THE Covid-19 pandemic has pushed the world into a prolonged crisis, and it will continue to do so.
New variants, vaccine shortages and the struggling economy have been on the list of difficulties, but the spotlight is back on coordinating the fight against the pandemic.
Successes and failures have shaken the state of order at home and abroad.
This not only raises questions about the longevity of such order, but also changes our understanding and expectation of leaders, the sources of their power and its use.
Today, most, if not all governments, are experiencing a Covid-19 "stress test" that can make or break their credibility.
While their position allows them to introduce and enforce stricter measures to contain the outbreak, not all methods are effective and compelling enough for people to follow.
The example that makes headlines are the coercive measures to ensure compliance with the standard operating procedure (SOP).
Fines and jail time are reserved for those who defy the SOP.
There are also attempts at negative reinforcement, where citizens are expected to comply with the SOP if they want to avoid a total lockdown.
While it is one of the more straightforward and easy-to-implement strategies, it has often resulted in the opposite effect.
The lack of immediate results shows that cooperation is affected by the degree to which the behaviour is seen as acceptable and widespread.
In Malaysia, the persistence of SOP breaches and other examples of non-compliance are publicised. While these have not incited mass demonstrations, such as in Italy, the United Kingdom, the United States and Germany, there is concern that reports of non-compliant behaviour would "normalise" it.
It shows that a reliance on strict coercion produces the opposite effect.
Acts of compliance come from "owning" collective concerns. Thus, it is important for decision-makers and civilians to see themselves as part of a larger group with the same cause. Only then are they unlikely to compromise on their self-interest.
In difficult times, a nation needs leaders who can lead by example through words and actions. They have to highlight the role models and experts able to facilitate strategies against the pandemic.
Expertise must be maintained to ensure that the rakyat still trust the experts.
This is easier said than done, considering that power, influence and trust are not static elements. The government's attempts at hitting a moving target has resulted in contradictory and confusing messaging. There are constant changes and retractions of directives and policies based on public feedback and political criticism.
This, too, affects the trust in experts, like those from the Health Ministry and its director-general. The public is questioning their directives and statistics because of the lack of progress coupled with increasing infections, deaths and political discourse.
In as much as compliance comes from the competency of the leadership, cooperation must come from its intended recipients.
For results to happen, we should not forget that this is a two-way street.
The leaders among the rakyat, from community leaders to even heads of families, should play their part in keeping each other accountable and safe during the pandemic.
This not only helps reduce the trust deficit, but also provides other means of self-sufficiency while proper strategies can be developed and implemented to combat the outbreak.
While challenging and questioning our assumptions can be an uncomfortable experience, especially in such difficult times, it needs to be done for the safety of the population.
The impact of a crisis depends on our ability to mitigate its intensity, duration, underlying causes and broader economic consequences.
Progress towards managing and overcoming the pandemic needs rational behaviour from an entire population in a time-sensitive manner. Support must come from compliance and vice versa.
Compliance comes from a complex combination of skilful management of influence, persuasion and communication.
It should never be achieved through quick solutions kept on life support through fearmongering and the blame game.
The writer is a researcher at the Foreign Policy and Security Studies programme, Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia