A majority of Americans say that the United States should take North Korea’s nuclear threats very seriously. At the same time, the public is divided over whether North Korea’s leadership is willing and capable of following through on its threats against the United States.

The national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted April 4-7 among 1,003 adults, finds that 56% say the government should take North Korea’s threats to use nuclear missiles against the U.S. very seriously. Another 27% say the government should take North Korea’s threats somewhat seriously.

About half of Americans (47%) think that North Korea’s leadership is really willing to follow through on its threats against the United States; 41% think North Korea is not really willing to follow through.

Opinion also is divided about North Korea’s ability to make good on its threats: 47% say it is capable of launching a nuclear missile that could reach the U.S. while 43% say it is not capable.

About a third of the public (36%) says they are paying very close attention to news about North Korea’s military threats and plans to restart its nuclear reactor, making this the most closely followed foreign news story of the year. Those who are following news about North Korea’s threats very closely are far more likely than those following it less closely to say that the government should take the threats very seriously (73% vs. 46%).

In addition, far more of those who are tracking North Korean news very closely say the country’s leaders are really willing to follow through on its threats (59% vs. 40% those following less closely).

However, assessments of whether North Korea is capable of reaching the U.S. with a nuclear missile are identical among those who are tracking news about North Korea’s threats very closely and those following the threats less closely (47% each).

Republicans and Democrats have comparable levels of interest in news from North Korea. But Republicans are more likely to say the government should take the threats very seriously (64% vs. 52% of Democrats). More Republicans than Democrats also think that North Korea is really willing to carry through on its nuclear threats (58% vs. 37%).

But partisans express similar views of North Korea’s military capabilities. About half of Republicans (52%) and Democrats (47%) say that North Korea is capable of launching a nuclear missile that could reach the United States.

Few See North Korea as Both ‘Willing’ and ‘Capable’

About a quarter of Americans (28%) see the maximum potential danger from North Korea: They say that North Korea is really willing to follow through on its threat to use nuclear weapons and that North Korea is capable of launching a nuclear missile that could reach the United States.

Roughly the same percentage (25%) expressed the opposite views. They say that North Korea is not really willing to use nuclear weapons against the U.S. and that its nuclear missiles would not be able to reach the United States.

Between those two viewpoints, comparable percentages say that North Korea is willing – but not capable – of attacking the U.S. with nuclear missiles (15%) or that while North Korea is unwilling to follow through on its military threats, it does have the capability to carry them out (13%).

Opinions about how seriously the United States government should take the threat from North Korea differ according to people’s views of its intentions and capability. Fully 83% of those who say North Korea has the will and capability to attack the U.S. think the government should take the threat very seriously. Nearly two-thirds (65%) of those who view North Korea as willing but not capable of attacking the U.S. agree.

Only about half (45%) of those who say North Korea is not really willing to follow through on its nuclear threats – but is capable of launching a missile that could reach the U.S. – view the threats as very serious. And just 29% of those who think that North Korea neither has the will not the capability to attack the U.S. says the government should take North Korea’s threats seriously.

As President Obama prepares to announce his policy for drawing down U.S. forces in Afghanistan, the percentage of Americans who favor removing the troops as soon as possible has reached an all-time high in Pew Research Center surveys.

For the first time, a majority (56%) says that U.S. troops should be brought home as soon as possible, while 39% favor keeping troops in Afghanistan until the situation has stabilized.

The proportion favoring a quick withdrawal of U.S. forces has increased by eight points since last month (from 48%), immediately after the killing of Osama bin Laden. A year ago, just 40% favored removing the troops as soon as possible, while 53% favored keeping them in Afghanistan until the situation stabilized.

Americans continue to say the decision to use force in Afghanistan was the right one, and 58% believe the United States will definitely or probably succeed in achieving its goals in Afghanistan. That is largely unchanged from the 62% who said the U.S. would achieve its goals in Afghanistan shortly after Osama’s death. But at the same time, a majority (56%) says it is unlikely that Afghanistan will be able to maintain a stable government after the U.S. military leaves.

