TrackBacks (0) Comments (0)
One of the first things a politician learns is to be skeptical of public opinion polls. Dismissive attitudes about polling, which cross party lines and international borders, create a serious dilemma for leaders when they are confronted with favorable data.
A little over a year ago, at London's G20 conference, President Barack Obama wasasked whether he had seen evidence of America's diminished power and authority in the world during his first international summit. In reply, Obama said that while he thought many people around the world had lost confidence in the U.S., he felt that his election and some of his administration's first actions were starting to restore America's standing. He added, "And although, as you know, I always mistrust polls, international polls seem to indicate that you're seeing people more hopeful about America's leadership."
President Obama may have been referring to an early 2009 poll that found that on average, across 17 countries, 67 percent of people believed his election would lead to improved U.S. relations with the rest of the world.
Now a new BBC poll shows that global opinion of America's influence in the world is on the rise for the second straight year. On average across 27 countries, 46 percent see U.S. influence as mainly positive while 34 percent believe it is mainly negative - the first time attitudes about the U.S. have been more positive than negative since polling began in 2005.
Few would call it a coincidence that multiple polls showing improved attitudes about the U.S. have followed Obama's election. "It appears the 'Obama effect' is real," said the most recent poll's analysis, citing more positive views of the U.S. from Germany and Russia to Chile and Egypt. But with the U.S. facing a world full of exhausted allies, reluctant partners, and determined adversaries, what does a global boost in numbers really matter?
Some have their doubts, questioning how this apparent growth in soft power translates into "usable leverage" for the U.S. on its toughest policy challenges, such as securing support for sanctions against Iran. Others see a connection between U.S. popularity and how inclined foriegn leaders are to cooperate with the U.S.
At minimum, most would agree that a better reputation for the U.S. is a good step toward regaining credibility on the global stage--something which tends to be useful in building leverage. At the same time, restoring credibility will not come easy. U.S. actions from the Middle East to Guantanamo have done a great deal to erode global confidence, and it will take more than a change in leadership to rebuild trust.
But the global shift in opinion about America suggests that, at least for the immediate future, people around the world are willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.
As part of efforts to introduce the world to a new style of leadership, Obama spoke to audiences in Accra andCairo. Text messages, the internet, and the international media gave his message an ever greater reach. Less than a year later, improved attitudes about the U.S. seem to indicate they liked what they heard, but the challenge for Obama is to act while the world is still listening.
Elected leaders know that popularity in the eyes of the public does not immediately translate into political will. Perhaps that's why many, like Obama, "always mistrust" polls.
Governing solely by shifts of global opinion is not the answer, but questioning their value deprives leaders of a valuable source of information about the world. George W. Bush did not need opinion polls to know that the UN Security Council would not support the 2003 invasion of Iraq, but without them it would have been difficult to understand the widespread consequences of these actions.
Chances are a White House staffer received a summary of the new BBC figures in a daily briefing and passed them up the chain of command, perhaps reaching the President himself.
Hopefully he accepted them not as a stamp of approval for a "job well done," but as a sign that the world is waiting--some more patiently than others--to continue the dialogue that began with his election.
Hopefully he accepted them not as a stamp of approval for a "job well done," but as a sign that the world is waiting--some more patiently than others--to continue the dialogue that began with his election.
His challenge now is to follow his words with actions.
Melanie Ciolek is a first-year student in the Master of Public Diplomacy program at the University of Southern California. Before arriving at USC, Melanie worked for the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) in Washington D.C., a global public opinion research think tank which manages the WorldPublicOpinion.org project. This op-ed is part of a partnership between Neon Tommy and the Association of Public Diplomacy Scholars.
http://blogs.uscannenberg.org/neontommy/2010/04/why-international-polls-matter.html
No comments:
Post a Comment