The Role of Great Power Leaders in Regional Disputes: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Asian Ideologies

International Journal of Social Science and Human Research ISSN (print): 2644-0679, ISSN (online): 2644-0695 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijsshr/v8-i10-110, Impact factor8.007 Page No: 8453-8459 IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8453 The Role of Great Power Leaders in Regional Disputes: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Asian Ideologies Moh’d, Kassim Badru PhD Candidate, University of International Business and Economics (UIBE) NO:10 Huixin East Street, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100029 China. ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to examine the role of great power leaders in managing regional conflicts, with a Comparative study of Asian ideological styles versus the Western approaches. It is disputable fact that the Great Leader’s ideologies can shape the policies of a county. This means that, national, regional and international policies can be influenced by the actions of the ruling leaders through their ideological beliefs, strategic dreams, diplomatic strategies, and their perceptions which considerably impact disputes dynamics and resolves. Asian leaders are primarily focus on non-interference, harmony, and long-term stability. They often use diplomatic means for conflict resolutions and employ the methods which rooted from their national and historical background, while Western leaders are habitually prioritize their ideologies through concentrating on implementation of international law, the issue of sovereignty, democratic diplomacy, and stressing institutions such as the United Nations (NATO) to address regional and international disputes. The analysis of this paper reveals that, presence of differences in their ideologies has an impacts on how conflict are started, increased, escalated and or resolved, in a particular region which result in security dilemma. The paper also reveals that, some conflicts and disputes are the results of aggressive leaders in a particular region that often driven by their own political interests, and political survival. Indeed, understanding these contrasting leadership methods among leaders is very important for building national, regional and global order, because it will provide the general framework in formulating effective strategies through rules and regulations within nations, which ultimately shape the elected leader to bind with those rules. The paper gives analysis on recent chaotic cases of Sudan, Russia vs Ukraine war and Israel-Gaza war, and provide empirical evidence that illustrate the implications of these leadership differences in contemporary geopolitical settings. KEYWORDS: Western Ideologies, Asian Ideologies, Great Power Leaders, Regional Disputes, Conflict Resolution. INTRODUCTION Indeed, the Leaders of Great Powers play a vital role in shaping national, regional and global disputes through their diplomatic influence, strategic decisions, political perception, and nation’s military capabilities. Their actions can have different implications, can either escalate conflicts or creates the ways to peace, making their guidance in determining nation or regional stability. This paper use three disputes example as a cases of determination. The first case is Sudan, for instance, in the Sudan conflict, interference of international powers and negotiations have an impact on duration of violence, whereas leadership style and decisions made, either prolonging instability or facilitating ceasefires. Similarly, the Russia-Ukraine war proves how Russia’s leadership decisions, including military interventions and diplomatic posing, directly impact the escalation of conflict and increase intention to NATO countries, which have also affected neighboring countries and global security in general. Conversely, Asian and Western leaders’ diplomatic efforts aim to maintain the escalation of crisis and find resolutions among these conflicting parties. This situation highlighting the important of leaders’ power in stopping or reduce escalation. The third example is The Israel-Gaza war. This also exemplifies the role of leader and how leadership style may have an impact on how decisions is made on ceasefire negotiation, conducting military operations, and international engagement. These three examples, will be analyzed thoroughly in coming parts of this paper. They underscore that strategic interests of great power leaders, their perceptions, and priorities, are highly used as an instrument in shaping conflict routes. The influence of the great power is spreading beyond their boundaries, that often becomes the sources of determining whether calamities and crisis should be continue and escalates in wider range or otherwise. The great power leader’s intervention in any conflict may have either positive or negative impact, which sometime depends on the nature of conflict. For example, the regional conflicts may have different impact compare to county-country