US Public Wants "New Approach" on Foreign Policy

US Public Wants "New Approach" on Foreign Policy

US Public Wants "New Approach" on Foreign Policy

by Jim Lobe

Understatement of the Century!

WASHINGTON - More than 70 percent of the U.S. public, including nearly half of self-identified Republicans, say they prefer candidates for Congress in the Nov. 7 mid-term elections who will pursue a "new approach" to U.S. foreign policy, according to a new survey released here Friday by the Programme on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA). The survey, which echoes many of the key findings of two other recent major polls of U.S. foreign policy attitudes, found that voters are increasingly disillusioned with critical aspects of policy preferences of the administration of President George W. Bush, particularly his reliance on military power, penchant for unilateral action, and disdain for international opinion. "Voters are calling for a sea change in U.S. foreign policy," said PIPA's director, Steven Kull, who noted that, unlike most mid-term elections, foreign policy has taken centre stage in this year's Congressional races. "They want less emphasis on military force, and more on soft power." Among other findings, the latest poll found that more than two-thirds of respondents (68 percent) said they were "dissatisfied with the position of the United States in the world", a sharp increase from the 30 percent who said they were dissatisfied during the first weeks of the Iraq war in April 2003, and up 14 percent from a Gallup poll taken just last February. Moreover, a surprising 44 percent of Republicans said they were dissatisfied with the U.S. position in the latest survey, which surveyed a representative, randomly selected sample of 1,058 adults across the country Oct. 6-15. Nearly nine out of 10 respondents said they believed that it is either "somewhat" (40 percent) or "very" important for people in other countries to feel goodwill toward the U.S. Eighty-four percent of self-identified Republicans agreed. The survey comes amid a growing consensus among professional political analysts that Democrats will regain control of the House of Representatives for the first time since 1994 and have an even chance at retaking the Senate, as well. It is the latest in a series of in-depth polls released over the past two weeks that have shown widespread and unusually intense disapproval of Bush's stewardship of foreign policy, particularly in the Iraq and the Middle East, and more generally of his emphasis on military power and indifference to foreign public opinion, especially in the Islamic world. A poll released earlier this week by Public Agenda and Foreign Affairs journal, a publication of the influential Council on Foreign Relations, found that nearly two-thirds of respondents believe that the world feels negatively about the United States. Moreover, nearly 90 percent said they considered that such feelings constitute a threat to U.S. national security. It also found that nearly 80 percent of respondents believe the world is becoming more dangerous -- 43 percent said "much more dangerous" -- and an even higher 83 percent said they were worried either "a lot" or "somewhat" about "the way things are going for the U.S. in the world" today. A second poll released last week by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found that around two-thirds of the public believes that the Iraq war has not reduced the threat of terrorism, will not lead to the spread of democracy in the Middle East, and has worsened U.S. relations with the Islamic world. Some three out of four respondents said they worry about the U.S. playing the role of "world policeman" more than it should. The PIPA poll made similar findings. It found, for example, that 65 percent of the public believe that the Bush administration has been "too quick to get American military forces involved" in dealings with foreign countries -- up from 59 percent two years ago -- and that 78 percent of respondents, including 64 percent of Republicans, believed that the Bush administration's conduct of foreign policy had "decreased" goodwill toward the U.S. overseas. Two-thirds of the public, including 52 percent of Republicans, said they believed the administration "should put more emphasis on diplomatic and economic methods" in the fight against terrorism -- up from 58 percent three years ago. Conversely, only 30 percent of respondents said the administration should put more emphasis on military methods or maintain the present balance, down from the 39 percent who took that position in 2003. Among Republicans, the comparable percentages fell from a strong majority of 59 percent to a minority of 48 percent. The survey also found a strong preference for Congressional candidates who favour increasing multilateral cooperation. Nearly three out of four respondents, including Republicans, said they would prefer Congressional candidates who believe that "the U.S. should do its share in efforts to solve international problems together with other countries" as opposed to "continu(ing) to be the pre-eminent world leader in solving international problems" (nine percent; 16 percent of Republicans); or "withdraw(ing) from most efforts to solve international problems" (16 percent, 11 percent of Republicans). Kull stressed that he didn't see a big "surge" in support for multilateralism or opposition to unilateralism in the latest results, but that support for multilateralism is "congealing and organising in the context of the current Congressional elections." Noting that U.S. citizens have traditionally supported multilateralism, he said, "There’s an accumulating feeling that 'when are we going to get back on track?'" Asked their reaction to the statement, "For the U.S. to move away from its role as world policeman and reduce the burden of its large defence budget, (it) should invest in efforts to strengthen the U.N.'s ability to deal with potential conflicts in the world," 68 percent of all respondents, including 53 percent of Republicans, agreed. Asked to choose between two principles for U.S. foreign policy -- that Washington should use its power "to make the world be the way that best serves U.S. interests and values" or that Washington "should coordinate its power together with other countries according to shared ideas of what is best for the world as a whole" -- 79 percent, including 75 percent of Republicans, chose the second option. On more specific policies, respondents were asked to choose between two alternatives for dealing with hostile countries, such as Iran and North Korea -- whether to demand that they first suspend their objectionable conduct before entering talks or to not impose pre-conditions before entering into talks. A majority of 55 percent of all respondents chose the second option, although half of Republicans chose the first. Asked whether anti-U.S. attitudes in the Middle East were based mostly on "dislike of American values" or on "dislike of American policies" in the region, 62 percent of all respondents chose the latter. Nearly 60 percent of Republicans, on the other hand, chose the former, which is generally consistent with the administration's position. Thirty-four percent of the sample's respondents identified themselves as Republicans; 43 percent as Democrats; and 23 percent as Independents. Commenting on the poll, Lael Brainerd, director of the Brookings Institution's Global Economy and Development Centre and former senior National Security Council official under President Bill Clinton, concluded that "Americans feel the need to rebalance the country's approach to the world."

