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.

Despite the economic recession, public support for free trade agreements has recovered after declining a year ago. Currently, 44% say that free trade agreements like NAFTA and the policies of the World Trade Organization are good for the country, up from 35% a year ago. Slightly more than a third (35%) say that such agreements and policies are bad for the country, down from 48% in April 2008.

The current balance of opinion is more in line with long-term trends when compared with the April 2008 measure. Last year marked the first time in a measure dating to 1997 that a plurality viewed free trade agreements and policies negatively. The current measure is identical to December 2006 and comparable with opinions in 2005 and 2004. Support for NAFTA and other free trade agreements in policies peaked at 49% in early September 2001; at that time, 29% said they were bad for the country.

Other recent national surveys also have found increases in support for foreign trade over the past year. In a survey conducted April 3-5 by CNN/Opinion Research Corp., 56% said they viewed foreign trade “more as an opportunity for economic growth through increased U.S. exports,” while 40% said they viewed foreign trade as “a threat to the economy from foreign imports.” In June 2008, a narrow majority (51%) said that foreign trade represented more of a threat rather than an opportunity for the U.S. economy.

In an April 1-5 survey by CBS News/New York Times, 66% said “that trade with other countries – both buying and selling products” is good for the U.S. economy. Fewer (58%) expressed that view in March 2008.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted March 31-April 21 among 3,013 adults interviewed on cell phones and landlines, finds people with low family incomes and Democrats are much more supportive of free trade agreements than they were a year ago.

Nearly half of Democrats (47%) now say that NAFTA and other free trade agreements, and the policies of the World Trade Organization are a good thing for the United States compared with 30% who view these agreements and policies negatively. In April 2008, only about a third of Democrats (34%) viewed free trade agreements positively while 50% expressed a negative opinion. More independents also express a positive opinion of free trade agreements (up eight points since last year), while opinion among Republicans has remained more stable; currently, 41% of Republicans see free trade agreements as a good thing while 38% view them as a bad thing.

Global Trade a Low Priority

The issue of trade has never rated very high on Pew Research’s annual list of the public’s policy priorities. But in January, amid rising public concern over the economy, 31% said that dealing with global trade should be a top priority for the president and Congress, down from 37% a year earlier. Among 20 issues, dealing with global trade ranked near the bottom; just 30% cited dealing with global warming as a top priority.

Only about a third of Democrats (33%) and independents (32%), and 28% of Republicans viewed dealing with global trade as a top priority for the president and Congress. (For more from this survey, see “Economy, Jobs Trump All Other Priorities in 2009,” Jan. 22, 2009.)

General Support for ‘Free Trade’

The public expresses more support for unspecified free trade agreements with other countries than it does for free trade agreements “like NAFTA and the policies of the World Trade Organization.” While most respondents were asked a question that mentioned these specific agreements and policies, a smaller group was asked their opinion of “free trade agreements between the U.S. and other countries;” 52% say such agreements are a good thing for the United States while 14% say they are a bad thing; 14% offer no opinion.

Republicans are far more supportive of free trade agreements generally (59%) than when NAFTA and the policies of the World Trade Organization are mentioned (41%). More independents also express support for free trade agreements generally than when specific trade measures are mentioned (51% vs. 43%). The difference is smaller among Democrats.

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.

Read the full analysis at pewresearch.org

The American public continues to have a mixed opinion about free trade agreements such as NAFTA and the WTO. On balance they are seen as a good thing for the country, but Americans are divided over the impact of free trade agreements on their own personal financial situations. About as many people think they are helped by them (35%) as believe they are hurt (36%).

Many Americans worry that free trade has had a negative effect on jobs and wages. Nearly half (48%) believe that free trade agreements lead to job losses in the U.S., while just 12% say that trade agreements have created jobs. A comparable number (44%) says that free trade has led to lower wages for American workers.

By contrast, there is less agreement that free trade has promoted economic growth or led to lower prices on products sold in the United States. Indeed, about as many people say that free trade agreements have raised prices on products as say that they have led to lower prices (30% vs. 32%).

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted among 1,502 adults from Dec. 6-10, finds that there is broad agreement about one group of beneficiaries from free trade agreements: Nearly six-in-ten Americans (57%) say that free trade is good for the people of developing countries, compared with just 19% who say it does not make a difference and 9% who think that free trade agreements are bad for the publics of developing countries.

Views of free trade have long been divided along socioeconomic lines. People with low annual household incomes, and those with less education, are less likely than others to view free trade as beneficial, both for the country and themselves. There also are significant political differences: More Republicans than Democrats say that trade has been good for the United States (50% vs. 42%), and the gap is even larger in terms of the personal financial impact of trade. In addition, far more Republicans than Democrats say that free trade agreements lower the price on products sold in the United States (40% vs. 27%).

But Republicans and Democrats both see a negative impact of trade on wages and jobs. By a margin of 42%-14%, Republicans say that trade agreements lead to job losses rather than creating jobs; Democrats agree by an even wider margin (51%-10%). And Republicans by 42% to 11% say trade makes wages lower rather than higher; Democrats concur by 47%-11%.

The new survey also finds that isolationist sentiment among the public, which has risen dramatically in recent years because of the Iraq war, remains undiminished. Currently, 42% of Americans agree that the U.S. “should mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own”; 53% disagree with that statement. The percentage agreeing with this statement equals the number in October 2005, and is on par with measures of isolationist sentiment in the mid-1990s, in the wake of the Cold War, and in the mid-1970s after the Vietnam War.

