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.

Dramatic events in London and Scotland last week attracted a large news audience. Roughly a third of the public paid very close attention to news that British police had found and defused two car bombs in London, and another 31% followed the story fairly closely. Fully 21% said this was the single news story they followed more closely than any other — making it the most closely followed news story of the week.¹ Interest in the attempted bombings did not reach the level of last summer’s major terrorism scare. In August 2006, 54% of the public paid very close attention to news about a foiled plot to blow up planes flying from England to the U.S. using liquid explosives.

Last week’s events in the United Kingdom received a substantial amount of news coverage in the U.S. Although the story did not break until Friday morning, it was the fourth most heavily covered news story of the week, accounting for 5% of the overall coverage. For Friday alone, the London story represented 27% of the news coverage for all sectors and 63% of cable news.

A large segment of the public remained focused on the Iraq war last week: 32% followed the situation in Iraq very closely and 19% listed this as their most closely followed story.

The demise of the immigration reform bill was the most heavily covered news story of the week — 12% of the overall newshole was devoted to this story. Roughly a quarter of the public followed the immigration debate very closely and 14% listed it as their most closely followed story. Until last week, roughly equal proportions of Democrats and Republicans were following the immigration debate. However, as the controversial legislation collapsed in the Senate, Republicans paid much closer attention than did Democrats (32% followed very closely vs. 19% of Democrats).

News about safety issues involving food and other products from China attracted a moderate audience despite relatively little coverage (1% of the newshole for the week). One-in-four Americans paid very close attention to this unfolding story and 9% said it was the story they followed most closely. In recent weeks, Chinese products including certain brands of toys, toothpaste and seafood have either been recalled or banned. This comes on the heels of the largest pet food recall in U.S. history earlier this year.

For the most part, the public does not believe that news organizations are exaggerating or underplaying problems with products from China. Fewer than a quarter (23%) say news coverage is making the situation sound like a bigger problem than it really is; 11% say the coverage makes it sound like a smaller problem than it really is. Overall, the public believes news coverage of these safety issues has been generally accurate (53%).
Fewer than one-in-four Americans paid very close attention to the Supreme Court’s ruling barring school districts from using race to determine which schools students attend. Only 5% listed this as their most closely followed story. Whites and blacks followed the ruling in roughly equal proportions. Democrats paid closer attention than Republicans to this story. Overall, 6% of the national newshole was devoted to news about the Supreme Court, with 3% focused specifically on the school desegregation ruling.

These findings are based on the most recent installment of the weekly News Interest Index, an ongoing project of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. The index, building on the Center’s longstanding research into public attentiveness to major news stories, examines news interest as it relates to the news media’s agenda. The weekly survey is conducted in conjunction with The Project for Excellence in Journalism‘s News Coverage Index, which monitors the news reported by major newspaper, television, radio and online news outlets on an ongoing basis. In the most recent week, data relating to news coverage was collected from June 24-29, and survey data measuring public interest in the top news stories of the week was collected June 29-July 2 from a nationally representative sample of 1,065 adults.

Traditional Media Delivers iPhone Message

As the much-anticipated Apple iPhone hit the stores on June 29, a large majority of Americans had heard at least something about the new product. Fully 46% of the public had heard a lot about the iPhone, and another 37% had heard a little. Just 16% say they have heard nothing at all about the new phone.

The vast majority of those who have heard something about the iPhone say they have been hearing most about it from traditional news sources like television, radio, newspapers, and magazines. Only 13% have heard about it mainly on the internet, and even fewer (5%) have heard about it from people they know.

Young people have heard the most about the iPhone — fully 59% have heard a lot about it. They are also much more likely than those over age 30 to have heard about the iPhone from internet sources rather than traditional media. Nonetheless, 68% of those ages 18-29 who have heard about the iPhone are hearing most about it from traditional sources, compared with 24% who are hearing most about the iPhone from internet sources.

Bush, Hilton Top Newsmakers of the Week

George W. Bush and Paris Hilton were the two most visible newsmakers last week. When asked to name the person they have heard the most about in the news lately, 29% named Bush and nearly as many (26%) named Hilton.

As a point of comparison, during the week that Anna Nicole Smith died (Feb. 11-16), 38% said that they had heard most about Smith, while 28% named Bush as the person they had heard the most about.

Other prominent newsmakers last week included Hillary Clinton (4% said she was the person they had heard the most about in the news lately) and Barack Obama (3%). Pro wrestler Chris Benoit, who reportedly took his own life after killing his wife and son, was mentioned by 3% of the public.

About the News Interest Index

The News Interest Index is a weekly survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press aimed at gauging the public’s interest in and reaction to major news events.

This project has been undertaken in conjunction with the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, an ongoing content analysis of the news. The News Coverage Index catalogues the news from top news organizations across five major sectors of the media: newspapers, network television, cable television, radio and the internet. Each week (from Sunday through Friday) PEJ will compile this data to identify the top stories for the week. The News Interest Index survey will collect data from Friday through Monday to gauge public interest in the most covered stories of the week.

Results for the weekly surveys are based on telephone interviews among a nationwide sample of approximately 1,000 adults, 18 years of age or older, conducted under the direction of ORC (Opinion Research Corporation). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls, and that results based on subgroups will have larger margins of error.

For more information about the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, go to www.journalism.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.

China, abortion, and the flag were the stories that dominated the consciousness of Americans in early July. Each was followed very closely by nearly half of all American adults – a level of response that places these stories in the top quintile of all stories Times Mirror has tracked. Although all three stories attracted about the same amount of attention, the nature of public response to each was quite different.