In a nation of 140 million people, as many scan the horizon, there appears to be no sign of a different breed of politician. Consequently, the nation's future seems likely to be held hostage to the past. However, according to a BBC poll, if 83% of the population does not feel that the politicians reflect their views, it is obvious that something must change -- either in the attitudes and behaviors of present-day politicians or in who will ultimately hold the reigns of power.

Recent deliberations in The Daily Star have begun to reflect the exasperation that many are beginning to express more vociferously about the political choices at hand. No one seems to be happy. Mr. Syeduzzaman, Mr. Jalil, Ms. Siddiqui and others have laid out key issues of concern. One brings up the matter of inclusiveness, another of how the civil society movement will merely end up as a "cocktail party" conversation piece, while a third fears the same dirty and divisive politics that might ensue within the Citizens' Group. These are substantive matters. I may add the credibility issue: How widely are those in the "group" known? Is a class issue likely to surface? Whether Grameen Bank's interest rates, a subject of great controversy, become a liability with Dr. Yunus as a prominent member of the group?

Despite the challenges, uncertainties and the feelings of hopelessness, this is a time when "the people" can make a difference for themselves by making sure their choices are aligned with their interests. Many of them are hurting in innumerable ways because of the quality of politics and governance they have endured from all past regimes. If they want change, they must engage, they must choose, and they must let their vote and voice resonate with their true feelings. Dr. Yunus's call for honest and competent people to be chosen is a step in the right direction. However, I think we need to go a bit further: we need "leaders." Honesty and competence are desirable attributes, but they do not necessarily a leader make! A good first step, therefore, is to make the crucial distinction between rulers and leaders.

The leader inspires by example, the ruler inspires fear; the leader crafts an attractive vision of the future, the ruler only confuses it; the leader engenders hope, the ruler hopelessness.

In working with people the leader delegates, the ruler controls; the leader builds consensus, the ruler dominates; the leader brings issues into the open, the ruler keeps issues cloaked in secrecy and intrigue; and the leader seeks out the best and the brightest, while the ruler is interested in succession.

As a person the leader is selfless and epitomizes sacrifice, the ruler is immersed in his/her ego and greed; the leader shares praise, the ruler claims it all; the leader is humble, the ruler arrogant; the leader is trusted, the ruler feared. And the leader is proactive, while the ruler is reactive (as our scrambling politicians seem to be exhibiting presently).

As influence agents, the leader's words can energize the nation, the ruler's rings hollow; the leader is not afraid of change, the ruler is terrified of change; the leader is concerned with the moral exercise of power and the good of the many, the ruler exercises power -- moral or immoral -- for personal ends. The list is much longer, but the distinction should be apparent.

Based on history and past performance, the above criteria -- along with honesty and competence -- ought to enable the people of this nation to make a clear distinction and choose wisely. In addition, it is important that the selection criteria reflect the following: the candidates must be educated (not just have paper certificates). While it is hard to define this attribute, one knows an educated person when one is seen!

One way to sift through the list of candidates is to present them on the national media to debate their issues and concerns; the enlightened ones will surely shine as a beacon. In the US, town hall meetings are held that are nationally broadcast for voters to assess their likely leaders. With all the TV channels in Bangladesh today, similar procedures must be instituted for the candidates to demonstrate their calibre.

Candidates must also be required to present their public service records where both failures and successes are open to public scrutiny. Next in line are their tax records and bank accounts: the candidates must declare all they have and avow publicly that they have nothing else to claim at a future date that has not been declared. The same thing should apply to their properties with a justification of how it corresponds to their incomes. These criteria should bring to the surface the most viable candidates.

As I have said in the past, "choices have consequences." By making the above criteria widely known and thoroughly discussed at every level, candidate selection may be better facilitated. This is where the Citizens' Group can make a difference.

Given the above criteria, some may despair about finding the "right" candidates. I believe they are there. Despite facing difficult odds -- over the past 35 years -- of corruption, injustice, insecurity, favoritism, fear, poverty, mistrust, bureaucracy, and religious radicalism and intolerance, the indomitable spirit and the positive and persevering force inherent in this nation has battled all odds and shown surprising rates of growth in the region: an exemplary accomplishment not "because of" but "despite" the quality of governance they have endured, bred long before the country's liberation and sustained and solidified post-liberation.

Clearly, the leadership is there; what is now needed is their identification based on the proposed criteria, wide discussion about them in their communities, bringing them to the public forum, and providing them commensurate support. If this nation wants a new generation of exciting leaders to chart out a brighter path -- nay, a destiny for this nation -- the educated, the concerned, the social reformers, the civic leaders, technocrats, entrepreneurs, and the visionaries must all emerge from every crack and corner of this nation and engage vigorously and energize the masses to find a set of dynamic leaders and send them forth to the pinnacle with unstinted support.

This requires involvement, organization, dedication and mobilization, a process that seems poised to begin. And if the past is any reflection -- from human chains to massive protest rallies -- it is possible to get such a process on track again. Perhaps then a new era of hope might dawn upon this nation. Alternatively, as I have said before, if those who can make a difference choose to sit in their cozy corners and let the events of the next election happen to them, they shall have relinquished the right to complain for yet another term.

Dr. Syed Saad Andaleeb is a professor at Pennsylvania State University, Erie, USA.