception in these areas.
There is another crucial factor in women's rise to power--political instability. Women
are often charged with providing unity in unstable contexts which benefits select ones in their
pursuit of power. Particularly in Asia and Africa, political independence causes various ethnic
and religious factions suppressed during colonialism to surface, The aftermath is plagued
1
A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents
TABLE 5
197
Women Leaders-System, Powers, and Paths
Europe
Asia
2
3
1S
2
3
4
3
0
8
3
0
3
9
4
2
3
6
0
3
0
4
4
2
4
Africa
L America
Other
Total
0
4
4
0
11
Systems
Unified Presidential
Unified Parliamentary
Dual Executive
Unified Pres.
Un ilied ParI.
Pari, Pres, Dominance
1
5
o
o
7
1
2
S
o
o
4
36
11
9
7
2
2
17
o
o
o
o
1
0
13
1
5
o
o
0
4
0
0
11
o
o
7
1
2
16
4
o
o
2
10
2
S
2
5
0
12
o
o
7
25
2
o
1
0
14
3
0
9
o
0
6
2
15
13
ParI. Pres. Corrective
Pari, Symbolic Pres.
7
3
Positions
President-Fu II Powers
PM-Full Powers
President-Weaker than PM
President-Stronger than PM
PM-Weaker than PreSident
PM-Stronger than President
o
7
7
2
Path
Popular Vote
Legislative AppOintment
Presidential Appointment
Constitutional Succession
Familial TIes
Temporary Appointments
13
3
0
7
6
2
2
Notes: The tally for Europe includes both presidents of the Swiss confederation. Ka.limiera Prunskiene of lithuania is not
reflected in the position category because the classification of the office is unclear; as such, the European total tn that
category is 19 instead of 20,
Under path, \tIliya Tymoshenko of Ukraine was appointed by the president for her first term, but by parliament for her
second; for the purposes of the count, she is included in the presidential appointment category.
Because the governmental structure changed three times during her three terms as prime minister, Bandaranaike of Sri lanka
is hard to classify in a position and system. Though she was the sole executive during her first term (and thus led a unified
parliamentary system), a weak presidency was created two years into her second term. Finally, a presidential dominance system
was created in 1978, which is the structure she served in her entire last term. I classified her in a dual executive system overall
since this covers 11 of 18 years in office. However, I ultimately place her as the weaker executive in a presidential dominance
system which was her most consistent type of pOSition occupied throughout her tenure. This reinforces the difficulty of
adequately placing executives in positions and systems that change over time.
by frequent regime change, evident in political murder and succession of coups. These
conditions create more opportunities to expand access to executive posts than in countries
with more stable transfers of power. The larger number of openings occaSionally benefits
women. Instability also correlates with a lack of institutional development, allowing for a
heightened role of ethnicity, kinship, or charismatic leadership in politics, opening the door
to a select group of women.
While a more thorough discussion of the gender ideologies at work resulting in
women with familial ties coming to power is beyond the scope of this essay, it is important
Chapter 6 The Executive Branch: Women and leadership
198 to note that these women are often portrayed as easily pushed aside by male leaders once
in ofnce and generally dependent upon them for their power. Their own political ambitions
are generally doubted, which is likely why they are able to secure their positions in the first
place. However, the vast majority of these women, particularly more recent cases, come to
power with high degrees of political experience. In fact, women like Fernandez de
Kirchner, Bache1et, and lagan were political actors in their own right, independent of their
male relatives. Earlier examples like Peron and Chamorro are similar to that of Aquino and
and their lack of independent
Bandaraniake's in their following their husband's
political drive and credentials. However, this seems to clearly be changing. Overall, chal­
lenges to women's political experience aL~o appear unfounded and likely stem from more
general beliefs about women's limited political capacities.
it is important to recognize that women are not the only ones benefiting from
family connections to power in these same contexts. Men from political families have come
to power in the same countries where women have ruled, including Nicaragua, Panama,
and Sri Lanka. Perhaps it is women with family connections who are just scrutinized more
closely for enjoying the same advantages their male counterparts partake of. Because of
prevailing gender roles, it is more conunonly assumed that women lack experience and the
credentials necessary for leadership, while men with familial ties, because they are men,
are given the benefit of the doubt.