Even among those who predict the U.S. will be successful in Afghanistan, nearly as many favor removing the troops as soon possible (46%) as favor keeping then there until the situation is stable (51%). Among those who say the U.S. will definitely or probably fail in achieving its goals – 34% of the public – a large majority (75%) supports removing the troops as soon as possible.

Over the past year, support for removing U.S. troops from Afghanistan as soon as possible has increased across nearly all political and demographic groups.

Two-thirds of Democrats (67%) now say troops should be removed as soon as possible, up from 43% a year ago. A majority (57%) of independents also support immediate troop withdrawal, an increase of 15 points from last year.

Republican support for removing U.S. troops as soon as possible has risen 12 points since last June. At that time, 65% of Republicans favored keeping U.S. forces in Afghanistan until the situation is stabilized while 31% favored removing them as soon as possible. In the current survey, 53% support keeping the troops there and 43% favor their withdrawal.

Over the past year, support for withdrawing the troops has doubled among Republicans and GOP-leaning independents who agree with the Tea Party. A year ago only 21% favored immediate troop withdrawal; that has risen to 42% currently.

War Still Viewed as Right Decision

A majority (57%) continues to say the U.S. made the right decision in using military force in Afghanistan while 35% said it was the wrong decision. Republicans are more likely than Democrats and independents to say it was the right decision.

The public’s assessments of the military effort in Afghanistan have changed little over the past few months – 53% say the military effort is going at least fairly well. Republicans are far more likely than Democrats and independents to say the effort is going well.

Optimism about success in Afghanistan increased after bin Laden’s death and remains higher than it was last year – 58% say the U.S. will definitely or probably succeed in achieving its goals in Afghanistan. But Republicans (67%) and Democrats (61%) are more optimistic about success than independents (51%).

Only 38% says that it is likely Afghanistan will be able to maintain a stable government when U.S. military forces leave the country while 56% say it is unlikely. In November 2009 the public was more optimistic about Iraq – 52% said it was at least somewhat likely Iraq would be able to maintain a stable government after U.S. forces left. There are very little partisan differences – a majority across party lines says it is unlikely Afghanistan will be able to maintain a stable government.

As President Obama prepares to host Chinese President Hu Jintao next week, Americans increasingly see Asia as the region of the world that is most important to the United States. Nearly half (47%) say Asia is most important, compared with just 37% who say Europe, home to many of America’s closest traditional allies.

Views on this issue have changed considerably over the last decade. In an early September 2001 poll, 44% said our political, economic and military ties to Europe were more important, while 34% prioritized our ties to Asia. Similarly, in polls conducted in 1993 and 1997 about half felt Europe was the region most important to American national interests, while roughly three-in-ten said Asia.

This shift reflects changing perceptions about the economic balance of power in the world. Almost half (47%) of Americans say China is the world’s leading economic power, while just 31% name the U.S. Three years ago – prior to the global economic crisis – only 30% characterized China as the global economic leader, compared with 41% for the U.S.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted January 5-9 among 1,503 adults finds that by two-to-one (60% to 27%) Americans see China’s economic strength as a greater threat than its military strength. And as Obama goes into talks with the Chinese president, a 53% majority say it is very important for the U.S. to get tougher with China on trade and economic issues.

Yet while Americans may see China as a problem, relatively few describe it as an adversary, and a 58% majority say it is very important to build a stronger relationship between the U.S. and China. By comparison, promoting human rights and better environmental policies and practices are important, but lower priorities.

American views of China are not extreme in a global perspective. A 2010 Pew Global Attitudes Project survey found roughly half of Americans expressing a favorable opinion of China, while 36% said they felt unfavorably. In that survey, attitudes toward China were far more negative in France, Germany and Turkey, as well as among the publics of some of China’s neighbors, such as Japan, South Korea and India. By contrast, China is viewed in an overwhelmingly favorable light in places like Kenya and Nigeria (where the U.S. is also viewed very favorably) as well as in Pakistan (where opinions of the U.S. are mostly negative).

