Moments before he cast his ballot in the referendum that could, in July, give birth to a new nation, the crack in the voice of Salva Kiir, Vice President of the Sudan, may have gone unnoticed.

It was brief and came at the end of his speech paying tribute to Dr John Garang and other Southern Sudanese who died in the struggle.

The last time Kiir’s voice cracked was when he paid his respect to Sudanese basketball star Manute Bol.

Bol, Kiir said, was a friend. They would often sit for long joking. And it was Bol who ferried journalists into Aweil to expose famine that killed hundreds of thousands dead. “What else can you remember a man for?” said Kiir.

Another time when Kiir got evidently emotional was when a long serving guard was gunned down while on night patrol in Juba in 2007.

“A leader,” says Luka Mariak Hol, a press officer at the Presidency who left in 2008, “should be in touch with his people.”

And in touch with his people Kiir has been. As the region’s leader, Kiir has embodied the emotions of his people in ways leaders often don’t.

When the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement named Kiir its chairman and President of the Government of Southern Sudan in 2005, some senior officials jumped ship. Others had to be dissuaded from jumping. Many angled for the post. In the end Kiir received it because he was not angling for it.

Eloquent and charismatic, Garang made it appear like a Ph.D was the only legit path to leadership in Southern Sudan. Kiir could not have been a better opposite of his predecessor. He may not have scaled the academic highs his predecessor did but nor did many others. The region was in the midst of war, sapping the energies of the entire generation into fighting on one side or the other.

Reluctant leader

Perhaps, for that reason, Kiir has been Southern Sudan’s reluctant leader. His hands-off approach has often baffled and angered activists who wanted change overnight. His delay in taking action against errant officials has often been interpreted as a sign of weakness.

In fact, after a chaotic first year in office, few expected much from Kiir. In one poll by the National Democratic Institute, people expressed hopelessness. The goodwill Kiir garnered upon taking the office was dissipating. The peace agreement was faltering. People wanted blood. Some said Garang would have given them that. Others said Kiir was timid. It didn’t help that Kiir was not at ease addressing people in English. Newspaper columnists, as recent as 2007 and 2006, dismissed Kiir as weak. More uncharitable things were written about him.

But now euphoria has finally gripped the new nation. At voter counting centres, voting officials have sat into the night counting ballots by lamps. One 99-year-old, according to an official, upon voting said she could now happily die if God called her.

And this euphoria has now turned the spot onto the man who has made it all possible. In the end, Southern Sudan has grown to like Kiir.

One Member of Parliament interviewed on radio didn’t want to say anything first before he poured praise on Kiir.

People are falling over themselves in praise of a man they once dismissed. His great flaws have become his greatest strengths. Few can imagine any other leader could have brought the country to this point.

First, there has been a peaceful and generally flawless referendum -- the freest election possible anywhere, by some accounts. The African Union, the Carter Center and the European Union for once joined in praise of an exercise they said was peaceful, in a country known for fighting.

One reason for the peace is that Kiir has had the ability to bring enemies to the table. Kiir has done so with the north. When Sudan’s President Omar al Bashir visited Southern Sudan a week to the referendum, few could have anticipated al-Bashir’s turnaround. He basically apologised for what the north did. Northern Sudan tried to Islamize the south, he said, but now he knows it can’t work. And the Sudanese President not only repeated the promise to be the first to accept an independent southern Sudan, he also pledged training, logistics and industrial support to the new country. Part of al-Bashir’s change was because Kiir always left a window open for talking.

In 2008, the north and south were in a standoff over the census, which with the Government of Southern Sudan resolving not to boycott. But Kiir acquiesced to President al-Bashir, a decision for which he was derided. And in 2009, Kiir sent his ministers, and he also participated, across Africa to explain why the International Criminal Court indictments against al-Bashir may do more harm than good for Southern Sudan, even if by doing this he risked the wrath of the international community.

Assertive

Second, Kiir has brought internal opponents back into the fold. And with his detached, hands-off attitude, Kiir has given would be opponents leeway in running institutions. And many, just too happy to wield that power, have curtailed their ambitions. He didn’t have a lot of options.

Southern Sudanese, a very assertive people, need a patient consensus builder, not a strongman. Kiir understood this. As President, he didn’t shuffle or fire officials until after two years in power, despite being pilloried for an ineffective government. He fired Rebecca Nyandeng, wife to the late iconic leader Garang, from the Roads Ministry and still persuaded her to take up a post as Presidential Advisor on Human Rights.

In fact, most officials he fired he did so after the public mood turned sharply against them. Thus, they couldn’t manipulate people into fighting their battles.

One SPLM guest who has worked closely with Sam Nujoma likens Kiir to the Namibian leader.

Nujoma, according to the guest, talks less, listens more. But he has a gut instinct and a wisdom that few with the highest levels of education only dream of. And Kiir’s disinterest in minute policy details has perhaps contributed to his decision to delegate much of the policy, leaving him legroom to see the broader picture.

In the end, with a new country on the horizon, Kiir has shown that sometimes a hands-off approach to government is, perhaps, the best way to make a nation.