A long-running myth in politics holds that leaders who sleep little and work constantly are more capable. Images of officials reading reports until dawn, making late-night calls and returning to packed schedules after only a few hours of rest are often treated as proof of dedication and toughness.
But running a country is not a test of personal grit. Because a leader’s condition can directly affect the lives of millions, chronic sleep loss is not simply a private habit.
Japan Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi recently said she generally sleeps “two hours, and at most four,” adding that she would like to sleep more. She cited policy reviews, official schedules, caring for family members and housework. Some in Japan’s political circles have voiced concerns about worsening health, impaired judgment and weaker communication.
U.S. President Donald Trump has also drawn attention for predawn messages, unexpected remarks and a punishing schedule. In a recent series of comments on Middle East developments, assessments said his frequently shifting messages created confusion in markets and diplomatic circles.
The core issue is not the exact number of hours slept. It is whether sleep deprivation can degrade the quality of decisions. Medical and brain-science research has long linked lack of sleep to reduced concentration, increased impulsiveness, failures in emotional control and errors in assessing risk. If that is dangerous for a corporate CEO, it can be far more damaging for a national leader making decisions on war and diplomacy, interest rates and disaster response.
A leader’s day is unlike that of most people. Security crises, sudden market swings, major accidents and natural disasters can erupt overnight. If the person who must decide in that moment is already exhausted, the country can pay unnecessary costs. A single remark can rattle markets, and one misjudgment can deepen diplomatic friction.
Even so, politics still tends to romanticize “sleepless leadership.” All-night briefings, dawn meetings and overloaded schedules are packaged as signs of responsibility. But endurance and the ability to govern are not the same. Staying awake longer does not make anyone wiser.
More advanced leadership manages fatigue through systems: staff filter and organize information, schedules are adjusted by priority, and leaders preserve their best condition for decisive moments. Governing is a marathon, not a contest in going without sleep. The idea that a leader must personally read every document and attend every meeting may look like diligence, but it often signals distrust of the organization and inefficiency.
South Korean politics is no exception. During presidential, parliamentary and local elections, candidates cut sleep to crisscross the country, and after winning they often present early-morning arrivals and late-night reports as evidence of sincerity. But the public wants a prepared leader, not an exhausted one — sound judgment, not dark circles, and stable results, not photos of nonstop travel.
A leader’s health is private, but it is also a public asset. The condition of a president, prime minister or minister is tied to national risk. Adequate rest, transparent health management and reasonable division of labor are not privileges; they are responsibilities.
Power without sleep should no longer be treated as a feel-good story. Sleep deprivation may be less a virtue than a warning sign. The more responsibility a leader carries, the more they need proper rest. The public wants not a weary hero, but a clear-minded person accountable for the nation.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.