China’s Economic Strength

Nearly half (47%) of Americans see China as the world’s leading economic power, while 31% say the United States holds that position. As recently as February 2008, the positions of these two countries were reversed: 41% named the U.S., and 30% China as the world’s leading economic power. Few Americans (6%) place the countries of the European Union in the top position. Similarly, only 9% think Japan occupies the top spot – a stark change from the late 1980s and early 1990s, when concerns about Japan’s growing economic power were widespread. In fact, a January 1989 survey found that by a two-to-one margin, Americans believed Japan was the world’s dominant economy: 58% considered Japan the top economic power; only 29% named the U.S.

While Americans believe China has assumed the leading position in the global economy, they see the military balance of power quite differently. Two-thirds (67%) think the U.S. is the world’s leading military power. Just 16% say China has the top military, while 5% name Russia, and 3% the EU.

In keeping with this, Americans view China primarily as an economic threat, rather than a military one. When asked whether they are more concerned about China’s economic or its military strength, more say the former by roughly two-to-one (60% vs. 27%).

One-in-five Americans identify China when asked to name the country representing the greatest threat to the U.S., up from 11% in November 2009. This is the highest percentage volunteering China as the greatest danger since a September 2001 poll taken prior to the 9/11 attacks and just months after the dispute over a U.S. surveillance plane that was held by Chinese authorities for several days on the island of Hainan.

China (20%) and North Korea (18%) top the list of global dangers, followed by Iran (12%) and Afghanistan (10%). For the first time in more than two decades, fewer than 10% name Iraq as the leading threat.

When the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press first asked this question in March 1990, roughly one-in-three Americans (32%) rated the Soviet Union as the biggest danger to the U.S. By February 1992, with the Soviet Union no longer in existence, Americans believed Japan’s rising economic power posed the greatest threat.

While Americans see China as a rising global power, relatively few characterize the U.S.-China relationship as adversarial. Only 22% describe China as an adversary; 43% say it is a serious problem, but not an adversary; and 27% believe China is not much of a problem. The view that China is not a problem is especially common among young people: 42% of 18-29 year-olds hold this opinion.

Views on this question have been relatively stable since it was first asked in 1997, although the percentage who consider China an adversary has increased somewhat since 2004, when just 14% saw China this way.

Partisan Differences on Views of China

For the most part, views about China and its military and economic strength do not vary considerably along partisan lines. Yet, Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents express more positive opinions of the Sino-American relationship than do Republican and Republican leaners. While majorities in both groups say relations between the U.S. and China are staying the same, 22% of Democrats say relations between the two countries are improving, compared with just 9% of Republicans. In 2004, when this question was last asked, 16% of Democrats and Democratic leaners and 21% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said relations between the two countries were improving.

When asked about their view of China, 47% of Republicans and Republican leaners and 43% of Democrats and Democratic leaners describe that country as a serious problem, but not an adversary. Republicans are somewhat more likely than Democrats to see China as an adversary (24% vs. 19%, respectively); conversely, Democrats are slightly more likely than Republicans to say China is not much of a problem (29% vs. 23%).

Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, those who agree with the Tea Party offer more negative views of China and Sino-American relations than do those who disagree with the Tea Party or have no opinion of the movement. One-third of Tea Party Republicans describe China as an adversary, compared with 17% of other Republicans and Republican leaners. And while 34% of those who agree with the Tea Party say relations between the U.S. and China are getting worse, 24% of Republicans who disagree with the Tea Party or do not have an opinion of it say that
is the case.

Democrats and Republicans also offer different views about U.S. policy toward China. The partisan gap is especially notable in regards to the promotion of human rights; 48% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say is very important for the U.S. to do more to promote human rights in China, compared with one-third of Republicans and Republican leaners.

Democrats and Democratic leaners are also more likely than Republicans and Republican-leaning independents to say it is very important for the U.S. to do more to promote better environmental policies and practices in China (43% vs. 34%, respectively). And while majorities among both partisan groups say it is very important for the U.S. to build a stronger relationship with China, more Democrats say that is the case (62% vs. 54% of Republicans).