conflict or war, because it depends on how the great power leader’s relation with the leader of one part among conflicting parties. Another issues are who is going to be negotiator, what the perception of negotiator on both conflicting parties, what diplomatic and negotiation means will be taken as part of reconciliation? These are among many The Role of Great Power Leaders in Regional Disputes: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Asian Ideologies IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8454 questions that should be taken under consideration before, during and after conflict resolution. It is undeniable that, the effective leadership should remain important for promoting stability and preventing national and regional conflicts from escalating into broader and wider international crises. A Brief of Sudan conflict In fact, most African conflict are routed in political, ethnic and religious differences. Sudan is one among those conflicting countries in Africa. Historically, Sudan conflict rooted in complex ethnic, religious, and political tensions that become the source of losing many lives of Sudanese. Sudan got its independence in early 1956 from Britain and Egypt, which together were colonizing Sudanese. The divisions between the north dominance against south become the source of ongoing conflict for many years. For example, the dominance of Arab-Muslim in north Sudan and the Christian/animist in South Sudan fueled repeated violence. The First Sudanese Civil War (1955–1972) which cost many Sudanese lives ended with the Addis Ababa Agreement, whereas they agreed on granting semi-autonomy to the South Sudanese, but this was not the medicine of the conflict. Geographically, South Sudan has good soil for agriculture compare to North Sudan, and the availability of oil resource in South Sudan fueled the conflict among Sudanese as a result of declining of Addis Ababa Agreements. This was the source of rising the Second Sudanese Civil War in 1983–2005, accompanied with bad governance, and religious differences. In 2005 the conflict ended by Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which led to South Sudan’s independence in 2011. However, the regions like Darfur, and other region the violence were continuing dramatically between rebel groups and government forces, resulting in genocide and arising of humanitarian crisis. On the other hand, the long-time ruler Omar al-Bashir, were protested in 2019 as a result of political instability in the county. However, the current tensions involve ethnic divisions, resource control, and political stability, make Sudan peace and stability to be unachievable. As it has been explored above that, Sudan has experienced long internal conflicts, particularly in regions like Darfur. International actors, including great power leaders such as China, Russia, the United States, and the excellent mediator Qatar have played crucial roles in many conflicting parties including the Sudan conflict. For example, the provision of Russian military support and diplomatic commitment with Sudan underscores how great powers are involved in peace keeping mission. In so doing, Russian leaders like Vladimir Putin have underscored maintaining influence in African countries, for example, providing arms to Sudan, and engaging in economic investments, shaping the regions to believe ties to Russia. On the contrary, Western efforts have focused on promoting human rights, and democracy, but their influence to Sudan has often been limited by Sudan and Western leaders’ perceptions on governance, and competing interests among global powers as well. A Brief of Russia –Ukraine War Another example of the developed conflict which lead to war, is the Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. This conflict demonstrates how the perception and decisions of a great power leader can strongly impact national, regional and global stability as it has been argued by Tampubolon, (2022). The choice of President Vladimir Putin to introduce the invasion was driven by a numbers of objectives. The primary objective among other is to prevent NATO countries to expand their territories closer to Russia’s borders, which Moscow recognizes as a direct threat to their security. Additionally, Putin as a leader, aimed to strengthen Russia’s influence in the region and protect what he considers as an important to their interests and national security. This has no different from what he did on African countries as elaborated by Siegle, (2021). Indeed, the Russian invasion has resulted in increasing of regional instability, as a result of deteriorate economy, destroy of human right, and influence of political unrest for Ukraine and neighboring countries. Another bad consequence of this war is to disturb European security and makes challenges to the post-Cold War order. In this regard, President Putin’s leadership plays an important role in shaping the ongoing conflict. Despite the diplomatic means taken to stop this war, there is limited achievement compared to disadvantages from both conflicting