Poll: Obama is losing the Arab world

by: Paul Rosenberg

Fri Aug 06, 2010 at 15:00


Not surprisingly, a new poll of public opinion in the Arab world (with a huge sample size, 3,976) finds that attitudes toward Barack Obama have cooled considerably.  This was the third such annual poll, conducted by a collaboration of the Brookings Institute and the University of Maryland, carried out by Zogby International.  (Announcement here, pdf here.) The principle investigator is Shibley Telhami, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Saban Center at Brookings and Anwar Sadat Professor for Peace and Development, University of M Maryland.

In announcing the poll, three key findings were cited:

• A substantial change in the assessment of President Obama, both as President of the United States and of Obama personally.

• Remarkably stable views on the Arab-Israeli conflict and the prospects of its resolution

• A majority of the Arab public now see a nuclear-armed Iran as being better for the Middle East

There's actually somewhat increased pessimism regarding the Arab-Isreali conflict, but the shift is relatively small.  And the support for Iran's nuclear program almost certainly reflects the disenchantment with the prospects of US change.  So the story around declining approval for Obama really is the centerpiece here.

It should be obvious that this topline result is bad for us generally, and specifically bad for dealing with international terror.  Indeed, it serves to underscore the total wrong-headedness of the "war on terror" framework. We clearly are losing the battle for hearts and minds--and we deserve to be losing, considering how completely we have failed to consider the legitimate needs and desires of the Arab world--as well as the wider world of Islam.  Of all the opportunities that Obama has thrown away, this is perhaps the most tragic, since the opening was so great, and his hand was so relatively free.

Two related questions gave very similar and stark results concerning the loss of positive attitudes.  First, there is the loss of hope:

Second, there is the growth of negative attitudes:

The disappointment and negative attitudes are not hard to understand, as two reasons dominate Arab public opinion:

Paul Rosenberg :: Poll: Obama is losing the Arab world

Arabs are actually pleased with improved attitudes towards Islam, but since this isn't what cocerns them most, it's not having the impact it might have if the atmospherics were matched with actual results:

This can be seen in the relatively insignificant differences in attitudes towards the US overal from 2008 through 2010. The departure of Bush did provide a modest shift, which persisted through 2010, but we're still viewed quite negatively overall:

There are four items that dominate negative views of US policy:

There is also a fairly accurate sense of what is driving US policy--much more accurate than Americans own views:

When it comes to admired world leaders, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan has rocketed to the top, clearly because of his strong stance against Israeli's conduct in the slaughter of Turkish citizens in the Gaza Freedom Flotilla. But Hugo Chavez is still noteworthy for proving more admired than anyone else in the Arab or Islamic worlds:

Finally, there's clear evidence of continued growth in internet use, most dramatic in the continued shrinkage of those who never use the Internet:

Nothing is a given, of course.  But eventually, the growth potential for citizen-level peer-to-peer communication is probably our greatest opportunity for peace and justice in the world.

Knowing basic facts such as those revealed in this poll is a basic starting point for moving that process forward.


Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
The inevitable consequence (4.00 / 6)
of saying all the right things, and then doing all the wrong ones. People aren't so stupid as to not see the glaring discrepancy and hypocrisy.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton

Obama had a free hand? You kidding? (0.00 / 0)
The ONLY thing Congress seems to agree on is that whatever Israel does is Ok with them.

(DISCLAIMER:  I am Jewish, so obviously must be self-hating here)

Considering there's probably 50 votes in the Senate to bomb Iran, or at least help Netanyahu do it for us, I surprised these poll numbers aren't even worse.


I Said "Relatively Free" (4.00 / 3)
As foreign policy almost always is for presidents.  Of course he can't actually sell out Israel.  But he could very easily do things that Israel doesn't like that would be extremely well-received by the Arab world and the American people.

Top of the list: respond affirmatively to the Arab League Peace Plan that was announced in 2002, and hailed at the time by Colin Powell.  Since the plan put the Arab League on record as willing to recognize Israel's right to exist at the end of the process, any president with real gumption could use his bully pulpit to rally the American people--including the majority of American Jews--and undercut AIPAC's power to set the agenda.

But that would have required courage, intelligence and consciousness.  The Obama Administration is 0-for-3 on that score, so of course it didn't happen.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
He could at least do as much as Bush Senior did (4.00 / 1)
I mean, he could if he had political courage.  

[ Parent ]
Free Hand (4.00 / 2)
So it isn't Obama's fault that he hasn't ordered our secret prisons closed yet?  Whose fault is it?  

[ Parent ]
Iraq and Afghanistan (0.00 / 0)
The massive disappointment with Obama on Israel and the Palestinians is obvious and expected, given current U.S. policy.  But it surprises me 27% are disappointed with Obama on Iraq, but only 4% on Afghanistan.  I would have expected those results to be reversed.