On trade and economics, however, Democrats and Republicans offer similar views; 54% of Republicans and Republican leaners and 52% of Democrats and Democratic leaners say it is very important for the U.S. to get tougher with China on economic and trade issues. But among Republicans, those who agree with the Tea Party are more likely than those who do not to place high priority on the U.S. getting tougher with China on economic and trade issues; 60% of Tea Party Republicans say this is very important, compared with 49% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who disagree with the Tea Party or do not have an opinion of it.

The general public and members of the Council on Foreign Relations are apprehensive and uncertain about America’s place in the world. Growing numbers in both groups see the United States playing a less important role globally, while acknowledging the increasing stature of China. And the general public, which is in a decidedly inward-looking frame of mind when it comes to global affairs, is less supportive of increasing the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan than are CFR members.

In polling conducted before President Obama’s decision to increase U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan, both groups expressed pessimism about prospects for long-term stability in Afghanistan. Fewer than half of the public (46%) and CFR members (41%) say it is very or somewhat likely that Afghanistan will be able to withstand the threat posed by the Taliban. While half of the CFR members (50%) favor increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan, just 32% of the public agrees.

In the midst of two wars abroad and a sour economy at home, there has been a sharp rise in isolationist sentiment among the public. For the first time in more than 40 years of polling, a plurality (49%) says the United States should “mind its own business internationally” and let other countries get along the best they can on their own.

The quadrennial survey of foreign policy attitudes, conducted among the general public and members of the Council on Foreign Relations, finds broad recognition of China’s growing power. But the public takes a less benign view of China’s rise than do the members of the Council on Foreign Relations.

For CFR members, China has been transformed from a major threat to the United States to an increasingly important future ally. Just 21% of CFR members view China’s emergence as a world
power as a major threat to the United States. In 2001, 38% of foreign policy opinion leaders said that China’s emergence was a major threat, as did 30% in 2005.

More important, there is a growing belief among CFR members that China, along with India, will be more important U.S. allies in the future. Majorities of the Council members surveyed say China (58%) and India (55%) will be more important U.S. allies; Brazil is a distant third (37%). And while more CFR members view China, India and Brazil as more important future allies than did so four years ago, substantially fewer say the same about Japan and Great Britain.

The public sees China’s emerging power as more worrisome than do the foreign policy opinion leaders. There has been virtually no change since 2005 in the percentage of the public saying that China represents a major threat to the United States (53% today, 52% then). Moreover, while Iran is mentioned most often as the country that poses the greatest danger to the United States, China continues to rank among the countries frequently named by the public as dangers to the U.S.

The new survey finds that 41% of the public says the United States plays a less important and powerful role as a world leader today than it did 10 years ago – the highest percentage ever in a Pew Research survey. And while the foreign policy opinion leaders differ with the public about many issues – including President Obama’s foreign policy, the war in Afghanistan and China – a growing proportion of Council on Foreign Relations members agree that the United States is a less important world leader. Fully 44% of the CFR members say the U.S. is a less important global leader, up from 25% in early September 2001, just before the 9/11 attacks.

In a reversal of opinion from the beginning of last year, 44% of the public now says China is the world’s leading economic power, while just 27% name the United States. In February 2008, 41% said the U.S. was the top economic power while 30% said China. Somewhat fewer people now say China is the top economic power than named Japan as the leading economic power in the late 1980s (58% in 1989).

The United States is widely viewed as the world’s leading military power – 63% express this view, while just 18% name China. A majority of the public (57%) continues to say that U.S. policies should try to maintain America’s role as the world’s only military superpower – although far fewer favor this if it risks alienating U.S. allies.

However, the percentage saying that the United States should “mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own” has reached an all-time high of 49%. Four years ago, 42% agreed that the U.S. should “mind its own business” in international affairs; in December 2002, just 30% agreed with this statement.