While many Americans take a cautious view of the U.S. role in the world, about half (51%) say they believe that the United States has a responsibility to do something about the ethnic genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan. Roughly the same number (53%) favors the use of U.S. troops as part of a multinational force to end the ethnic genocide there.

By comparison, in March 1999 nearly half of Americans (47%) felt the U.S. had a responsibility to do something about the fighting between ethnic groups in the Serbian province of Kosovo. But during the Bosnian civil war in June 1995, far fewer ­ just 30% ­ believed the U.S. had a responsibility to do something about fighting between Serbs and Bosnians in the former Yugoslavia.

The crisis in Darfur is not registering with most Americans. Just 13% say they have paid very close attention to this story; interest in the Iraq war (42% very closely) and news about the incoming Democratic leaders in Congress (29%) overshadows interest in Sudan.

However, those who have followed this story at least fairly closely are much more likely than those who have not to say that the U.S. has an obligation to take some action in Darfur. Fully two-thirds (66%) of those who have followed reports on Darfur very or fairly closely say the United States has a responsibility to do something about the ethnic genocide in Sudan; only about four-in-ten (43%) of those who have not closely followed the story agree.

There also are significant educational differences in opinions about this issue; 68% of college graduates ­ and just 40% of those with a high school degree or less ­ say the United States has a responsibility to do something about the ethnic genocide in Darfur. But partisanship is not a factor in these opinions ­ comparable majorities of Republicans (53%), Democrats (51%), and independents (56%) agree that the U.S. has an obligation in this regard.

Free Trade: Many Are Uncertain

Opinions about the impact of free trade agreements ­ both on the country and on individuals’ finances ­ have been generally stable over the past ten years. In December 2003, positive perceptions of the effects of free trade declined, but recovered soon after.

In general, people do not see free trade as either completely positive or completely negative ­ and sizable minorities offer no opinions at all. In the current survey, 21% did not express a view about free trade’s impact on the country; 29% said free trade agreements neither helped nor hurt their personal finances, or declined to answer.

Just 28% of those surveyed say that free trade agreements are good for both the country and their own personal financial situation; about as many (25%) take a negative view of free trade in both dimensions. But nearly four-in-ten (37%) view free trade agreements as neither positive nor negative, or have no opinion on one or both questions.

Similarly, when asked about the specific effects of free trade on wages, jobs, prices, and the economy in general, most Americans render a mixed judgment. However, many more say that free trade agreements have no positive consequences than say that such agreements have no negative effects (47% vs. 30%).

Trade’s Personal Impact

Perceptions of the personal impact of free trade vary widely across different groups in the population. Older Americans and those with lower levels of income and education are the least likely to say their financial situation has been helped by free trade agreements.

By contrast, the wealthiest and best educated are much more positive about trade’s effects on themselves and their families. For example, just 22% of those with household incomes under $20,000 annually believe trade agreements have helped them financially; 47% think trade has hurt them. At the other end of the income scale, 55% of those earning $150,000 or more say free trade has been good for them financially; just 12% say it has been bad.

Roughly four-in-ten people in the West (43%) say free trade has helped their finances. That compares with 37% in the Northeast and 33% in the South. In the Midwest, just 31% say trade has helped their financial situation and 42% say it has hurt ­ a number that rises to 51% among those making less than $40,000 annually.

Modest Optimism for ’07

Americans remain fairly gloomy about the way things are going in the United States. Just 28% are satisfied with national conditions, while 65% are dissatisfied. But most people say that, as far as they are concerned, next year will be better than this year. Nearly six-in-ten (57%) people ­ including half of those currently dissatisfied with national conditions ­ say 2007 will be better.

Optimism about the coming year is in line with end-of-year measures from December 1994 and December 1998 (59% in each year), but lower than in December 1999 amid the nation’s economic boom (66% better). Two-thirds of Republicans (67%) feel that next year will be better, compared with 54% of Democrats and the same percentage of independents. Although their party won majorities in Congress last month, Democrats are significantly less positive about the upcoming year than they were in December 1994, shortly after the party lost control of Congress; at that time, nearly two-thirds of Democrats (65%) felt that 1995 would be a better year.

Economic Ratings Stable, Job Picture Improves

Roughly four-in-ten Americans (38%) rate economic conditions in the country as excellent or good. The current measure is in line with public views of the economy in late October (33% positive) and September (37%).

The public’s economic expectations for the year ahead have improved somewhat since September. About one-in-five (22%) think the economy will be better off a year from now, while 18% say it will be worse off, and most Americans (56%) say it will be about the same as now. In September, 16% said the economy would improve.

In addition, the public has a more upbeat view of the availability of jobs in their local communities. Currently, 40% say there are plenty of jobs available locally, while 49% say jobs are difficult to find. Last January, just a third of Americans had an upbeat opinion of their local employment situation.

Perceptions of the local job situation have improved particularly in the West, among political independents, and middle-income Americans. Roughly half (49%) of those with annual household incomes of between $30,000 and $75,000 now say there are plenty of jobs available locally. In January, only about a third in those income categories said plenty of jobs were available locally (35%).