Also interesting is that female leaders can help propel members of their ovv'll inune­
diate families into power through their political names. This was the case for Indira
Gandhi's son Rajiv Gandhi, who served as prime minister of India from 1984 to 1989;
daughter-in-law Sonia Gandhi, who has led the Congress Party since 1998; and grandson
Rahul Gandhi, who has been a member of parliament since 2004. Sri Lanka's former
President Chandrika Kumaratunga was not just aided by her ties to her father, former Prime
Minister Solomon Bandaranaike, but also to her mother, Sirimavo Bandaranaike, who
served as prime minister. Down the road, blood ties to Kumaratunga were pivotal in turn
to her mother becoming prime minister for a third term in 1994. Most recently, Benazir
Bhutto's husband Asif Zardari assumed conunand of the Pakistani People's Party after her
assassination. He later gained the presidency. Based on religious decree, Bhutto was barred
from thi~ position because she was a woman. Leading the entire country as president was
unacceptable-not heading a party (Anderson 1993). TI10ugh women can help their rela­
tives rise to political prominence, these ties still ultimately originate from a male relation.
Not a single woman in this sample aided a husband or child in their pursuit of executive
office without being related to a former male leader themselves.
INSTITUTIONAL EXPLANATIONS
I
I
'!l
~
Above all, institutional factors appear the most relevant to understanding the role of gender
and ascendance to executive office. Some political arrangements are more beneficial to
women than others. However, executive office is typically considered most resistant to
women because it is deeply rooted in masculinity. Georgia Duerst-Lahti (1997) argues that
executive powers are masculine because they are centralized and hierarchical, making it
difficult for women to break through. 27 Some attribute the greater success of women's
1
A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents 199
attainment of prime ministerial posts to their ability to circumvent a potentially biased gen­
eral public and instead be chosen by the party. Margaret Thatcher of the United Kingdom28
and Angela Merkel of Germany'9 are good examples of women rising to power through
party promotion and benefiting from leadership openings. This does not
mean
that elites always advance women candidates. In fact, some find elites discriminate against
women parliamentary candidates in recruitment in many Western contexts. 3D Still, some
women are actively recruited by parties, ultimately ri~ing to the prime ministership. In con­
trast, ascension to the presidency typically relies on some sort of popular vote. Depending
on how open the general public is to women candidates, this may prove difficult.
The fusion of executive and legislative authority within parliamentary systems is a major
difference berween presidents and prime ministers. Since prime ministers share power with
cabinet and JYdrty members, the traits necessary for this position are negotiation, collabora­
tion, and deliberation, all considered more feminine. Because legislatures are deliberative
institutions, decision-making processes are slower. Women are less hindered by views of their
abilities to collaborate and deliberate than their capacities to lead quickly, decisively, and
independently.3 1 In contrast, preSidents in presidential systems act independently of the leg­
islature and generally are expected to lead quickly and decisively, traits which are more often
associated with masculinity. Women's ability to bypass a potentially sexist public, less politi­
cal autonomy, and the greater acceptance of women's ability to collaborate than dominate in
32
a political system are possible explanations for meir
success as prime ministers.
The path to the presidency may also work in tandem with the rules dictating presi­
dential tenure. Whether through party elections, dissolution of parliament, or a vote of no
confidence, prime ministers may leave office at any point in time. PreSidents generally have
fIXed terms, though in cases of severe wrongdoing they may be impeached. 1hls generally
places presidents in a more secure position, also possibly working against women.
Parliamentary systems also feature party financing of elections, which alleviates potential
gender discrimination in fund-raising.
However, many systems do not neatly fit within the presidential and parliamentary
categories while the semi-presidential system classification has traditionally covered a wide
array of cases bearing little resemblance to one another. 33 Moreover, while there are many
differences berween the positions of presidents and prime ministers, very large variations
are evident within these types; not all presidencies or prime ministerships arc created equal
and this has gendered implications. An important aspect guiding paths and authority is
whether the executive consists of one or rwo people, unified or dual systems respectively.