At the same time, there has been a rise in unilateralist sentiment. Fully 44% say that because the United States “is the most powerful nation in the world, we should go our own way in international matters, not worrying about whether other countries agree with us or not.” That is by far the highest percentage agreeing since the question was first asked by Gallup in 1964.

CFR members continue to strongly support the United States playing an assertive role in global affairs: 69% say the U.S. should be either the single world leader (7%) or the most assertive of leading nations (62%). These opinions are little changed from previous surveys.

Yet CFR members assign a far lower priority to several globally oriented policy goals than they did at the beginning of the decade. Just 10% of CFR members say that promoting democracy in other nations should be a top U.S. foreign policy goal, down from 44% in early September 2001, shortly before the 9/11 attacks.

Defending human rights (down by 22 percentage points as a top priority), strengthening the United Nations (19 points) and improving living standards in developing countries (13 points) also are now viewed as less important priorities by CFR members.

These are among the principal findings of America’s Place in the World, a survey of foreign policy and national security attitudes conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, in collaboration with the Council on Foreign Relations, an independent, nonpartisan organization focused on helping government officials and the public better understand the world and foreign policy. The survey was conducted among 642 members of the Council on Foreign Relations and 2,000 members of the public.

The survey finds that the Council members are much more positive about President Obama’s approach to foreign policy and his handling of specific issues than is the public. About three-quarters (77%) of the members of the Council of Foreign Relations approve of Obama’s overall job performance, compared with just 51% of the public. There are comparable or even larger differences in opinions about Obama’s handling of Iran, Iraq, global climate change and several other issues. Yet the CFR members are nearly as critical of Obama’s handling of the situation in Afghanistan as is the public. Just 42% approve of Obama’s job performance on Afghanistan, which is modestly higher than his rating among the public (36%).

Only about half of CFR members (49%) say the Taliban’s growing strength in Afghanistan represents a major threat to the United States; 70% of the public sees this as a major threat. Yet CFR members are much more supportive than the public of the initial decision to use force in Afghanistan – fully 87% say this was the right decision compared with 56% of the public. CFR members also are more supportive than the public of increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan.

There is little optimism among either the members of the Council on Foreign Relations or the public about prospects that Afghanistan can become stable enough to withstand the threat posed by the Taliban. Just 41% of the Council members and 46% of the public think that it is very or somewhat likely that Afghanistan will become stable enough to withstand the threat from the Taliban and other extremist groups.

Major Threats and Long-Term Priorities

The public and Council on Foreign Relations members generally agree on three of the major threats facing the United States – large majorities of both groups say Islamic extremist groups like al Qaeda, Iran’s nuclear program and international financial instability are major threats to the well-being of the United States. But they differ over the seriousness of other global threats. The public views China’s emergence as a world power as a more serious threat than do CFR members, and the gap is nearly as large over North Korea’s nuclear program.

Fully 69% of the public says that North Korea’s nuclear program is a major threat to the well-being of the United States, which is little changed from 2005 (66%). But concerns about North Korea have declined markedly among CFR members over this period: just 44% currently regard North Korea’s nuclear program as a major threat, down from 67% in 2005. While growing tensions between Russia and its neighbors are viewed as a major threat by just 38% of the public, even fewer CFR members (12%) say this is a major threat.

More than eight-in-ten (85%) CFR members say instability in Pakistan is a major threat to the U.S.; this is a much lower concern for the public – just 49% view this as a major threat. In addition, higher percentages of the CFR members view global climate change (by 15 percentage points) and international financial instability (by 13 points) as major threats to the United States.

The CFR members’ concerns over Pakistan are seen in other ways as well. Nearly one-in-five (18%) says that Pakistan represents America’s most important international problem. However, Pakistan is mentioned by only 1% of the general public as America’s top international problem.

In terms of long-range policy priorities, large majorities of both the public and CFR members see preventing another terrorist attack on the United States and reducing U.S. dependence on imported energy sources as top priorities.

But on other goals – particularly protecting American jobs – there are substantial differences. Fully 85% of the public views this as a top foreign policy priority compared with just 21% of CFR members. This gap is not new: It was as large in the first America’s Place in the World survey in 1993 (85% of public, 19% of foreign policy opinion leaders) and has remained about as large in each of the succeeding studies.