The belief by more Americans that jobs are plentiful appears to be helping President Bush’s rating on the economy. Currently, 39% approve of Bush’s job performance in this area, his highest rating since February (38%). Among those who say that jobs are available locally, Bush’s rating on the economy is 56%; by contrast, just 28% of those who say jobs are difficult to find approve of Bush’s performance on the economy.

Personal Finances

About half of Americans (48%) rate their own personal financial situation as good or excellent, which has changed little in recent years. However, there is a bit more personal financial optimism than in January 2006. Currently, 67% say they expect the financial situation of themselves and their families to improve either a lot (10%) or some (57%) over the next year; that compares with 61% who were personally optimistic almost a year ago.

Notably, while people’s evaluations of their personal financial situations remain deeply polarized along political lines, there continues to be greater partisan agreement about future financial expectations. Roughly three-quarters of Republicans (76%) say they expect their financial situation to improve at least some, compared with 65% of Democrats and 64% of independents.

Foreign Policy Attitudes: Little Change

Pew’s 2005 survey of foreign policy attitudes showed a steady rise in isolationist sentiment from earlier in the decade. In that survey, 42% said the U.S. should “mind its own business internationally,” up from 34% in 2004 and just 30% in 2002. As was the case in October 2005, there are major socioeconomic and political differences in views on this issue. (See “Opinion Leaders Turn Cautious, Public Looks Homeward,” Nov. 17, 2005)

About half of those with a high school education or less (51%) believe that the U.S. should mind its own business internationally, compared with just a quarter of college graduates. Politically, conservative and moderate Democrats are the only group in which a majority (51%) agrees with this statement. By contrast, conservative Republicans disagree by about three-to-one (73%-24%); views of the other political groups are more mixed.

There also has been little change since the fall of 2005 in opinions about whether the United States “should cooperate fully with the United Nations.” Currently, 57% agree with this statement, compared with 35% who disagree. Overall opinions of the U.N., as well as whether the U.S. should cooperate fully with that organization, remain deeply politicized. Eight-in-ten liberal Democrats, and 68% of moderate and conservative Democrats feel the U.S. should cooperate fully with the U.N. That compares with smaller majorities of independents (57%) and moderate and liberal Republicans (55%). Only about a third of conservative Republicans agree that the U.S. should cooperate fully with the U.N., while 62% disagree.

Anti-Terrorism Policies

Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the public has been fairly consistent in its opinions about anti-terrorism policies. Solid majorities favor requiring citizens to carry a national identity card at all times and allowing airport personnel to do extra checks on passengers who appear to be of Middle Eastern descent (57% each).

By contrast, there has been much less support for the government monitoring personal communications and credit card purchases; support for these steps are even lower when people are asked specifically about the government monitoring their personal calls and credit card purchases.

In the current survey, just 22% favor allowing the government to monitor their personal phone calls and emails; this is consistent with support for this step since the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Only about a quarter (26%) favor the government monitoring their credit card purchases. More Americans backed this policy in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 (40%), but support fell soon afterward.

Despite the extensive support for allowing extra airline checks on people who appear to be Middle Eastern, there are major demographic and political differences concerning this practice. Democrats themselves are divided ­ a narrow majority of conservative and moderate Democrats (52%) favor permitting greater scrutiny of people who appear to be Middle Eastern, but just 37% of liberal Democrats agree.

Older Americans ­ those ages 50 and older ­ are much more supportive of allowing extra checks on passengers who appear to be Middle Eastern than are people under age 30. However, race is not a factor in these opinions. About as many African Americans as whites are in favor of allowing airport personnel to do extra checks on passengers who appear to be of Middle Eastern descent (57% of blacks, 59% of whites).

Katrina Update

In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the public was highly critical of the federal government’s response to the tragedy. However, Americans are now even more critical of the government’s job performance in handling the crisis ­ just 20% say the government has done an excellent or good job in the aftermath of the hurricane, while fully 76% rate its job performance as only fair (36%) or poor (40%).

As expected, there are political differences in the public’s evaluation of the government’s performance after Katrina, with Democrats much less favorable than Republicans. But even among Republicans just a third give the government a positive rating, while 61% say the government has done only fair or poor in Katrina’s aftermath.

These differences also are reflected in concerns over whether the government is spending too much or too little on hurricane relief. Most Americans (55%) ­ and majorities or pluralities in every major demographic and political group ­ say their bigger concern is that the government is spending too little rather than too much on Hurricane Katrina relief efforts. Even among conservative Republicans, where concerns about excessive government spending on Katrina relief are fairly pronounced, somewhat more say their greater concern is that the government will spend too little rather than too much on these efforts (by 42% to 32%).

Despite the bleak assessments of the government’s performance after Katrina, most Americans say generally there has been a lot (9%) or some (47%) progress in rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Yet these perceptions also differ along political and racial lines. Roughly seven-in-ten Republicans (71%), and 58% of whites, believe at least some progress has been made in rebuilding areas affected by the hurricane; only about half of Democrats (47%) ­ and 46% of blacks ­ agree.

For the first time since the Vietnam era, foreign affairs and national security issues are looming larger than economic concerns in a presidential election. The Sept. 11 attacks and the two wars that followed not only have raised the stakes for voters as they consider their choice for president, but also have created deep divisions and conflicting sentiments over U.S. foreign policy in a troubled time.