Women ascend more frequently as executives where structures are dispersed, as in dual
executive systems. Their powers are less concentrated and therefore less challenging to the
prevailing gendered order. Further, since there are rwice me position~ at play, this incre'dses
women's odds of ascension. However, the positions
tend to occupy within dual exec­
utive structures are often weaker and more vulnerable.
To determine how powerful women executives are, I categorize countries as one of
five main types:
1. Unified Presidential: Has a president elected in some fashion who does not share power with
a prime minL~ter.
2. Unified Parliamentary: Features a
parliamentary form of government. minister powers with a cabinet in a
I
i
200 Chapter 6 The Executive Branch: Women and leadership
3. Parliamentary-presidential dominance: Power is distributed between a dominant president
and a much weaker prime minister.
4. Parliamentary-presidential corrective: ~'here the
is not dominant but possesseA
considerable powers (possibly the power to dissolve the legislature) while the prime minister
is more influential.
S. Parliamentary with weak Of figurehead presidents: Where presidents have no substantive
powers Or very limited authority while the prime minister is decidedly dominant.
Power is strongest for presidents in unified and presidential dominance systems and
weakest for figurehead presidents in parliamentary systems. 35
Based on the system and possession of specific executive powers,36 I classify execu­
tives as one of the following:
i
.I President with Full Powers (unified systems)
2. President-Weaker than the Prime Minister (dual svs:terns)
3. President-Stronger than the Prime Minister (dual sV8:terns)
4. President-Equal Powers to the Prime Minister (dual Bv,;!",n,)
5. Prime Minister with Full Powers (unified systems)
6. Prime Minister-Weaker than the President (dual systems)
7. Prime Minister~Stronger than the President (dual systems)
8. Prime Minister-Equal powers to the Prime Minister (dual systems)
Based on the stereotypes relating to gender and executive power, I generally expect
women to rule in dual systems and in weaker positions. While women prime ministers
with full powers may also be common, rarely will women be president~ with full powers
or presidents who are stronger than the prime minister.
Taking a closer look at the types of offices that women have held, it is striking that
most female leaders--36, or
from dual executive systems, therefore sharing
power with another executive
Table 5). Women thus serve more often in systems
where executive authority is more dispersed, as opposed to in those with more unified
executive structures. Only eighteen (33%) are unrivaled by another executive in their
exercise of power. These are evenly divided among presidents and prime ministers.
However, recall that prime ministers are always highly vulnerable in their positions.
Even the ten prime ministers who share power with a weaker president are still suscep­
tible to ouster. They do not have the power to dismiss the president. This power,
however, is held by several presidents who are stronger than the prime minister in
various systems throughout the world, particularly Eastern Europe and Africa. In this
only two women presidents shared power with a weaker prime minister
Qagan-Guyana, and Kumaratunga-Sri Lanka). Subsequently, of fifty-four women
leaders only nine have ever held fairly unrivaled authority in the position of president.
This includes seven from unified systems and the two from dual executive systems
already noted. However, it excludes the two women presidents of the Swiss
Confederation. They are technically from unified systems since only one person leads the
Federal Council at a time. However, the president has only the power to chair council
I
A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents
201
meetings--hardly a dominant force. Several other female presidents are mainly
such as Mary McAleese of Ireland and Pratibha Pati! of India. Sixteen female
prime ministers share power with a dominant president-many of whom can be
dismissed by him unilaterally! Thus, women executives are still fairly constrained in their
powers and often insecure in their positions.