Greater percentages of the public than CFR members also view reducing illegal immigration (by 35 points) and combating drug trafficking (by 34 points) as top long-range priorities. And while 37% of the public says strengthening the United Nations is a top priority, just 18% of CFR members agree. By contrast, a clear majority (57%) of CFR members say that dealing with global climate change should be a top long-range priority, compared with 40% of the public.

Support for Free Trade Holds Steady

The survey underscores the public’s anxiety over the nation’s economy. Fully 85% say protecting jobs should be a top foreign policy priority and economic issues are cited most frequently as the greatest international problem confronting the United States, followed closely by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Despite these concerns, public support for free trade agreements like NAFTA and the policies of the World Trade Organization (WTO) has increased somewhat over the past year. In April 2008, nearly half of Americans (48%) said that free trade agreements were bad for the country, while 35% said such agreements were good for the country. In two polls this year, including the current survey, pluralities have said that free trade agreements and WTO policies are good for the country; currently, 43% say that free trade agreements are good for the country, while 32% express a negative opinion.

Nonetheless, foreign policy specialists have long been more supportive of free trade compared with the public, and that remains the case today. Nearly nine-in-ten CFR members (88%) say that free trade agreements and the policies of the WTO are good for the country, which is little changed from previous America’s Place in the World surveys.

The public expresses more negative opinions about the specific impact of free trade agreements on jobs, economic growth and wages. Still, somewhat smaller percentages say that free trade agreements lead to job losses (53%), lower wages (49%) and slower economic growth (42%) than did so in April 2008 (61%, 56% and 50%, respectively).

Public’s Terrorism Concerns Grow

The survey also finds substantial differences between the public and CFR members over anti-terrorism strategies and tactics – and even over the ability of terrorists to launch new attacks on the United States. Currently, 29% of the public says the ability of terrorists to launch a major attack on the U.S. is greater than it was at the time of the 9/11 attacks; that percentage has risen 12 points since February. (NOTE: The main survey of the public was mostly conducted before the Nov. 5 shootings at the Ft. Hood Army base in Texas.)

The public’s attitudes about terrorists’ capabilities are comparable to opinions in October 2005: 29% say the ability of terrorists to conduct a major attack is greater than it was at the time of 9/11, 38% say their ability to launch a major strike is the same as it was around 9/11, while 29% say it is less.

By contrast, an increasing proportion of CFR members say the ability of terrorists to launch a major attack is less now than at the time of the Sept. 11 attacks; 56% of CFR members say that currently, up from 44% in 2005.

The public and CFR members continue to support divergent policies to combat terrorism. Most notably, 19% of the public says the use of torture is often justified to gain important information from terrorist suspects, while 35% say the use of torture in these circumstances is at least sometimes justified. Just 2% of CFR members say torture is often justified, and 11% say it is sometimes justified, to gain important information from suspected terrorists.

The proportion of the public saying torture is at least sometimes justified against suspected terrorists has increased modestly over the past year. Currently, 54% say torture is at least sometimes justified to gain important information from suspected terrorists, compared with 49% in April and 44% in February.

Other findings:

• France’s Comeback: A separate survey by the Pew Global Attitudes Project finds that France’s image has improved substantially in recent years. Fully 62% of the public says they have a favorable opinion of France, up from just 29% in May 2003, during tensions over France’s opposition to the Iraq war.

• Pakistan’s Slide: Favorable ratings of Pakistan, by contrast, have become more negative just in the past year. Currently, just 16% of the public expresses a favorable opinion of Pakistan, down from 37% in the spring of 2008.

• Divided over Military Action: Among the public, 63% approve of the use of U.S. military force against Iran if it were certain that Iran had produced a nuclear weapon; just 33% of CFR members agree. But a greater percentage of CFR members (63%) than the public (51%) favors using U.S. military force if extremists were poised to take over Pakistan.