parties. Indeed, the decision of European leaders and the decision of conflicting parties’ leaders have extensively influence the escalation of the Russian-Ukraine war (Dani Belo, 2023). This scenario nan be vividly seen to the response from Western nations, including European nations and the US is to pose difficulties to Russia, including posing of economic sanctions, provides military support for Ukraine, and increasing diplomatic efforts, thus; underscores how powerful leaders’ actions can either escalate or reduce conflicts. This crisis shows that top leader decisions’ can change regional conflicts into wars which then can reach to be global crisis. This example highlights the power of leader and how they influence the stability of the region, indicating how the implication of their decisions and believes in the world politics. This scenario also indicates on how power of the leader can define the nature of international relations today (see, what happen in 80 United Union General Assembly 2025) 1 The brief of Israel-Gaza conflict The ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict vividly demonstrates how regional leadership impacts on the progressing and strengthening disputes. For example, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s policies and the strategies of using military intervention play a crucial role in shaping the conflict in Gaza. His decisions associated to military involvement in the conflict, leads to aggressive responses from Hamas. Negotiation becomes unpredictable and un achievable despite the diplomatic ways employed by different 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZZS7HpXBMQ or and https://www.un.org/en/ga/ Retrieved on 06/10/2025 The Role of Great Power Leaders in Regional Disputes: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Asian Ideologies IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8455 actors, such as Qatar, US and many other nations. Indeed, Netanyahu decision and action leads to influence whether violence escalates or de-escalates, because Netanyahu’s style and from what he believes often stresses on the issue of Israel security, which can lead to prolong the conflict and makes risk for peace making process to be unachievable. This means that, the immediate military action taken by Israel army not only deteriorate stability but also put all hostage’s life in danger. In note shade, this paper argued that, if Benyamin Netanyahu aims to finish the ongoing conflict, this is possible within a day, and why is not so? While every action taken by military has got permission from him. The inversion and ranging of missiles indifferent parts in the Middle East can validate this argument. On the other hand, Palestinian leadership under Hamas in Gaza affects the conflict dynamics. Hamas’s rules and policies, and their responses to Israel administration underscore the determining of the violence level as well as humanitarian effect in Gaza. The role of regional leaders, in regional power further confuses the situation. Countries such as Egypt, Turkey, and Iran have an impact on this war, however most of these countries prioritize their strategic interests that may influence the prolonging of conflict (BBC News 2023) 2 . For instance, Iran’s administration support for militant groups, such as Hezbollah, Houthi in Yemen and Hamas in Gaza makes this conflict more complicated. The Egypt’s border policies and the Turkey’s diplomatic position are all shape regional stability. This paper insists that, the leaders of all sides do not take their position in order to stop killing innocent children, female and adults in Gaza, destruction of infrastructure, displacement of Gaza people, stopping genocide, and humanitarian aids. In fact, the decision, made by Israel Prime Minister and US President Donald Trump not to acknowledge Palestine as a free statehood can lead to escalate conflict to many years to come. However, Western nations, especially, the United States, sometime try to engage in this conflict through economic assistance, diplomatic, and even military actions by supporting Israel. This situation has been argued differently, if people are willing to finish the war, how come one nation help other nation by providing military equipment for the purpose of killing, and destroying other conflicting party? While they publishing that, they aiming to shape outcomes in favor of security and maintain peace. Dani Belo (2023) tried to show how war impact on the overall global issues. The Gaza conflict in recent years for example, particularly in 2023 has escalated dramatically, thus; highlights how leadership style, perception and decisions in Israel and the broader region may decide whether conflicts should escalate or should reach to possible resolutions. Without hesitating, it is seemed that, these leadership policies, leader’s perceptions and decisions often hinder all efforts done toward lastly peace. This situation tells us how the complexity of using strategic interests in either side, security concerns, and political interest of individual. The