1be circumstances under which women occupy executive office is also imponant to
examine. Findings illustrate the difficulty women have in coming to power through the
popular vote. Only presidents are subject to the popular election, though several countries
appoint presidents rather than elect them. Also, political openings sometimes occur
benefiting those in line to succeed the president. Among the nine dominant women
presidents, three succeeded male presidents from their
of vice preSident, avoiding
one of these women (Macapagal-Arroyo, the Philippines) was
conse~q'Llen't1y.37 Thus, only six women have ever attained dominant
presidencies initially through a popular election. The limitations on women in attaining
strong presidencies are staggering given the prevalence of women with familial ties to
power. For example, Latin American women presidents typically come to power in unified
presidential systems. They are thus unrivaled by another executive. Most were also elected
by the public. However, all had familial ties to power, generally through marital connec­
tions to former political leaders. The four dominant female presidents of Asia also have
kinship links. In fact, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf has the distinction of being the sole female
president possessing dominant power in a system who was elected bv the
WITHOUT familial ties to power.
Johnson-Sirleaf's case is intriguing to analyze beeause it offers another institutional fac­
tor benefiting women-the use of presidential runoff elections in eases where no candidate
wins a majority of the vote. She originally received only 19.8 percent of the vote in the tlrst
round, far from a majority5H However, she finished second out of twenty-two candidates,
propelling her to a two-person round in which she was victorious against the original vote
leader George Weah. Had the winner simply commanded a plurality, she would have lost.
Perhaps the ability of a woman to place second demonstrates to the public they are no longer
a long shot candidate because of their gender. Women may also be more apt to run for the
presidency in systems where there are a variety of competitive panies rather than just two.
Although not a major focus of this essay, several women leaders only led their COUn­
tries on an acting or proviSional hasis. Many were appointed by temporary ruling coalitions,
legislatures, or presidents. However, some moved up through constitutional provisions if
held offices positioning them appropriately. Several other women in dual executive
systems were appOinted by presidents upon the dismissal or resignation of the current prime
minister and remained in their posts until new appointments were made. Again, women are
sometimes able to bypass traditional mechanisms in these cases to attain power. Their lead­
ership is less threatening since it is only on a temporary basis. Several lead during periods of
electoral transformation. 1bis is unsurprising since women are generally depicted as less
politically ambitious and, once elections are held, are expected to return to their previous
positions. Still, some like Tymoshenko (Ukraine) turn their temporary stints into a more
pennanent position, a fact that should not be obscured.
202
I
J
Chapter 6 The Executive Branch: Women and Leadership
Therefore, a combination of factors including political institutions and processes,
personal educational and economic attainment, women's legislative representation, kin­
ship ties, political instability, and institutionalization are related to women's executive
advancement. Women come to power in diverse settings, sometimes on multiple occa­
sions and generally occupy positions that are less autonomous and powerfuL The few
who are dominant presidents elected by the public are nearly always women with
familial ties to power.
Perhaps the most important lesson to take from this analysis is that not all nation­
alleadership posts are created equal. The fact that women have increased their numbers
as executives is important. However, powers at their disposal and level of autonomy
illustrate how far they have come. Also, there are still several important countries,
including the United States, that have never had a woman executive. In a forthcoming
piece, I apply factors propelling women to executive office to the question of why the
United States has yet to join the ranks of countries with female leaders. 39 I conclude that
this is due to the immense powers of the president within the American system and on
the world stage, the president's relative security, the stability of the American system,
the unified executive structure, and the reliance of the popular vote for presidential
ascension. While familial ties have been a route to office for male presidents, even
with this distinction, Hillary Clinton failed to do what other women around the world
have-shatter the executive glass ceiling. Even if she succeeded, the impact her exam­
ple would have given comparative patterns would be mixed. She, like many others, has
marital ties to a former executive. It is hardly a coincidence that Hillary Clinton was the
woman who came closest to the Oval Office. In this way, she would leave unchallenged
the dominant path women can take to strong presidencies. However, given the sheer
strength of the position and the status of the United States in the world, her example
would set her apart.
CONCLUSIONS: WHY DOES IT MAnER FOR WOMEN TO RULE?