• Obama – Best and Worst: CFR members overwhelmingly see President Obama’s emphasis on engagement and diplomacy as the best thing about his administration’s foreign policy (44%). The most frequently cited negatives about Obama’s foreign policy are his handling of Afghanistan and Pakistan (27%).

• Fewer See U.S. as Less Respected: Most Americans (56%) say the United States is less respected than in the past, but that is down from 70% last year. In contrast with surveys during the Bush administration, more Republicans (68%) than Democrats (49%) now say the U.S. is less respected.

• Less Support for U.N.: The proportion of CFR members saying that strengthening the United Nations should be a top long-term policy priority is down sharply from 2001. Meanwhile, only about half the public (51%) says the United States should “cooperate fully” with the U.N., slightly fewer than in 2005 (54%) and the lowest percentage since 1976.

In the wake of the Iraq war, North Korea has taken center stage as a threat to peace and stability in the minds of many people around the world according to results from the Pew Global Attitudes Survey conducted in May.

More than three-in-four (77%) Americans see the current government in North Korea as a great or moderate danger to Asia. U.S. public concern has risen by 12 percentage points since November 2002. Americans are not alone in worrying about Pyongyang. Eight-in-ten (79%) Australians and 77% of Germans think North Korean actions threaten Asia. But fewer South Koreans agree – 69%.

The Bush administration’s efforts to use the current multilateral negotiations to end the North Korean nuclear program are complicated by rising antipathy toward the United States and U.S. policies in South Korea.

Half of South Koreans surveyed in May 2003 by the Pew Global Attitudes Survey held an unfavorable view of the United States, up six percentage points from July 2002. Anti-Americanism has risen particularly sharply among the young. A year ago, half (51%) of the 18-29 year olds surveyed had a somewhat unfavorable or very unfavorable opinion of the United States. This year, seven-in-ten (71%) young South Koreans expressed such views.

In most nations, critics of the United States say their sentiments reflect opposition to President George W. Bush, more than a general problem with America. But in South Korea, 72% of those who hold unfavorable views of the United States express general hostility toward America that goes beyond criticisms of the president.

U.S. efforts in the six-party negotiations on North Korea may be further complicated by widespread sentiment in South Korea that Washington acts unilaterally in foreign policy. Three-in-four South Koreans (76%) believe that the United States does not take into account South Korean interests when making international policy decisions. Such criticism of U.S. unilateralism is shared by publics in Russia (71%) and Japan (59% in 2002) – two other nations that are parties to the Beijing talks.

South Korean disapproval of the conduct of U.S. foreign policy reflects public opposition to particular American international initiatives, including the war on terrorism and the Bush Administration’s policy of preemptive military strikes against U.S. foes. Seven-in-ten South Koreans (71%) oppose U.S.-led efforts to fight terrorism. More than half (55%) of South Koreans also say that it is rarely or never justified to use military force against countries that may seriously threaten South Korea, but have not attacked it.

These results are drawn from polls conducted by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, a series of worldwide public opinion surveys conducted over the past 18 months. The project has issued two major reports, “What the World Thinks in 2002″ – based upon 38,000 interviews in 44 nations – and “Views of a Changing World, June 2003″ – based on 16,000 interviews in 20 nations and the Palestinian Authority. Sample sizes for the 2003 poll were as follows: U.S. 1,201; South Korea 525. Full details about the surveys, and the project more generally, are available at www.people-press.org.

The public is deeply divided about the future of U.S.-China relations. Although a solid 60% majority say relations between the United States and China are stable — neither improving nor getting worse — there is little agreement over the question of whether our current handling of China is tough enough and no single policy stance gets majority support.

Today, 44% of the American people say the Clinton administration has not been tough enough in its dealings with China and 43% say the administration struck the right balance. Just 2% say the U.S. has been too tough.

Similarly, no consensus exists on the question of whether the U.S. should cooperate with China to help maintain peace and prevent the spread of nuclear weapons in Asia or take a firm stand against human rights abuses there, even if it increases tensions between the two countries. Today, 45% of the public chooses cooperation; 44% opt for a firm stand.