Dissatisfaction with Iraq is shaping opinions about foreign policy as much, if not more than, Americans’ continuing concerns over terrorism. Both attitudes now inform the public’s point of view of the U.S. role in the world. Tellingly, the poll finds about as many respondents favoring a decisive foreign policy (62%) as supporting a cautious approach (66%). And reflecting an ever-widening partisan gap on foreign policy issues, Republicans assign higher priority to decisiveness than to caution, while Democrats do just the opposite.

Americans are acutely aware of ­ and worried about ­ the loss of international respect for the United States given disillusionment over Iraq. Two-thirds say the U.S. is less respected by other countries than in the past, and this opinion is particularly prevalent among opponents of the Iraq war. Nearly nine-in-ten (87%) of those who think the war was the wrong decision say the U.S. is less respected internationally, compared with 53% who say the war was the right decision. And by roughly two-to-one, this loss of respect is viewed as a major ­ not minor ­ problem for the U.S.

Yet it also is clear that the constant threat of terrorism continues to influence public attitudes toward the use of force in the post-Sept. 11 era. Fully 88% of Americans rate “taking measures to protect the U.S. from terrorist attacks” as a top foreign policy priority. And while the public has deep reservations about the war in Iraq, there is sustained support for the doctrine of preemption. A 60% majority believes that the use of military force can at least be sometimes justified against countries that may seriously threaten the U.S., but have not attacked. This is only a slight decline from the 67% that expressed that view in May 2003, when most Americans judged the war in Iraq a success.

Nonetheless, the public supports a cooperative stance toward America’s allies. Overall, a majority of Americans ­ and nearly half of Republicans ­ rate improving relations with U.S. allies as a top foreign policy priority. The nationwide survey of foreign policy attitudes by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, conducted in association with the Council on Foreign Relations, also finds that by 49%-37%, the public believes that the nation’s foreign policy should strongly take into account the interests of U.S. allies, rather than be based mostly on the national interests of the United States.

Continuing discontent with the way things are going in Iraq underlies public criticism of the Bush administration’s overall approach to national security. The survey of foreign policy attitudes, conducted July 8-18 among 2,009 adults nationwide, finds a solid 59% majority faulting the Bush administration for being too quick to use force rather than trying hard enough to reach diplomatic solutions. A growing minority (37%) believes the administration pays too little attention to the interests and views of U.S. allies in conducting foreign policy, while 15% say it pays too much attention and 38% say the administration pays the right amount of attention to allied interests.

Moreover, evaluations of President Bush’s handling of Iraq itself remain critical. An update of public opinion on Iraq, conducted August 5-10 among 1,512 adults, shows that more than a month after the transfer of sovereignty to the new Iraqi government, 52% disapprove of the way Bush is managing that situation. And almost six-in-ten (58%) continue to say that the president does not have a clear plan for bringing the situation in Iraq to a successful conclusion.

At the same time, there are also expressions of support for hardline antiterrorism measures both domestically and overseas. By a significant margin (49%-29%), more Americans are concerned that the government has not gone far enough to protect the country than are concerned that the government has gone too far in restricting civil liberties. The poll also finds that while a narrow majority of Americans (53%) believe that torture should rarely or never be used to gain important information from suspected terrorists, a sizable minority (43%) thinks torture can at least sometimes be justified.

Republicans and Democrats now hold sharply divergent views on a range of foreign policy attitudes, including the use of torture, the proper balance between fighting terrorism and protecting civil liberties, and even the root causes of the 9/11 attacks. Since late September 2001, a growing number of Democrats (51%) and independents (45%) believe that U.S. wrongdoing in dealings with other countries might have motivated the 9/11 attacks. Republicans reject that view even more decisively than three years ago (76% now, 65% in late September 2001).

Nowhere is the partisan divide more evident than in views of America’s global standing. Fully 80% of Democrats and 74% of independents say the U.S. is less respected by other countries than in the past. Only about half of Republicans (47%) believe the U.S. has lost respect. At the same time, an increasing number of Republicans and independents ­ but not Democrats ­ believe the United States is more powerful than it was a decade ago. Democratic perceptions of U.S. power have not changed at all from a survey conducted just prior to the 9/11 attacks: 32% of Democrats saw the U.S. growing in power then, and the same number do so today.

Partisan gaps also are seen in differing visions of the nation’s long-term foreign policy goals. Democrats rate protecting the jobs of American workers and combating terrorism as about equal in importance, and at the top of their scale of foreign policy priorities (89% cite jobs, 86% terrorism). For Republicans, by comparison, combating terrorism is by far the most important policy objective. Beyond that, many more Republicans than Democrats view preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction as a top priority, while Democrats attach greater urgency to strengthening the U.N., dealing with world hunger and reducing the spread of AIDS and other infectious diseases.

The public’s overall priorities are significantly different now than they were in October 2001. In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, concern over many objectives unrelated to terrorism ­ especially reducing the spread of AIDS and dealing with hunger ­ fell sharply. But those concerns have rebounded in the current survey, in some cases to pre-9/11 levels.

By contrast, the public attaches somewhat less importance than it has in the past to finding a solution to the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. Overall, the public sympathies in that conflict still lie with Israel rather than the Palestinians (by 40%-13%). Yet there has been a sharp decline in the percentage of Americans who regard U.S. policies in the Middle East as fair ­ 35% say they are fair, down from 47% in May 2003. While the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has barely been mentioned in the presidential campaign, public opinion about the region has become more polarized as well, with Democrats increasingly skeptical that the U.S. is fair in its policies.