On a concluding note, a question regarding the importance of women executive is
raised. Do women leaders exercise power differently than men? Do they fight for
women's equality and promote women to positions of power? Findings are largely
varied, ultimately raising more questions for future research. "None of these women has
been a 'revolutionary' leader, and overall they have tended to be spread across the
ideological spectrum.,,40 Gro Harlem Brundtland, former prime minister of Norway,
helped pass family friendly legislation including generous paid family leaves for women
and men and promoted many female cabinet officers. Others like Great Britain's
Margaret Thatcher and India's Indira Gandhi neither advanced women nor attempted to
pass gender equity legislation. Still, they challenged prevailing assumptions about how
women rule and ultimately our conceptions of gender. In Gandhi's case, this was
through exhibiting highly masculine traits evidenced by her winning the "title of
man in cabinet of old women,,,41
1
A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents
203
Chile's Michelle Bachellet, a member of the Socialist Party, has had to tread very
carefully as she led a multiparty coalition, and numerous conflicts have ensued since she
assumed office. Committed to gender parity, Michelle Bachclet appointed an equal number
of men and women to her cabinet. However, she qUickly replaced two relatively inexpe­
rienced women with men who had previously served in the government at the insistence
of coalition partners. 42 During her administration, she legalized divorce the morning aftcr
pill, built shelters for victims of domestic abuse, strengthened laws against fathers who do
not support their children, enforced legislation on sexual harassment, and expanded
protections for breast-feeding mothers. 43 However, a pay equity law stalled in the male­
dominated legislature, OveralL Bachelet offers an example of a feminist preSident, but still
reminds us that individual leaders are always constrained by their particular contexts,
Further, while it is tempting to conclude that the world would be a better place if more
women ruled, this view reinforces essentialist beliefs about women and ignores the large
degree of diversity among them,
Regardless of whether women leaders are committed to or even able to advance
women's substantive representation (if one can even adequately define what women's
interests are), women presidents and prime ministers challenge long-held assumptions
that women are unfit to govern. Since many countries that have broken the glass
once also had another woman follow, the descriptive representation this offers to women
is undeniable, With the increaSing number of women in these high-profile positions, the
message sent is that women arc able to rule and slowly chips away at our long-standing
association of executive office with masculinity.
NOTES
L Excluded are those serving in pOSitions not conforming
to presidential or prime ministerial office such as San Marjno. Though the Swiss executive is comprised of (I
seven person Federal Council, a president is elected by
the Assembly to serve a one-year term and is thus incorpo­
rated in this analysis. l:5ecause of the Federation of Bosnia's
nontraditional and complex governmental structure, its president. Borjana Kristo, is excluded from this list. I do
not examine nonautonomous countries since the power
stnlcture is difficult to ascertain, A small number of women have served in both prime ministerial and presidential capacities in a country. Others were offldaUy interim leaders prior to securing a more permanent appointment. Since the unit of analysis is the woman leader, 1 do not count each
position as a separate case. In instances where the same
woman held two different types of executive pOSitions, I
analyze them solely in the position they held longer,
2. Some of these countries had women servmg as tempo­
rary leaders--Germany, Haiti, Israel, Lithuania. and South
Korea, Since the original writing of this article, tithuania
and Switzerland have added additional cases of women leaders,
3, Interparliamentary Union website http://ww,jpu,org/ wmn-e/dassifhtm. accessed March 3J, 2009, 4, Uowever, only Margaret 111atcher truly headed a nudear power at the titne she was in office. tcaders of countnes who were in
before their countries became nuclear were
of Pakistan, Gandhi of India, and Meir France's Cresson, and India's current President Pati! were not in pOS(s substantively influencing defense, Israel's nudear status is unofficial. 5, http://www,upLcom/Top_News/2009l0 l/ 28IIceland_to name_openly..gay-prime_minister/UPI-90501233173420/,
accessed March 30, 2009, 6, See also Farida Jalalzai, "Women Political teade,,;: Past
and Present," Women & Politics 26 0/4) (2004), pp, 85-108.