Poll of US Public Finds Growing Anxiety About World Affairs

Poll of US Public Finds Growing Anxiety About World Affairs

Thanks for starting to get a clue america

WASHINGTON - Five years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon, the U.S. public has become increasingly anxious about world events and the role that their country is playing in them, according to the latest "Confidence in U.S. Foreign Policy" survey released here Wednesday by a non-partisan group, Public Agenda, and Foreign Affairs journal.

The survey found a substantial increase in the percentage of respondents that gave the administration failing grades on most of some two dozen foreign policy issues, compared to the January poll and a previous one conducted in June, 2005.

The survey, which was overseen by legendary pollster Daniel Yankelovich, found a substantial rise in concern about how the U.S. is perceived in the world and particularly in predominantly Muslim countries, compared to the last survey, which was conducted in January.

Nearly 90 percent of respondents said they considered it a threat to U.S. national security when "the rest of the world sees the United States" in a negative light.

Nearly two-thirds of respondents said the world currently feels either "somewhat" or "very" negatively toward the country, while nearly four in five said they believe the country is seen as "arrogant".

"It's not just a matter of (wanting to be) well-loved or nice," stressed Yankelovich in a conference call for journalists Tuesday. "People see it as threatening to our national security."

The survey queried 1,001 randomly chosen adults Sep. 5-18, the same period that President George W. Bush made of number of high-profile appearances to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and defend the continued U.S. presence in Iraq.

It also found that nearly 80 percent of respondents believe the world is becoming more dangerous for the U.S. and its citizens. A 43-percent plurality said it was becoming "much more dangerous".

The perception of greater danger was largely due to concerns about the Middle East, which was cited by 42 percent of respondents as the greatest foreign policy problem facing the country, far ahead of any other single concern and six points higher than the January survey.

Fears about terrorism and Islamic extremism have also increased markedly over the past year, according to the survey, while concern about Iraq, while relatively stable over the same period, remains sufficiently high to be considered at a "tipping point"; that is, an issue on which public opinion is so intense that politicians -- as many incumbent lawmakers are finding in the ongoing mid-term campaigns -- cannot afford to ignore it.

Indeed, according to virtually all political analysts here, public dissatisfaction with the Iraq war has become by far single biggest obstacle to Republican chances of retaining control of both houses of Congress in the Nov. 7 elections. Polls this month have consistently shown that nearly two-thirds of the public disapprove of the way Bush is handling the war.

