About Me

My photo
I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

World Opposed to U.S. as Global Cop

by Eli Clifton for Inter Press Service

April 19, 2007

WASHINGTON - The world public rejects the U.S. role as a world leader, but still wants the United States to do its share in multilateral efforts and does not support a U.S. withdrawal from international affairs, says a poll released Wednesday. The survey respondents see the United States as an unreliable “world policeman”, but views are split on whether the superpower should reduce its overseas military bases.

The people of the United States generally agreed with the rest of the world that their country should not remain the world’s pre-eminent leader or global cop, and prefer that it play a more cooperative role in multilateral efforts to address world problems. The poll, the fourth in a series released by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and WorldPublicOpinion.org since the latter half of 2006, was conducted in China, India, United States, Indonesia, Russia, France, Thailand, Ukraine, Poland, Iran, Mexico, South Korea, Philippines, Australia, Argentina, Peru, Israel, Armenia and the Palestinian territories.

The three previous reports covered attitudes toward humanitarian military intervention, labour and environmental standards in international trade, and global warming. Those surveys found that the international public generally favoured more multilateral efforts to curb genocides and more far-reaching measures to protect labour rights and combat climate change than their governments have supported to date. Steven Kull, editor of WorldPublicOpinion.org, notes that this report confirms other polls which have shown that world opinion of the United States is bad and getting worse, however this survey more closely examines the way the world public would want to see Washington playing a positive role in the international community. Although all 15 of the countries polled rejected the idea that, “the U.S. should continue to be the pre-eminent world leader in solving international problems,” only Argentina and the Palestinian territories say it “should withdraw from most efforts to solve international problems.”

The respondents tend to agree that the US should do “its share in efforts to solve international problems together with other countries” in: South Korea (79 percent), United States (75 percent), France (75 percent), China (68 percent), Israel (62 percent), Peru (61 percent), Mexico (59 percent), Armenia (58 percent), Philippines (55 percent), Ukraine (52 percent), Thailand (47 percent), India (42 percent) and Russia (42 percent). In a majority of countries — 13 out of 15 — publics believe Washington is “playing the role of world policeman more than it should,” including France (89 percent), Australia (80 percent), China (77 percent), Russia (76 percent), Peru (76 percent), Palestinian territories (74 percent) and South Korea (73 percent). Seventy-six percent of those polled in the United States also agree that their country plays too big a role as a global cop, but 57 percent of Filipinos disagreed with the statement, and Israelis were evenly split on the issue.

Majorities think that the United States cannot be trusted to “act responsibly in the world” in: Argentina (84 percent), Peru (80 percent), Russia (73 percent), France (72 percent) and Indonesia (64 percent). But majorities or large percentages in the Philippines (85 percent), Israel (81 percent), Poland (51 percent), and Ukraine (49 percent) say the superpower can be at least “somewhat” trusted to act responsibly. Although most of the countries involved in the poll had majorities who believe the U.S. was too involved in policing issues of international concern, there were mixed views about whether it should reduce its military presence around the world. Only five out of 12 publics favoured decreasing the number of overseas U.S. military bases: Argentina (75 percent), Palestinian territories (70 percent), France (69 percent), China (63 percent) and Ukraine (62 percent).

Majorities in the Philippines (78 percent), United States (68 percent), Israel (59 percent) and Poland (54 percent) favour maintaining or increasing the current levels of U.S. military bases. Armenia and Thailand lean in favour of maintaining current levels or reducing base locations, while India was divided. No country favoured increases. The survey clearly shows that the perception of the U.S. role in the world is negative and getting worse, but some publics did have significant numbers who felt relations between their country and the United States are getting better.

Most of the respondents in India (58 percent) and China (53 percent) felt relations were improving, while pluralities agree in Australia (50 percent), Armenia (48 percent), Indonesia (46 percent), and Thailand (37 percent). Majorities or pluralities in Poland (60 percent), South Korea (56 percent), Israel (52 percent), Ukraine (52 percent) and Russia (45 percent) say relations with the U.S. are about the same. No countries had majorities or pluralities who say relations with the United States are getting worse.

[It would appear I’m not alone in this opinion either…… No US 'Global Cop' role is required or desired.]

8 comments:

Scott said...

Those of us in the US who oppose the interventionist foreign policy of the past 60 years are smeared as "isolationists" and told we didn't learn the lesson of World War II.

Juggling Mother said...

umm, do you think president A will accept the very simple answer; The bible describes a 17 year old boy as an infant becuase......

it's not a true story!

ROTFLMAO

you get good spam Cyberkitten:-)

CyberKitten said...

scott - I guess people don't 'get' the subtle difference between "isolationism" and "non-intervention".

JM said: you get good spam Cyberkitten:-)

Don't I just... [grin].

beepbeepitsme said...

I think the idea of the US as being the world cop, or any country being given that tag, stems from the fact that there is no longer the classic balance of power that existed when the USSR was also a world power.

CyberKitten said...

But the question remain Beep... Do we *need* a World Cop?

Just because the USA is the only Superpower [ATM] doesn't mean that they can throw their weight around. That's not being a Cop - that's being a Bully.

Laura said...

Scott: I think a lot of that is people's inability to deal with nuance. There's a big difference between being isolationist vs. cooperating with other countries vs. acting like we own the world, know what's best for everyone and God dammit we're gonna give it to you...

The latter is the real problem with our policies. That's the problem with traditional Realists though - they think there must be someone "in charge" to counteract the international anarchy. Because God forbid we try to trust other nations and all work toward a common goal...

CyberKitten said...

laura said: I think a lot of that is people's inability to deal with nuance. There's a big difference between being isolationist vs. cooperating with other countries vs. acting like we own the world, know what's best for everyone and God dammit we're gonna give it to you...

Very true. Remember the saying that inside every 'gook' there is an American wanted to get out? Well, some Americans may believe that... Some non-Americans may want that... but the majority just want to be left alone to get on with things... There is an idea that countries have a right to Self Determination - or is that merely an historical footnote these days I wonder?

laura said: That's the problem with traditional Realists though - they think there must be someone "in charge" to counteract the international anarchy.

Again true. Whilst various empires spanned the globe 'anarchy' was kept to a minimum. Now that there is only one psuedo-empire left standing it's rather inevitable that 'anarchy' will spread. This is pretty much beyond anyone's control - unless you want to return to an imperial past (which is probably impossible at this point). Once that fact is recognised everything else pretty much falls into place.

laura said: Because God forbid we try to trust other nations and all work toward a common goal...

That's if they *want* to work towards such a goal. National self-interest still rules many states. They'll band together for various reasons (including working towards a common goal) but only if its in their individual interests to do so. Such has it always been.

beepbeepitsme said...

cyber

Do we need the US as a world cop? It always comes down to who is watching the cop?

The US, or any other extremely powerful country or organization is not the world cop unless the rest of the woprld sees it as such. The US might see itself as the world cop, but I would suggest that many nations in the rest of the world see it as a corrupt cop.

Frankly I think it is impossible for one nation to decide that it has the right to decide what is right and what is wrong. Or - to decide what is good for the rest of the world and what isn't.

I would think this no matter which one nation it was - whether it was china, russia or australia.