7. If acting leaders are induded, the youngest woman ever to
hold office is Macedonia's Radmila Sekennska who was only
thirty-two at [he time she entered the prime ministership,
8, Leonie Huddy and Nayda Terkildsen, "Gender Stermtypes
and the Perception of Male and Female Candidates,"
American Journal of Political Science 37 (1) (1993),
pp. 119-147, I
204
Chapter 6 The Executive Branch: Women and Leadership
9. Richard L. Fox and Zoe M. Oxley, "Gender Stereotyping
in State Executive Elections: Candidate Selection and
Success," journal ofPal/tics 65 (3) (2003), pp. 83:Hl50.
10. Sabine Sczesny, Janine Bosak, Daniel Neff, and Birgit
Schuns, "Gender Stereotypes and the Attribution of Leadership
Traits: A Cross-Cultural Comparison," Sex Roles 41 (11) (2004),
pp. 631-645.
11. Kathleen Dolan, Voring for Women, How tbe Public
Evaluates Women Candidates (Boulder, CO: Westview
Press, 2004).
12. Jerome H. Black and Lynda Erickson, "Women
Candidates and Voter Bias: Do Women Politicians Need to
Be Better'" Electoral Studies 22 (I) (2003), pp. 81-100.
13. Pamela Paxton and Melanie M. Hughes. Women, Politic>
and Power.' A Global Perspective. (Los Angeles CA: Pine Forge
Press, 2007).
14. Susan J. CarroIl, "Voting Choices: Meet You at the
Gender Gap," in Susan J CarroIl and Richard L. Fox (Eds.),
Gender and Elections, Shaping tbe Future of American
Politics (New York: Cambridge UniverSity Press, 2006),
pp.74-96
15. Melinda Adams, "Women's Executive Leadership in
Africa: Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf and Broader Patterns of
Change," Politics & Gender 4 (3) (2008). pp. 475--485
16. Marcela Rios Tobar, "Seizing a Window of Opportunity:
The Election of President Bachelet in Chile," Politics &
Gender 4 (3) (2008). pp. 509-519.
17. Anne Maria Holli, "Electoral Reform Opens Roads to
Presidency for Finnish Women," Polilics & Gender 4 (3)
(200S), pp. 496--509.
18. Frances Rosenbluth, Rob Salmond. and Micllitel F. Thies.
"Welfare Works: Explaining Female Legislative Representation,"
Politics & ('"meier 2 (2) (2006), pp. 165-192.
19. R. Darcy, Susan Welch, and Janet Clark, Women,
Elections and Representation (New York: Longman, 1987).
20. Gwen Moore and Gene ShackIllan, "Gender and
AuthOrity. A Cross National Study," Social Science Quarterly
77 (1996), pp. 273-288.
21. Farida Jalalzai, "Women Rule-Shattering the Executive
Glass Ceiling," Politics & Gertder 4 (2) (2008), pp. 1-27.
22. fIJid.
2.3. Rehecca Howard Davis,
Women {I,nd Power in
Parliamentary Democracies, Cabinet Appo'rttments Irz
Western Europe, 1968-1992 (Lincoln, NE: University of
Nebraska Press.
24. Farida Jab!zai, "Women Rule-Shattering the Executive
Glass Ceiling." Politics & Gender 4 (2) (2008), pp. 1-27.
25. Piper Hodson, "Routes to Power: An Examination of
Political Cllitnge, Rulership, and Women's Access to Executive
Office," in MaryAnne Borelli and Jam,'! M. Martin (Eels.), The
Otber Elites (Boulder, CO: Lynne Riellller, 1997), pp. 33-47.
26. Miki Caul Kittilson and Kim Pridkin, "Gender, Candidate
Portrayals and Election Campaigns: A Comparative
Perspective," Politics & Gender 4 (3) (2008), pp. 371-392.
27. Georgia Duerst-Lahti, "Reconceiving Theories of Power:
Consequences of Masculinisnl in the Executive Branch," in
MaryAnne Borelli and Janet M. Martin (Eds.), The Otber
Hlites (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997), pp. 11-32.
28. Anthony
Case of Margaret Thatcher," The Britisb journal ofPolitical
Science 32 (3) (2002), pp. 435--454
29. Clay Clemens, "From the OULside in: Angela Merkel as
Opposition Leader, 2002-2005," German Politics & Society
24 (3) (2006). pp. 41-81.