Public opinion on other international issues unrelated to terrorism and Iraq ­ such as China and the impact of NAFTA and other trade agreements ­ has been fairly stable in recent years. On balance, a plurality of Americans (40%) characterize China as “a serious problem, but not an adversary,” while 36% think China “is not much of a problem.” The latter figure is little changed from two years ago (33%). Prior to the Sept. 11 attacks, just 23% thought that China was not much of a problem for the U.S.

Finally, the public remains divided over the impact of free trade. A 47% plurality believes NAFTA and other free trade agreements have been a good thing for the United States, while 34% say they have been a bad thing. Yet Americans are far less positive about the personal impact of such trade deals ­ 34% say their financial situation has been helped, compared with 41% who say they have been hurt by free trade agreements. Further, protecting jobs now ranks as highly as a foreign policy priority as it did in the early 1990s.

Throughout the world, there is a tension in opinion brought on by the push and pull of globalization. Strong majorities in all regions believe that increased global interconnectedness is a good thing. But globalization is more popular among the youth of the world. Everywhere but Latin America, young people are more likely than their elders to see advantages in increased global trade and communication, and they are more likely to embrace “globalization” per se¹. This hesitation among some older citizens to embrace the movement toward globalization may be due in part to latent nationalism. Trend data from the World Values Survey², in successive surveys over the past 20 years, show that for the last two decades older people in the U.S. and throughout Western Europe have consistently expressed more national pride than a generation of older citizens.

Whose Culture is Best?

The Global Attitudes survey shows that people all over the world and of all ages are proud of their cultures. Yet it is only in the West (North America and Western Europe) where that pride is markedly stronger among the older generations, while younger people tend to be less wedded to their cultural identities.

In the U.S., 68% of those ages 65 and older agree with the statement “our people are not perfect, but our culture is superior,” while only 49% of those ages 18-29 agree. The generation gap in Western Europe is similar. More than half of older Western Europeans (53%) are culturally chauvinistic, compared with only one-in-three (32%) of their younger counterparts. The difference between generations is particularly apparent in France, where only 21% of those under age 30 support the notion of cultural superiority while 56% of those aged 65 and older say French culture is superior.

Eastern Europeans overall are more likely than their Western counterparts to say that their culture is superior. However, generational differences are not as sharp or as consistent as those seen in the US and Western Europe. In Bulgaria, Russia and Ukraine, citizens of all ages agree about the superiority of their respective cultures. In the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovak Republic, there are differences in perspective across age groups.

In Africa and Latin America, strong majorities, cutting across almost all ages, believe their culture is superior. In Asia, feelings of cultural superiority are even more intense. There are no major generation gaps in the region, except in Japan, where 84% of older people think that their culture is superior, compared with only 56% of those under age 30 who hold that view.

Protecting “Our Way of Life”

Despite the general attraction of globalization and possibly, as a reflection of their sense of cultural superiority, solid majorities everywhere think that their way of life needs to be protected against foreign influence. In most parts of the world, that desire cuts across all age groups. However, in the U.S., Western Europe and parts of Eastern Europe, older people are much more worried than the young about defending their country’s way of life.

In the U.S., seven-in-ten (71%) people ages 65 and older want to shield their way of life from foreign influence, while just over half (55%) of those ages 18 to 29 agree. This generation gap is even greater in France, Germany and Britain, where older people are twice as likely as young people to be worried about erosion of their way of life. Generational differences are less consistent in Eastern Europe. Concern is greatest among older people in Russia and Ukraine, while young Czechs are more worried than their elders about foreign influence.

Africans, Asians, Latin Americans and people living in the Middle East are generally even more worried than Americans and Europeans about a pernicious foreign influence on their way of life, but that concern is broadly shared across generations, with little significant difference between age groups.

Putting the Brakes on Immigration

Skepticism about foreign influence is evident in widespread, intense antipathy toward immigration. Majorities in nearly every country surveyed support tougher restrictions on people entering their countries. Immigrants are particularly unpopular across Europe, especially among the older generation, where half of those surveyed completely agree with the need for additional immigration controls. The anti-immigrant generation gap is widest in France, where more than half (53%) of those ages 65 and older completely agree that immigration should be restricted. Only a quarter (24%) of younger French men and women shared such strong views.

Anti-immigrant sentiment also runs high in the United States, especially among older Americans. Half (50%) of those ages 65 and older strongly support new controls on entry of people into the country. Only four-in-ten (40%) young people share that intensity of sentiment.

Support for greater immigration controls also is widespread in Africa, Asia and Latin America, without the generational differences seen in Europe and the United States. The principal exception is Japan, where older people are much more vehement than younger people that foreigners should face restrictions for entering their country. Fully 64% of Japanese ages 65 and older say there should be more control over foreign immigration. Only 12% of those ages 18-29 agree.

Most Agree English is Important

While most citizens of the world long to preserve their own national identities and to protect their cultures from foreign influence, majorities everywhere agree on the importance of children learning English or, in the case of the U.S. and Britain, on the necessity for children to learn a foreign language.