resent occasion in the UN assemble, when the prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu exposes his speech, many presidents, ministers, and other nations representatives left out (BBC News 2025) 3 . They did not pay attention to listen Netanyahu speech because of the perception of bias and controversy. If we try to analyze the Netanyahu’s speeches, it cannot be denied that, they are often appear as aligned with Israel’s government rules and policies, which many leaders from different countries view as controversial, especially regarding the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For example, the Benjamin Netanyahu and his strong opposition to Palestinian statehood, and the expansion of settlement in Gaza and in West Bank often isolates Israel and kindly they embrace to Palestinian ambitions. The aggressiveness of Israel regime in Gaza, indeed, leads to some European countries to announce and acknowledge Palestinian statehood. Such countries like France and United Kingdom. (Aljazeera report 2025) 4 Moreover, the increasing of Diverse Geopolitical Interests. The United Nation stands as a stage that representing countries with different social, environmental and geopolitical interests. Many member states, particularly in Muslim and the Arab world, see Israeli procedures, rules, and policies as unjust and oppressive, and thus; stands as the root of denying to listen Netanyahu’s speech. For example, countries like, Qatar, Iran, Oman, Pakistan, China, Russia, India, Moldova and other several nations have historically taken critical to Israel, which reduces the impact of Netanyahu’s speeches. Also, the availability of diplomatic tension, this means that the diplomatic disputes together with past conflicts between Israel and other Arab world have established the background of mistrust and have created suspicion toward sustainable peace in the region. Indeed, the Netanyahu’s actions towards Palestinian leading to minimize weight to his speech in the UN assemble. To finalize the issue, if someone consider the Content and Tone of Netanyahu’s speeches, he may conclude that, it was often antagonistic or self-confident. This happened because sometimes trying accusing other leaders or groups of cruel intent. This confrontational tone causes many UN members to dismiss and to unlisten his statements as seemed to be unfair and uncorroborated. But we can ask ourselves for example, why the alliance of Israel such as UK, Germany, and France be against the Israel Regime towards his actions? Why they began to reset their views and opinions towards Palestinian? Why the ICC has provided the warrant of submitting Netanyahu and other Israel and Hamas leaders to the Court? Why UN condemned the deeds of Israel regime? and Why Hamas decided to attack in 7th October 2023.All these questions need to be considered without making biases. The world has 2 https://scispace.com/search?q=-%20BBC%20News%20(2023).%20%22Israel-Gaza%20Conflict%3A%20 Esca lation%20and%20International%20Impact.%22&utm_source=scholar.google.com&utm_content=global_search Retrieved on 02/10/2025 3 https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cderxxylpzdo 4 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/9/21/canada-australia-join-uk-in-recognising-palestinian-statehood Retrieved on 06/10/2025. The Role of Great Power Leaders in Regional Disputes: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Asian Ideologies IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8456 tired to see the innocent people suffering in different parts of the world because of the one leader political interest. For instance, it has been argued that, Netanyahu do not need hostages, but what he need is to complete what he calls Israel mission, that is building Israel as ‘Greater Israel’. This can be justified by the increasing of new settlements in Palestine, especially in West Bank and recently the area nearest to Gaza, displacement of Palestinian people to un known safe place, killing them, and killing journalists, elders, women and children, causing un necessary starvation by blocking humanitarian aid to innocent people of Gaza. However, Israel insist that, what they do is to defend their territories. Comparative of Asian ideological leadership styles versus the Western approaches It is disputable fact that, cultural values play a crucial and important role in determining leadership styles and their methods to control conflicts, particularly through diverse frameworks of global cultural aspects. Some research shows that Western and Asian cultures tend to adopt different styles and level of leadership which associated with their social attitudes, habits, moral and norms. In Asian cultures for example, the style of leadership frequently follows a protective ideal or style, where leaders are seen as protectors, defenders and guiders who emphasize loyalty and the well-being of their followers. This model insists the hierarchical respect, unity, and long-term and good relationships among the followers, which can be effective in managing conflicts