Well, Don't Forget (4.00 / 1)
These are Arab populations.  Iraq is arguably the heart of Arab nationalism.  The Afghans aren't Arabs at all.  And Obama's promises weren't nearly as clear-cut with respect to Afghanistan.  So I think there's plenty of time for opinion to become more sour about that, it's just premature to expect it right now.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Couple responses... (4.00 / 3)
...from someone who currently lives and studies in Jordan and talks with Arabs daily, albeit a statistically terrible sample.
1. @Mark Matson, people in the Muslim world are much, much, much more concerned with the little progress they see on moving US forces out of Iraq, though Obama has actually moved faster than his original timetable and the draw-down's working as expected.  They are operating under the assumption that he'd get into office and within a year we'd be completely out.  Afghanistan is peripheral to the standard Sunni, Middle Eastern Arab way of thinking because it's a) far away and b) there are a lot of Shia Arabs there, to grossly oversimplify.  Also, Afghanistan is not in the news nearly as much here, but as the US moves out of Iraq I'm sure it will be.
2. It should be noted in addition to the above charts that opinion of the American people is very, very, very, very different than opinion of the United States.  Most--let's say 70% or more--of Muslim Arabs will tell you that they don't like the American government or its policies, but that they like Obama more than Bush even if they still dislike Obama.  Another 10-20% are people who hate America and by extension its people, and hold the people directly responsible for Iraq and the lack of a resolution to Israel/Palestine.  The remaining 10% are Christians and are much more likely to hold positive views of the United States.  But again, every single Muslim I have ever talked to in Jordan has said either "I don't like the American government, but I like the people" or "I like Obama and the people" or "I like the government and the people."  I've never met in two and a half months of living here anyone who genuinely hates Americans as a group of people.  And yes, I speak Arabic, so I'm not doing the GWB-thing of simply speaking English louder and slower if people don't understand me.  

Remember all those claims (0.00 / 0)
that Obama would, merely because of his race, change Muslims' view of the country. This shows just how ridiculous -- and insulting -- those claims were. This, for example:

What does he offer? First and foremost: his face. Think of it as the most effective potential re-branding of the United States since Reagan. Such a re-branding is not trivial-it's central to an effective war strategy. The war on Islamist terror, after all, is two-pronged: a function of both hard power and soft power. We have seen the potential of hard power in removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. We have also seen its inherent weaknesses in Iraq, and its profound limitations in winning a long war against radical Islam. The next president has to create a sophisticated and supple blend of soft and hard power to isolate the enemy, to fight where necessary, but also to create an ideological template that works to the West's advantage over the long haul. There is simply no other candidate with the potential of Obama to do this. Which is where his face comes in.

Consider this hypothetical. It's November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man-Barack Hussein Obama-is the new face of America. In one simple image, America's soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama's face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can.

http://www.theatlantic.com/mag...



Well, Of Course (4.00 / 1)
the potential was all there.  I never doubted that.  But that's precisely why Obama's been such a huge disappointment.

Yeah, we knew change would be hard.  But it's a whole lot harder when you don't even try.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
But he did! (4.00 / 1)
Just being who he is did change everyone's perceptions, including, but not limited to, the Arab world.  Not just the color of his skin, but his name and heritage as well.

Those claims weren't ridiculous at all.  The whole world reacted strongly to his election.  Remember that Nobel Peace Prize?  The world was ready to jump at what he represented.  Did jump, in fact.

But that was back before he did anything besides give speeches.  Now actions are undoing all the good.  Make no mistake, though, there was a lot of good before the action.


[ Parent ]
Sure, for a month or two (0.00 / 0)
What was ridiculous and insulting was the claim that this change would be lasting and transformative, as if Muslims would accept subjugation and violence as long as the person doing the subjugating and violence was black.  

[ Parent ]
But It Wasn't That Simple, David (0.00 / 0)
Sure, that's what it meant objectively.

But most Americans have no idea what American foreign policy means objectively.  They only know what's in their hearts. And the record shows that Americans as a whole really are a generous people.  So, naturally, that's what they assume US foreign policy reflects.

Obama's purpose in the grand scheme of things is now fairly clear:  it's to sustain that illusion--and related other ones that dominate our domestic politics.  But there was genuine hope and promise to bring about fundamental change.  Unfortunately, Obama wouldn't know fundamental change if it came up and bit him in the ass.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
It's not in their hearts (0.00 / 0)
it's in their politics.  The corporate media and both parties are telling them how our foreign policy is motivated by real threats to our security, and a selfless concern for the needs of defenseless others.  

When there was no Democrat in the White House, a lot of people were able to see through that (despite the best efforts of Democratic elites.)  Now, with a Democrat running things, as you say, those people assume that he means the things he says (missing the fine print). But they weren't always willing to assume that, as the elections in 2006 and 2008 suggest.

Despite all that, citizens are far smarter when it comes to foreign policy than elites are.

Strengthen Social Security...Don't Cut it  


[ Parent ]
See Also (4.00 / 1)
Misreading the Public: The Myth of a New Isolationism, a book from the late 1990s, which gets at how elites systematic misinterpret mass public opinion on foreign policy--which is a key part of the story about how elites rationalize their behavior.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Thanks (0.00 / 0)
The conflation of not wanting to dominate with isolationism is a powerful tool for dismissing the public's views when it comes to foreign policy.

Strengthen Social Security...Don't Cut it  

[ Parent ]




USER MENU


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you

Donate to Open Left

Senate Forecast
With Rasmussen


Without Rasmussen


SEARCH

   

Advanced Search