Generational differences on language training suggest that, while older Americans and Western Europeans are quite worried about foreign threats to their way of life, they still place great value on developing the language skills necessary to cope with the broader world. Fully 42% of US senior citizens completely agree that children need to learn a foreign language. Only 29% of those under the age of 30 feel that strongly about language training. In France, 68% of those ages 65 and older completely agree that kids need to learn English to succeed in the world today. Only 44% of those ages 18-29 feel that strongly. The age gap is equally wide in Britain and less pronounced in Germany and Italy.

In Eastern Europe, the generational difference on this issue runs in the opposite direction. Young people are much more strongly committed to the idea of learning English than the older generation. Overall, 53% of Eastern Europeans under the age of 30 completely agree that children need to learn English to succeed in the world today. Only 29% of those ages 65 and older feel the same way.

In Latin America, overwhelming majorities of all ages agree about the importance of learning English. Only in Mexico do young people place much greater value on language training than do their elders. In Asia, there is similarly widespread agreement among all age groups about the need to learn English. The lone exception is Japan, where 75% of those ages 65 and older completely agree that it is important for kids to learn English, while only 45% of those ages 18-29 completely agree.

¹ This also is true in the Asian countries surveyed by the Global Attitudes Project but not aggregated for the accompanying table or for this analysis.
² The World Values Survey, run out of University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, can be found online at www.worldvaluessurvey.org.

The speed of the war in Iraq and the prevailing belief that the Iraqi people are better off as a result have modestly improved the image of America. But in most countries, opinions of the U.S. are markedly lower than they were a year ago. The war has widened the rift between Americans and Western Europeans, further inflamed the Muslim world, softened support for the war on terrorism, and significantly weakened global public support for the pillars of the post-World War II era — the U.N. and the North Atlantic alliance.

These are the principal findings from the latest survey of the Pew Global Attitudes Project, conducted over the past month in 20 countries and the Palestinian Authority. It is being released together with a broader survey of 44 nations conducted in 2002, which covers attitudes on globalization, democratization and the role of Islam in governance and society.

While the postwar poll paints a mostly negative picture of the image of America, its people and policies, the broader Pew Global Attitudes survey shows wide support for the fundamental economic and political values that the U.S. has long promoted. Globalization, the free market model and democratic ideals are accepted in all corners of the world. Most notably, the 44-nation survey found strong democratic aspirations in most of the Muslim publics surveyed. The postwar update confirms that these aspirations remain intact despite the war and its attendant controversies.

The new survey shows, however, that public confidence in the United Nations is a major victim of the conflict in Iraq. Positive ratings for the world body have tumbled in nearly every country for which benchmark measures are available. Majorities or pluralities in most countries believe that the war in Iraq showed the U.N. to be not so important any more. The idea that the U.N. is less relevant is much more prevalent now than it was just before the war, and is shared by people in countries that backed the war, the U.S. and Great Britain, as well as in nations that opposed it, notably France and Germany.

In addition, majorities in five of seven NATO countries surveyed support a more independent relationship with the U.S. on diplomatic and security affairs. Fully three-quarters in France (76%), and solid majorities in Turkey (62%), Spain (62%), Italy (61%) and Germany (57%) believe Western Europe should take a more independent approach than it has in the past. ?

The British and Americans disagree — narrow majorities in both countries want the partnership between the U.S. and Western Europe to remain as close as ever. But the percentage of Americans favoring continued close ties with Western Europe has fallen — from 62% before the war to 53% in the current survey. In fact, the American people have cooled on France and Germany as much as the French and Germans have cooled on the U.S.

In Western Europe, negative views of America have declined somewhat since just prior to the war in Iraq, when anti-war sentiment peaked. But since last summer, favorable opinions of the U.S have slipped in nearly every country for which trend measures are available. Views of the American people, while still largely favorable, have fallen as well. The belief that the U.S. pursues a unilateralist foreign policy, which had been extensive last summer, has only grown in the war’s aftermath.

In Great Britain and Italy, positive opinions of the U.S. increased considerably since just before the war (see page 19). Of the 21 publics surveyed in the new poll, overall support for the United States is greatest by far in Israel, where 79% view the U.S. favorably. Israelis also express near-universal support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism, with 85% favoring the fight against terrorism. Majorities in Western Europe and Australia also back the war on terrorism, but support has slipped since last summer in both France and Germany (15 points in France, 10 points in Germany).

In addition, the bottom has fallen out of support for America in most of the Muslim world. Negative views of the U.S. among Muslims, which had been largely limited to countries in the Middle East, have spread to Muslim populations in Indonesia and Nigeria. Since last summer, favorable ratings for the U.S. have fallen from 61% to 15% in Indonesia and from 71% to 38% among Muslims in Nigeria.

In the wake of the war, a growing percentage of Muslims see serious threats to Islam. Specifically, majorities in seven of eight Muslim populations surveyed express worries that the U.S. might become a military threat to their countries. Even in Kuwait, where people have a generally favorable view of the United States, 53% voice at least some concern that the U.S. could someday pose a threat.

Support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism also has fallen in most Muslim publics. Equally significant, solid majorities in the Palestinian Authority, Indonesia and Jordan — and nearly half of those in Morocco and Pakistan — say they have at least some confidence in Osama bin Laden to “do the right thing regarding world affairs.” Fully 71% of Palestinians say they have confidence in bin Laden in this regard.