especially within a socialist society (Arun et al., 2021). Good example can be seen when China tries to engage in any conflict, their normality and use peaceful means to reach to the solution among conflicting parties. The world witnesses today how China, India were engaged in Russia –Ukraine war, Sudanese war and IsraelGazan war in finding last peace. Before the war began, during the war and now, they insist on peace, resolving disputes in diplomatic ways rather than military actions. On the other hand, Western leadership tends to favor transformation styles, most of the time they are focusing on empowerment, individual achievement, and performance-driven results. According to Chandolia & Anastasiou, (2020) Western leaders often encourage open communication, innovation, and collaboration, emphasizing merit and accountability. Good example can be vividly seen in this recently occasion of the US President Donald Tramp in his recommendation of cease fire which comprises of 20 agreement elements that lead to Israel Regime and Hamas leaders to accept the deal so as to end the ongoing war. However, this deals come after Israel fail to capture their hostages hold by Hamas for two years now and bring them back home, Gaza has been bombed for two years, many innocent children, women, and elders lost their live unnecessarily, people are displaced from their home, stopping of the humanitarian aids and causes of starvation are among calamities face Palestinian today. Failing of this aggressive ways took by Israel leader especially Netanyahu, leads to President Trump to help Israel and Palestinians in another side, to establish the deals which will ensure the release of all hostages, and withdrawal of Israel military groups from Gaza as the way of diminishing the ongoing war. Indeed, these cultural differences impact how different leaders address conflicts. In contrasting the Case Studies of Regional Disputes, this paper shows vivid example that can analyze and show clearly the two block picture on dispute resolution. The tension of existing geopolitical issue explores and provide nuanced opportunity to analyze the impact of leadership model on regional conflicts. For instance, the Asian leaders, especially China, tries to analyze and solve the South China Sea dispute using protective style by claiming their territory in a way that, they stand to promote economic partnership and maintain regional stability. AZAM, (2003) insists that, China’s leadership emphasizes a collective regional identity, which aligns with Asian cultural values of harmony and consent. However, Western ideology seen to be different from the same dispute. For example, the United States highlights international law and individual rights as a western approach, that often leads challenges to China. Farnillah (2023) argued that, the leadership style has been employed by U.S. with their coalitions and presence military to counterbalance China’s influence in the region. This difference in leadership styles has important implications for the country and regional stability. The tensions are increasing every days and diplomatic mean are needed so as avoid un necessary war, China’s wright do defend its territory is the needs of international system. This paper insists that Asian leaders often adopt indirect and harmonious style, which aiming to preserve their relationships towards the conflicting parties, and social and economic stability, to china for instance, both conflicting parties are important to their economic and development setting. While Western leaders might engage and favor honesty, directly and use different strategies in solving problem aiming to resolve conflict in quick way. To western leaders, they prioritize their national interests before the engagement in any conflicts, what state will achieve? What are the political and economic achievement will state gain? Who are our enemy? What kind of regime is needed in particular place and at what time? In short they emphasize of their interest. Take an example of the Donald Trump deals, the pressure within America and demonstration over the western countries symbolize how the society changed in the recent year especially during the Israel and Hamas war, which underscores the changings in political system. Trump see Israel as a burden, what they spend by giving Israel military equipment and assistance cannot be reversible, plan of reconstruction of new Gaza is another obstacle, and pressure of other European and Western countries to acknowledge Palestine statehood show the exclusion of US and Israel against world views. The leadership effectiveness in disputes resolution can be seen in different contexts. Taken an example of transformational leadership style has been related to effective and higher job satisfaction and effective disputes managing in educational sector, suggesting that, management and leaders who encourage motivation in their offices and motivate to their followers, can decrease disputes (Kouni et The Role of Great Power Leaders in Regional Disputes: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Asian