Shehbaz Sharif Summit of Sycophancy

Ashok Ogra
ashokogra@gmail.com
“Flattery will get you everywhere.” This line, attributed to the actress Mae West, came to one’s mind, when watching Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s lavish praise on the US President Donald Trump at the just concluded summit on Gaza at Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt.
In a clever move,President Trump prompted Shehbaz Sharif to speak-perhaps knowing that other leaders would be hesitant to indulge in flattery. True to form, Sharif readily obliged, calling Trump a “man of peace” and even recommending him for the Nobel Peace Prize- second time.
It is possible the Pakistan PM was taking a leaf from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte’s realization that appealing to Trump’s ego could yield results.
The reputed US newsmagazine TIME aptly captures this approach: Putin, who stopped flattering Trump, lost ground as a result. Both Zelensky and Rutte’s “flattery diplomacy” may seem sycophantic, but it has revitalized NATO unity and revived US backing for Ukraine.
This explains why Trump, once dismissive of NATO and indifferent to Ukraine, has now reversed course-pledging weapons sales to Europe for Ukraine and reaffirming his commitment to NATO.
It is true that other world leaders too have learned that the key to managing Trump in his second term is flattery, patience, and adaptability. At summits,leaders now praise him lavishly, orchestrate shorten meetings, and avoid contentious topics. Having watched his unpredictable style-driven by instinct, ego, and “America First” rhetoric-they focus on reading his moods rather than his policies. Trump’s erratic shifts, social media outbursts, and rapid policy reversals have turned diplomacy into performance, forcing leaders to adjust strategy around his impulses rather than traditional negotiation.
However,Shehbaz Sharif went a step further when he startled the audience comprising heads of states/ governments by lavishing excessive praise on Donald Trump. The Pakistan Prime Minister overlooked a simple fact: the claim that Donald Trump stopped multiple wars and averted nuclear escalation is contestable and not clearly established. Why confuse the achievement of a temporary ceasefire with the attainment of permanent peace?
This conduct of Shehbaz Sharif has also not gone down well in Pakistan particularly among its masses in general, and intelligentsia in particular. Already, recent anger and violence in Muridke near Lahore, among a large section of Islamist-leaning populations, reflects their perception of their leader’s remarks as a betrayal of Palestinian solidarity.
The episode also highlights Pakistan’s enduring dilemma: balancing Western (read: U.S.) diplomatic dependence with managing Islamic-populist expectations, revealing a deep disconnect between diplomats’ messaging abroad and the grassroots mood at home.
In a scathing commentary carried by the largest circulated English newspaper of Pakistan, THE DAWN, Ahmad Sajjas Malik writes that ‘in a hall meant for sober diplomacy, Shehbaz Sharif remarks seemed theatrically misplaced – “a volley of high praise” that drew “hesitant applause and instant headlines.”Yet, what appeared as a gaffe revealed a deeper truth about Pakistan’s diplomacy: flattery defining its foreign policy.
Flattery in diplomacy-polished, deliberate, and psychologically precise-has long served as one of the most effective instruments for persuasion and statecraft.From monarchs and revolutionaries to presidents and autocrats, leaders have wielded or succumbed to flattery to open doors that brute force could not.
During the 2nd World War, Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill perfected mutual flattery as political glue. Churchill hailed Roosevelt as “the greatest man I have ever known,” while Roosevelt, aware of Churchill’s imperial self-image, assured him that he was “carrying the torch of civilization.” Such exchanges softened ideological tensions and sustained cooperation even as their war aims diverged.
The same subtle craft was evident in Richard Nixon’s historic 1972 meeting with Chairman Mao Zedong in what was then known as Peking.Nixon’s opening remark-“You have changed the world”-was no mere compliment but a calculated nod to Mao’s revolutionary ego. Mao replied in kind, and breakthrough followed. Nixon’s words transformed suspicion into dialogue, signalling to China that the United States respected its sovereignty and global stature.
In post-colonial Asia, flattery became a bridge between superpowers and the newly independent world. During Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev’s 1955 visit to India, he called Jawaharlal Nehru a “wise statesman” and India “the cradle of ancient civilization.” The compliment sought to align India with the Soviet bloc through admiration rather than coercion. Nehru reciprocated by calling Khrushchev’s visit “a gesture of friendship from a great people,” proving that warmth could achieve what ideology could not.
Modern diplomacy has continued this tradition, often blurring sincerity and spectacle. Donald Trump’s effusive praise of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un-calling him “a very talented man” and later declaring “we fell in love”-was ridiculed at home but functioned tactically. Kim, long isolated, responded to the validation, creating an unprecedented diplomatic opening. The episode showed that even autocrats crave acknowledgement as equals.
Historically too, imperial powers institutionalized flattery to maintain control. When the British consolidated power, they reinvented the culture of flattery-this time, as an instrument of control. They awarded titles such as Rai Bahadur, Khan Bahadur, and Sir, flattering Indian elites into loyalty.
However, the archetype of diplomatic flattery, however, remains Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand, Napoleon’s wily foreign minister. Talleyrand could make monarchs feel omnipotent while quietly bending them to his will. His dictum-“Speech was given to man to disguise his thoughts”-captures the essence of flattery as both performance and persuasion.
Thus, as is evident, in every age, flattery succeeds because it satisfies a universal craving: the desire for respect and recognition. In diplomacy, as in life, leaders tend to respond less to logic than to affirmation of their importance. It reminds us that persuasion often begins not with policy, but with the simple act of making another feel seen, valued, and remembered.
However, let me add a caveat: sincere and timely flattery can build bridges faster than treaties, but when excessive or insincere, it collapses into ridicule and mistrust. It is on this perilous edge that the Pakistan Prime Minister faltered, abandoning the dignity his office demands. Shahbaz Sharif’s effusive praise of Trump offers a striking illustration of former U.S. diplomat Adlai Stevenson’s warning: “Flattery may be acceptable in small doses, but when fully ‘inhaled’ it risks losing sincerity, judgment, or dignity.”
What could have been a nuanced diplomatic gesture became a spectacle of servitude, exposing vulnerabilities that undermined both the Pakistan PM’s authority and the nation’s standing.
Yet, as a reward, the IMF this week reached a staff-level agreement with Pakistan for another $1.2 billion loan to help stabilize its perennial balance-of-payments crisis.
Meanwhile, neither Rutte nor Zelensky nor even Israel ‘s Benjamin Netanyahu can claim the prize of flatterer-in-chief; surely that honour goes to Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sherif. His remarks were received with disbelief by all those present at the historic peace agreement signing table. Diplomats whispered; social media mocked. Yet the only man who mattered in that room- US President Donald Trump- smiled. And in geopolitics, sometimes one man’s applause outweighs a world’s laughter.
(The author works for reputed Apeejay Education Society, New Delhi)

The post Shehbaz Sharif Summit of Sycophancy appeared first on Daily Excelsior.

News