More generally, the postwar update survey of 16,000 respondents finds, in most countries that are friendly to the United States, only modest percentages have confidence that President Bush will do the right thing in international affairs. People in most countries rate Vladimir Putin, Gerhard Schroeder, Jacques Chirac and Tony Blair more highly than they do Bush. The president also ranks slightly behind Blair in the United States, mostly due to political partisanship. Nearly all Republicans (95%) express confidence in Bush, compared with 64% of Democrats.

War Views Entrenched

The war itself did little to change opinions about the merits of using force in Iraq. In countries where there was strong opposition to the war, people overwhelmingly believe their governments made the right decision to stay out of the conflict. In countries that backed the war, with the notable exception of Spain, publics believe their governments made the right decision. In Great Britain, support for the war has grown following its successful outcome. A majority of Turks oppose even the limited help their government offered the U.S. during the war, while Kuwaitis largely approve of their government’s support for the military effort.

Opinion about the war is strongly related to perceptions of how the U.S. and its allies conducted the war and are managing its aftermath. In countries opposed to the war, there is a widespread belief the coalition did not try hard enough to avoid civilian casualties. By contrast, solid majorities in most of the coalition countries, as well as Israel, believe the U.S. and its allies did make a serious attempt to spare civilians. Eight-in-ten Americans (82%) feel that way, the highest percentage of any population surveyed.

A somewhat different pattern is apparent in attitudes toward the postwar reconstruction of Iraq. Americans generally believe the allies are taking the needs of the Iraqi people into account. But there is less support for that point of view elsewhere, even in Great Britain, Australia and Israel. Muslim publics generally believe the United States and its allies are doing only a fair or poor job in addressing the needs of the Iraqi people in the postwar reconstruction.

There also is widespread disappointment among Muslims that Iraq did not put up more of a fight against the U.S. and its allies. Overwhelming majorities in Morocco (93%), Jordan (91%), Lebanon (82%), Turkey (82%), Indonesia (82%), and the Palestinian Authority (81%) say they are disappointed the Iraqi military put up so little resistance. Many others around the world share that view, including people in South Korea (58%), Brazil (50%) and Russia (45%).

Still, even in countries that staunchly opposed the war many people believe that Iraqis will be better off now that Saddam Hussein has been removed from power. Solid majorities in Western Europe believe the Iraqi people will be better off, as do eight-in-ten Kuwaitis and half of the Lebanese. But substantial majorities elsewhere, notably in Jordan and the Palestinian Authority, say Iraqis will be
worse off now that Hussein has been deposed.

The postwar update shows limited optimism for a surge of democratic reform in the Middle East. Substantial minorities of Muslims in many countries say the region will become somewhat more democratic, but only in Kuwait do as many as half predict the Middle East will become much more democratic. Expectations of major political changes in the Middle East are modest in countries that participated in the war. Just 16% in Great Britain, 14% in the U.S. and 10% in Australia think that the Middle East will become much more democratic.

U.S. Favors Israel

U.S. policies toward the Middle East come under considerable criticism in the new poll. In 20 of 21 populations surveyed — Americans are the only exception — pluralities or majorities believe the United States favors Israel over the Palestinians too much. This opinion is shared in Israel; 47% of Israelis believe that the U.S. favors Israel too much, while 38% say the policy is fair and 11% think the U.S. favors the Palestinians too much.

But Israel is the only country, aside from the U.S., in which a majority says that U.S. policies lead to more stability in the region. Most Muslim populations think U.S. policies bring less stability to the Middle East, while people elsewhere are divided in their evaluations of the impact of U.S. policies.

More broadly, the postwar survey asked people their views on the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. By wide margins, most Muslim populations doubt that a way can be found for the state of Israel to exist so that the rights and needs of the Palestinian people are met. Eight-in-ten residents of the Palestinian Authority express this opinion. But Arabs in Israel, who voice the same criticisms of U.S. policy in the Middle East as do other Muslims, generally believe that a way can be found for the state of Israel to exist so that Palestinian rights and needs are addressed. In fact, Arabs in Israel are nearly as likely as Jews to hold that opinion (62% of Arabs, 68% of Jews).

Outside of the Muslim world, there is general agreement that there is a way to ensure Israel’s existence and meet the needs of Palestinians. This view is widely shared in North America and Western Europe.

As people around the world contemplate emerging security threats, countries in the Middle East — Iran and Syria — are viewed as less of a danger than North Korea. Majorities in most countries see North Korea as at least a moderate threat to Asian stability and world peace, while nearly four-in-ten in Australia (39%), the U.S. (38%) and Germany (37%) view North Korea as a great danger. However, just 28% of South Koreans agree that North Korea presents a major threat to regional stability. Israelis have a different sense of potential threats than do people elsewhere. More than half of Israelis (54%) say Iran presents a great threat to the Middle East, twice the proportion in the next closest country (U.S. at 26%).

Democracy Can Work Here

Despite soaring anti-Americanism and substantial support for Osama bin Laden, there is considerable appetite in the Muslim world for democratic freedoms. The broader, 44-nation survey shows that people in Muslim countries place a high value on freedom of expression, freedom of the press, multi-party systems and equal treatment under the law. This includes people living in kingdoms such as Jordan and Kuwait, as well as those in authoritarian states like Uzbekistan and Pakistan. In fact, many of the Muslim publics polled expressed a stronger desire for democratic freedoms than the publics in some nations of Eastern Europe, notably Russia and Bulgaria.