Ideologies IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8457 al., 2018). It is fact that, this approach contrasts with the laissez-faire leadership style, which has appeared to be less effective in conflict resolution (Chandolia & Anastasiou, 2020). In other hand, diplomatic efforts done by Asian and Western leaders in addressing various Asian conflict, comprising the ongoing disputes such as Russia and Ukraine, Hamas and Israel, Hezbollah and Israel reflect different ways and methods shaped by historical context, political issue, and cultural aspect. This paper also examines different trips that has been taken by supper power Asian and Western leaders explaining the result in dispute resolution. In the perspective of the Hezbollah-Israel conflict, those Western leaders have repeatedly required to facilitate peace keeping through international bases, that most of time stressing on ceasefire agreements and dialogue. For example, the United Nations has addressed an important role in simplifying discussions, with different leaders such as U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited the region to help reducing and de-escalation and tried to support for diplomatic resolutions. That trips typically aim to confirm Israel’s security and stability from the Arab and Muslim nations, at the same time talking about humanitarian fears in Lebanon. Yet, the results have been varied, such as political recognition and territorial conflict leads to fail temporary ceasefire. In opposition, Asian leaders, particularly from nations such as Iran and Syria, have revealed support for Hezbollah, and other Islamic militant groups and they involved as part and parcel of standing against Western impact in the region. The clash of the two opposing ideas between Asian positions and power with Western diplomatic efforts lead to difficultness of conflict resolution in the region, lack of a joined strategy among Asian and Arabian nations also make difficulties to the situation, because they almost differ in their national interests. Coming to the Ukraine-Russia conflict, it is fact that, Western leaders have involved in different ways, such making direct talk with top leaders of conflicting parties, arranging diplomatic talk, try making negotiation, and using of international support for Ukraine. For example, the visits trips done by various leaders like European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and U.S. President Joe Biden by strengthen different sanctions counter to Russia and supporting militarily to Ukraine. In spite of those trips done, they resulted in increasing economic sanctions, and military support, yet the war continues, this situation shows that there is a limitation of these diplomatic pressure in stopping Russia’s strategic of escalation. Coming to the talk of Donald Trump with Putin, and Ukrainian President still there is no good progress in to conflict because they did not succeed to stop war. However, Donald Trump is continuing to find ways to reach to the lasting peace from this conflict, while recently President Trump make a talk with President Putin and president of Ukraine. On the other hand, Asian leaders, especially from China, aligned with neutrality, emphasizing dialogues, using more peaceful means of resolution, and condemning using of military force. The China neutrality have shaped by its principles of noninterference policy so they engaged in conflict without clearly based with either conflicting party. In this regard, China’s style insists their role and stand as mediator. They try to persuade some initiatives that will be helpful for discussions while preserving economic ties with Russia. This approach reveals a broader style in Asian diplomacy, where Asian leaders habitually balance the conflicting parties’ national interests with promoting economic ties and emphasizing regional stability. The principle of China that insist on harmony between Man and Nature always resulting to calls for peace that lack the implementation of military action, and escalation of war, which is different from the approaches used by Western block. Turning to the Israel-Hamas conflict, it has similar witnessed a deviation in diplomatic approaches. European nations and Western leaders, such as the U.S. habitually focus on helping Israel Regime by supporting them in terms of military weapons and technical issues. They always suggest that, Israel has right to defend its territories, while supporting for humanitarian access to Gaza. The visit of high level US officers and officials, aim to negotiate temporary ceasefires and simplify aid distribution, however, according to Hamas, this was a technical approach of sizing Gaza and displacement of Palestinian from their own land unjustly, therefore, the established efforts got resistance from Hamas, which regard as illegal interventions. On the contrary, Asian leaders, especially from nation state like Qatar and Turkey, have involved in the conflict more openly with Hamas, supporting for the right of Palestinian and give emphasis