Again, agreement fails to emerge when the public is asked to balance trade and military security. Given the choice, 47% of Americans say containing China’s military power is more important; 42% say maintaining China as a trading partner is more important.

Those most attentive to accusations that China stole nuclear technology from the United States, white evangelical Christians, and Republicans take a tougher position on China than the average American. For instance, of the 19% who followed news about the accusations against China very closely, over two-thirds say the Clinton administration has not been tough enough with China, compared to less than half of the general public who agree. In addition, a 55% majority of white evangelical Protestants say the United States should contain China’s growth as a military power — eight percentage points above the average.

Opinion More Negative

American public opinion toward China has grown slightly more negative since President Clinton visited the Asian nation last summer. As Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji tours the U.S. this week, increasing numbers of Americans express skepticism about China’s resolve on free markets, democracy and diplomacy.

Less than one-quarter (23%) of Americans now say China is becoming more democratic and allowing its people more freedom; 65% feel just the opposite is true. This is a return to the 26%-64% split in 1997 and marks a significant change from August 1998, when 35% of Americans thought the Asian nation was becoming more open and 51% disagreed.

Similar movement can be seen on the issue of free markets, although the public is not quite so adamant in their view of China’s resistance of economic reforms. Today, 34% say the Chinese economy is becoming more like the U.S. economy; 47% disagree. In August 1998, Americans were more evenly divided: 41% felt the Chinese economy was becoming more open, 44% disagreed.

Although a 48% plurality of the public continues to see China as a serious problem — a number basically unchanged since September 1997, when 46% of the public felt this way — many Americans are becoming increasingly critical in their view of China. More Americans now describe China as an “adversary” (up to 20% from 14% in 1997) and fewer dismiss China as “not much of a problem” (down to 25% from 32%). Moreover, two-thirds of the public considers allegations that China stole nuclear technology from the United States to be very serious.¹

Low Priority Given China

Americans’ ambivalence about China may be due, in part, to the relatively low priority they give to the nation. A slim majority (52%) say that keeping a close watch on the development of China as a world power should be a top priority for the U.S. government. This is considerably lower than the number who place a premium on reducing the threat of international terrorism (75%), stopping international drug trafficking (72%) and halting the spread of AIDS (65%).

That said, however, concern about China ranks above that of other Asian nations. Only 38% of the public rates managing trade and economic disputes with Japan a top priority; even fewer (29%) say that countering the threat of militarism in North Korea should be a top priority.

As with NAFTA, American opinion leaders and the American public have conflicting views about Asia. A plurality of opinion leaders believe Asia is now more important to the United States than Europe, a recent survey found, while the public (by a 50% to 31% margin) continues to see Europe as most important.

The choice of Asia by the Influentials was largely one of pocketbooks vs. hearts. Of those respondents selecting the Pacific Rim, more than three-fourths cited economic reasons. The public, in continuing to look to Europe, may not see the same economic opportunity as the Influentials; it believes by an overwhelming five to one margin (72% to 14%) that Japan has an unfair trade policy toward the United States.

The survey by the Times Mirror Center for the People & the Press also found that the Influentials view the Asian region with most concern. No nation has replaced the former Soviet Union as the greatest danger to the United States, but the aggregated concern about the traditional nations of Asia was high. Those Influentials who specialize in security and defense issues considered it most dangerous to the United States, far more than the former Soviet Union or the Mideast.

Strong majorities or pluralities of almost all Influential groups would use U.S. troops to stop a North Korean invasion of South Korea, while most of the public would oppose it. Strong majorities in every Influential group would keep U.S. force levels in South Korea at current levels. Stronger sentiment was found for deep cuts in U.S. forces in Europe than in South Korea.

The survey of 649 opinion leaders in the nine groups — foreign affairs, security-defense, business, media, religion, science, state and local government, academia, and culture — was conducted in July and August, with two parallel public surveys in September and October. The results were released earlier this month in a report titled as America’s Place in the World.