According to Yankelovich, a tipping point is reached when the vast majority of the public says they are concerned about an issue, with more than 50 percent insisting that they are a concerned "a lot", and when majorities believe that the government can do something about it. According to the latest survey, 55 percent say they worry "a lot" about the casualty toll in Iraq.

Last January, the survey found that, in addition to Iraq, a "tipping point" had been reached on the importance of reducing U.S. dependence on foreign energy supplies. But the percentage of respondents who said that they "worry a lot" about that problem fell from 55 percent to 46 percent in the latest poll -- perhaps a reflection of the steep plunge in gasoline prices since the summer.

Concern about two other issues that were approaching a "tipping point" earlier this year -- illegal immigration and preventing jobs from moving overseas -- has also receded somewhat over the past nine months, as fears about a new terrorist attack and growing hatred of the U.S. in Muslim countries have grown, according to the survey.

The latest survey introduced a new "Foreign Policy Anxiety Indicator" -- based on answers to five questions, including whether the world saw the U.S. in a positive or negative light and whether the world had become more or less dangerous to the U.S. and its citizens -- designed to measure to measure the degree of confidence the public has in U.S. foreign policy at any one time.

Other questions included how worried respondents were about the way things are going for the U.S. in the world (83 percent said they are worried either "a lot" or "somewhat"); how successful the U.S. is as a leader working toward a more peaceful and prosperous world (69 percent rated its performance " fair" or "poor"); and whether U.S. relations with the rest of the world are on the right or wrong track (58 percent chose wrong).

On a scale of 0 to 200, where 0 connotes complete confidence and 200 panic, the index determined a current score of 130: in Yankelovich's words, "troubling, not yet dire, but quite troubling".

"This level of public anxiety, combined with Americans' disapproval of the nation's current course, is not something leaders can just dismiss," he noted.

Underlining that finding was the low degree of confidence shown by respondents in the administration's ability to achieve its key foreign policy goals. Less than a third of respondents gave the administration As or Bs on achieving its objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan; less than a quarter on reducing U.S. dependence on foreign energy sources; and less than a fifth on improving relations with Muslim countries or protecting U.S. borders from illegal immigration.

Indeed, the survey found a substantial increase in the percentage of respondents that gave the administration failing grades on most of some two dozen foreign policy issues, compared to the January poll and a previous one conducted in June, 2005.

"It's a combination of mounting threats from all over the place, and (the sense) that we don't seem to have any real control in responding to it," said Yankelovich, who compared the "growing uneasiness or malaise" to the late 1970s when the country suffered a number of foreign policy reverses and persistent inflation and unemployment, dooming the re-election of then-President Jimmy Carter.

"While you don't have the same level of concern about the economy today," he said, "I think Iraq is at least as worrisome as the Vietnam (war) and maybe more so because of a feeling that the stakes may be higher in Iraq, perhaps because of its involvement with Middle East... The concern with Iraq is the linchpin to all of the other uneasiness than Americans feel."

While the survey found growing concern about alienating foreign -- particularly Muslim -- opinion and stronger support for diplomacy and cooperating more with other countries on a range of issues, it also suggested greater more intense public backing for preemptive attacks against countries developing weapons of mass destruction.

It also found that 70 percent of respondents believed that criticism of the U.S. for being too pro-Israel to broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace was either "totally" or "partially" justified -- a notable increase from previous surveys.

Welcome to aMeRiKa

This is aMeRiKan government policy:

SIMULATED DROWNING, SIMULATED TRUTH

World Can't Wait

Imagine that you are strapped to a board, blindfolded, and your mouth taped shut. Suddenly you are upended and your head is plunged below water, or water is poured continuously on a pile of rags across your face. Water is forced up your nose, you choke and gag, you cannot cry out or do anything to stop it.

Torture? Heavens no, the U.S. doesn't torture! This is only simulated drowning, as water-boarding is euphemistically called in the press.

The sole merit of Vice President Cheney is that he says out loud what the others are actually thinking and doing. When asked about the administrations use of water-boarding in a recent radio interview, Cheney replied, "It's a no-brainer for me."

Is this use of torture a major issue in the current elections? Is any major political figure vowing to put an end to this? Do people even know about it?

This is one more reason why the national emergency teach-ins called by World Can't Wait-Drive Out the Bush Regime with the Bush Crimes Commission are so crucially needed.