to the need for a win-win situation and use of balanced style that negotiate the complaints of both conflicting parties. This commitment lead to some success in early and first cease fire phase, where some Israel hostages were released in January 2025 and join to their families. However, the lack of a political will of Benjamin Netanyahu, the agreement of cease fire become un implemented. And make the Israel-Gaza war to continues while weaken longterm resolution efforts. The recent cease fire between Hamas and Israel cannot give guarantees to peace to the people of Palestinian especially at Gaza due to the frequent situation of Israel regime to break some other confined agreement in the past days. President Trump seen to force Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to enter in to negotiation phase knowing that the Hamas will not accept the deal, however, the decision of Hamas to accept the negotiation proposed by Donald Trump surprised Netanyahu despite of ambiguities of many of the agreed elements. This paper argues that, despite the agreement achieved by these conflicting parties, the peace will be witnessed in short period of time due to the Israel pressure to Benjamin Netanyahu concerning the remain dead bodies of hostages as well as the different court cases that Netanyahu are associated with. Nevertheless, the efforts of president Trump to cease fire between Israel and Hamas marked as a historical event that may result in short-term peace situation in Gaza. The Role of Great Power Leaders in Regional Disputes: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Asian Ideologies IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8458 The Institutions’ role Between Asian Versus Western in Conflict Resolution The great power leaders may influence national, regional and international disputes through mediation. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) found in Asian serves as an important international institution which deals with dialogue and conflict resolution. This institution shows the effectiveness in implementing of their duties in the region. The non-interference approach used by ASEAN make the institution to be more effective and regarded as an important body of keeping regional stability. However, some scholars see the effectiveness of this institution is debatable, because it has been challenged by the differences of member states interest, and lack of decisive leadership (Gumilar et al., 2022). For instance, the dispute of South China Sea shows the ASEAN’s as an institution is struggling, as some countries like Philippines and Vietnam find support from outside powers such as China and the U.S. this situation leads to complicate environment at the time of decision making and implementation period. This difference explains the challenge ASEAN faces in balancing two external powers’ attitudes and regional unity which driven by great power competition (Gumilar et al., 2022, and Moh’d, 2024). However, the Western institutions is differed from the Asian one, for example the World Trade Organization (WTO) provides the structure of dispute resolution which always emphasize on obedience and rules. The ongoing trade war for example, between US and China highlight how this institution function. It attempts to control and manage disputes through dialogues, negotiation and rules. However, the challenge of this institution seen to be the breaking of some rules while the enforcement also limited (Farnillah, 2023). This institution plays vital role in conflict resolution when disputes occurs, and US-China trade war is exemplified, and it has influence in some countries. When great power interest’s put as priority highlights the presence of the tension and result to threatening regional stability. If someone asks about the importance of discussing this issue, indeed, the answer introduces itself, the difference of ideologies and leadership style of great powers have intense implications for regional security and stability. The Asian leaders’ normally stress on protectiveness and collective harmony, which promote long-term stability through cooperative structures, while Western leaders’ emphasis on individual rights and competitive strategies. Most of time this competitiveness can lead to increase tensions and conflict (Arun et al., 2021; AZAM, 2023). CONCLUSION The effect of great power leaders on regional clashes and conflicts is both significant and complex. Their strategic decisions, diplomatic initiatives, and military actions deeply impact the course and intensity of different conflicts in different regions. Leaders such as Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Hamas leaders, Joe Biden, Iranian Supreme leader and Benjamin Netanyahu possess the power to shape regional dynamics through various means, including military support, economic sanctions, or diplomatic negotiations. These actions frequently have dynamic consequences in their territories and beyond their borders, and in high level affecting regional and global stability and security. Indeed, understanding