Vision - differentiates leaders from others

Leaders have one special thing which others don't have. They have clarity of thoughts. They are certain of what they want, why they want and manner in which the achievement of aim is acceptable. They have a vision. Gandhiji, one of the most prominent leaders of the world, had very clear vision that he wanted independent, peaceful and united India. Most often people forget the peaceful aspect of this independence .. At the time of struggle of independence, the movement was clearly divided into two camps, one was of the followers of Gandhiji's priciples of ahimsa, satyagrah and the second was of the armed fighters, rebels, krantikaari.
The disadvantage with the armed resistance was that English government was best prepared for these type of movements, also the government had experience of tackling and suppressing them. It would have taken atleast a millennium more for such movement to be successful because the inventory ( guns, bullets, bombs, training) needed was expensive and rare, also this method was direct violation of law. Even if we would have got the independence, the nation would have easily slide into a civil war which inturn is equally undesirable. The situation might have been similar to what it is presently in some African nations like Sudan, Somalia, Congo etc. The region would have been divided in to many subregions with the most powerful gang in the region ruling. Also, taking weapons away from the general public would be a task impossible even to imagine.
What Gandhiji provided was not just independence but peaceful independence. The English government had no idea how to tackle a peaceful movement, they were confused. They first chose not to highlight Gandhiji by ignoring/under-mining his deeds, and later found him unstoppable.
The Hindu-Muslim riots just after the partition is a dark period in the india's modern history. However the riots would have been worse had both sides were equipped with weapons. Today the toll of those riots seems insignificant if one is to consider the degree of closeness of habitat of people of both communities. And these riots weren't a new thing, rift was present almost all along the past.
Gandhiji was able to mobilize such a huge population because the enemy was clear, distinct an outsider, someone who was not among us. He worked with the farmers, loom workers, potters and other labours which constituted the general population. This helped him connect with the general public and gain their confidence. Although he was against casteism and religionism and he himself treated people from all the caste and religion alike, he wasn't very successful at changing perception of the masses. It is tougher to turn one against oneself. It is hard to order self and obey. Sometimes it work and many times it doesnt. It is same as when you decide to study for the next exam in time while struggling with preparation of the present exam.
At an individual level he has done more than enough for the country, but at level of a leader his failure to create religious harmony can be attributed to his age. Neither he was physically strong at the time of independence nor he got much time to focus on these problems. Had we got the independence a bit earlier he might have done even this for us.
One more area where he failed is creating second rung leaders who would carry on with his mission. Nehru, Patel, and others were great leaders but weren't as great as he was.