30. David Niven, "Party Elites and Women Candidates: TI,e
Shape of Bias," Women & Politics 19 (2) (1998), pp. 57-<10.
31. Georgi(l Duerst-Lahti, "Reconceiving Theories of Power:
Consequences of MasculinL'lm in the Executive Branch," in
MaryAnne Borelli and Janet M. Martin (Eds.), The Otber
Elites, (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997), pp. 11·32.
32. farida Jalalzai, "Women Rule-Shattering the Executive
Glass Ceiling," Politics & Gender 4 (2) (2008), pp. 1-27.
33. Alan Siaroff, "Comparative Presidencies: The Inadequacy
of the PreSidential, Semi-Presidential and Parliamentaty
Distinction," European Journal of Political Researcb 42 (3)
(2003), pp. 287-312.
34. Farida Jalalzai, "Women Rule-Shattering the Executive
Glass Ceiling," Politics & Gerzder 4 (2) (2008), pp. 1-27.
35 These claSSifications are also based on presidential powers
tallied above (see Siamff, 2003).
36. Powers investigated include making pivotal appoint­
ments, chairing cabinet meetings vetoing legislation,
declaring unlimited long-term emergency or decrees, playing
a major role in policy formation including foreign policy
and defense, being integral to governmental formation, and
dissolving the legislature at will (see also Siaroff, 2003).
37. Isabel Peron (Argentina) was deposed in a coup before
her term was over while Sukarnoputri Ondonesia) lost a
runoff election.
3S. Melinda Adams, "Women's Executive Leadership in
Africa: Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf and Broader Patterns of
Change," Politics & Gender 4 (3) (2008), pp. 475--485.
39. Farida Jalalzai, "Madame President: Gender, Power and
the Comparative Presidency," journal of W)merz, Politics &
Policy (forthcommg 2010).
40. Michael A. Genovese, "Women as National Leaders:
What do We Know!" in Michael A. Genovese (Ed), Women
as Nationall.eaders (I.ondon: Sage, 1993), pp. 211-218.
42. Eleanor Clift, "Leadership Meets Machismo: Chile's First
Woman President Is Getting Mixed l(eviews as She Tries to
Impose Gender Parity on Her Government. A Tale of
Instinct, Dialogue and the Santiago Bus Service,"
Newsweek 2007, http.//www.newsweek.com/id/34804/
page/I, accessed April 16, 2009.
43. Daniela Estrada, "Chile, Progress for Women, but Still a Yawning Gap." Interpress Service, March 6. 2009. ipsnews.netlnews.asp?idncws=46007, accessed j
2009. 1
I
A Woman in Charge of the Country? Women Prime Ministers and Presidents
u
205
FURTHER READINGS
Duerst-Lahti, Georgia. "Reconceiving Theories of Power:
Consequences of Masculinism in the Executive Branch,"
in MaryAnne Borelli and Janet M. Martin (Eds,) The Otber
Elites. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp. 11-32.
Genovese, Michael A. (Eds), Women as National Lead<'YS.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993.
Hodson,
Change', Rulership, and Women's Access to Executive
OlIke," in MaryAnne Borelli and Janet M. Martin (Eds.)
The Otber Elites. Boulder, co: Lynne Rienner, 1997,
pp.33-47.
Huddy. Leonie and Nayda Terkildscn. "Gender Stereotypes and
the Pen:eption of Male and Female candidates," American
Journal ofPolitical Science, 37 (1) (1993), pp. 119-147.
Jalalzai, Farida, "Women Political Leaders: Past and
Present," Women & Politics 26 0/4) (2004), pp. 85--108.
Jalalzai, Parida, "Women Rule: Shattering the Executive
Glass Ceiling," Politics & Gender 4 (2) (2008), pp. 1-27.
Siaroff, Alan, "Comparative Presidencies: The Inadequacy of
rhe Presidential, Semi-PreSidential and Parliamentary
Distinction," European Journal of Political Researcb
42 (3) (2003), pp. 287-312.