the role of these Western and Asian leaders is necessary for understanding how regional conflict grow and why some dispute escalate or de-escalate. The ongoing conflicts validate how leadership style and leaders’ choices and opinions can either reinforce tensions or provide ways to diplomatic resolution. For example, the interventions of aggressive military force normally lead to strengthening conflicts, while promoting peace programs and dialogue can quickly stop de-escalation, as it can be vividly seen in recent Israel-Hamas cease fire agreement as a product of Donald Trump to make the Gaza war an end. Identifying the fundamental role of these leaders underscores the needs of using diplomatic ways of solving disputes and explore the responsibility of policymakers in improving long-term regional and global stability. Eventually, this paper argues that, the decisions and actions taken by great power leaders during any conflict are very, very essential in shaping and promoting regional peace and stability, as a result of preventing individual rights, harmony, and war escalation. Thus; will prevent peoples’ lives, un necessary displacement and destruction, and un trust to one nation to another. Indeed, the leaders have an important and pivotal role to undermine or promote regional and global security and stability. REFERENCES 1) AZAM, R. (2023). Arbitration in China and Asean: issues and challenges. Russian Law Journal, 11(9s). https://doi.org/10.52783/rlj.v11i9s.1677 2) Arun, K., Gedik, N., Okun, O., & Şen, C. (2021). Impact of cultural values on leadership roles and paternalistic style from the role theory perspective. World Journal of Entrepreneurship Management and Sustainable Development, ahead-ofprint(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/wjemsd-10-2020-0128 3) BBC News (2023). "Israel-Gaza Conflict: Escalation and International Impact." https://scispace. com/search?q=- %20BBC%20News%20(2023).%20%22IsraelGaza%20Conflict%3A%20Escalation%20and%20International%20Impact.%22&utm_source=scholar.google.com&utm _content=global_search The Role of Great Power Leaders in Regional Disputes: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Asian Ideologies IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8459 4) Chandolia, E. and Anastasiou, S. (2020). Leadership and conflict management style are associated with the effectiveness of school conflict management in the region of epirus, nw greece. European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education, 10(1), 455-468. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe10010034 5) Dani Belo (2023). The conflict in Ukraine and its global implications: Canadian Foreign Policy Journal . https://doi.org/10.1080/11926422.2023.2258227 6) Drajat, G. (2018). Assessing indonesia’s leadership in the advancement of asean political-security community under president joko widodo. Aegis Journal of International Relations, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.33021/aegis.v2i2.424 7) Farnillah, A. (2023). The china-us trade dispute in neo-realism perspective and settlement of dispute by the wto. Jurnal Inovasi Ilmu Sosial Dan Politik (Jisop), 5(2), 130-140. https://doi.org/10.33474/jisop.v5i2.20089 8) Glauber, J. W., & Laborde Debucquet, D. (2023). How will Russia's invasion of Ukraine affect global food security? https://cgspace.cgiar.org/items/e4902a36-1af8-4969-97c3-0a507 da07ae4 9) Gumilar, R., Widodo, P., & Hafizah, M. (2022). Asean modern leadership styles: a critical analysis. Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, 3(2), 314-321. https://doi.org/10.36418/jiss.v3i2.537 10) Kouni, Z., Koutsoukos, M., & Panta, D. (2018). Transformational leadership and job satisfaction: the case of secondary education teachers in Greece. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(10), 158. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v6i10.3451 11) Mearsheimer, J. J. (2003). The tragedy of great power politics (Updated edition). WW Norton & Company. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=lDzCD_C_ipoC&oi=fnd&pg =PR7&dq=%22+Mearsheimer,+John+(2022).+%22The+Tragedy+of+Great+Power+Politics.%22+W.W.+Norton+%26+ Company.&ots=4uZ0cXoTzV&sig=aTrr27OelWBQe4OezWMhAdQ4RQk 12) Moh’d, K. B. (2024). The Role of Soft Power in Great Power Rivalries: Challenges, Solutions, and Strategies, Focus on International Relations Theories: International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research (IJFMR) https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i05.28465 13) Siegle, J. (2021). Russia and Africa: Expanding influence and instability. Russia’s Global Reach: A Security and Statecraft Assessment, 80-90. https://www.marshallcenter.org/sites/ default/files/files/202105/RGR%20Chapter%2010%20v2.pdf 14) Tampubolon, M. (2022). Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its impact on global geopolitics. ESJ Humanities, 18(20), 4870. http://repository.uki.ac.id/id/eprint/9288 There is an Open Access article, distributed under the term of the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.