The postwar update finds that in most Muslim populations, large majorities continue to believe that Western-style democracy can work in their countries. This is the case in predominantly Muslim countries like Kuwait (83%) and Bangladesh (57%), but also in religiously diverse countries like Nigeria (75%). There are no substantive differences between Muslims and non-Muslims in Nigeria on this point. Only in Indonesia and Turkey do substantial percentages say democracy is a Western way of doing things that would not work in their countries (53%, 37%). ?

At the same time, most Muslims also support a prominent — and in some cases expanding — role for Islam and religious leaders in the political life of their countries. Yet that opinion does not diminish Muslim support for a system of governance that ensures the same civil liberties and political rights enjoyed by democracies.

In religiously diverse countries, Muslims generally favor keeping religion a private matter at the same rates as non-Muslims. In Nigeria, for example, six-in-ten Muslims and the same proportion of non-Muslims completely agree that religion should be kept separate from government policy. In Lebanon, there are only modest differences on this point between Muslims and non-Muslims.

U.S. Ideals Backed — Mostly

The broad desire for democracy in Muslim countries and elsewhere is but one indication of the global acceptance of ideas and principles espoused by the United States. The major survey also shows that the free market model has been embraced by people almost everywhere, whether in Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, or Asia. Majorities in 33 of the 44 nations surveyed feel that people are better off in a free-market economy, even if that leads to disparities in wealth and income. Despite the protests in recent years against globalization and America’s role in fostering it, people are surprisingly accepting of the increased interconnectedness that defines globalization.

This is not to say that they accept democracy and capitalism without qualification, or that they are not concerned about many of the problems of modern life. By and large, however, the people of the world accept the concepts and values that underlie the American approach to governance and business.

Yet there are profound differences in the way Americans and people in other countries — especially Western Europeans — view such fundamental issues as the limits of personal freedom and the role of government in helping the poor. Americans are more individualistic and favor a less compassionate government than do Europeans and others. Nearly two-thirds of Americans (65%) believe success is not outside of their control. Except for Canadians (63%), most of the world disagrees. Among 44 nations surveyed, the U.S. has one of the highest percentages of people who think that most people who fail in life have themselves to blame, rather than society.

Accordingly, Americans care more about personal freedom than government assurances of social justice. Fully 58% of Americans say it is more important to have the freedom to pursue personal goals without government interference, while just 34% say it is more important for government to guarantee that no one is in need. In most other nations, majorities embrace the opposite view. And while most Americans support a social safety net, they are less strongly committed than other peoples to their government taking care of citizens who cannot take care of themselves.

Many Want Democracy, Fewer Have It

People everywhere are united by their desire for honest multiparty elections, freedom of speech and religion and an impartial judiciary. A fair judiciary is seen as especially important; in most countries it is more highly valued than free elections.

Yet there is a widespread sense that these democratic aspirations are not being fulfilled. In Eastern Europe, only in the Czech Republic does a majority (58%) say they have honest, multiparty elections. In Russia and Ukraine, only small minorities feel they have free elections (15% in Russia, 21% in Ukraine). Skepticism about honest elections and freedom of expression are the norm for almost all of the democratizing countries of the world, but this is especially the case in Muslim countries.

Perceptions of repression in some predominantly Muslim countries — notably Turkey and Lebanon — are as widespread as anywhere in the world. Solid majorities in both Turkey and Lebanon say their nations lack several fundamental rights: freedom of speech, a free press, fair elections and an impartial judiciary.

Soviet Hangover

In much of Eastern Europe, there is now greater acceptance of post-communist political changes compared with Pulse of Europe surveys conducted by the then-Times Mirror Center for the People & the Press in 1991, as the Soviet Union was collapsing. Even so, the legacy of communism is apparent in the attitudes of many Eastern European publics. Only about half of those in Ukraine and Russia approve of the political changes that have occurred since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

More generally, Russians and Ukrainians, as well as most other Eastern European publics, say a leader with a “strong hand” could solve national problems better than a democratic government. Only Czechs and Slovaks favor democracy over a strong leader. In most of Latin America and Africa, there is more of a preference for democracy.

There is, however, a large generation gap on views of democracy in Eastern Europe. In most Eastern European countries surveyed, people age 60 and older are much more likely to disapprove of post-communist political changes than are people under the age of 35.

“Yes” to a Smaller World

Beyond their common desire for democracy and free markets, people in emerging nations
also generally acknowledge and accept globalization. People worldwide have become aware of the impact of increasing interconnectedness on their countries and their own lives. Majorities in 41 of 44 countries surveyed say that international trade and business contacts have increased in the past 5 years.

The survey finds broad acceptance of the increasing interconnectedness of the world. Three-quarters or more of those interviewed in almost every country think children need to learn English to succeed in the world today. People generally view the growth in foreign trade, global communication and international popular culture as good for them and their families as well as their countries. For most of the world’s people, however, this approval is guarded. Increased trade and business ties and other changes are viewed as somewhat positive, not very positive.

Despite the widespread support for the globalization process, people around the world think many aspects of their lives — including some affected by globalization — are getting worse. Majorities in 34 of 44 countries surveyed say the availability of good-paying jobs has gotten worse compared with five years ago. They also see the gap between rich and poor, the affordability of health care and the ability to save for one’s old age as getting worse. But people do not blame a more interconnected world for these problems — they mostly point to domestic factors. This is especially true in economically faltering countries in Africa and Latin America, such as Kenya and Argentina.

People around the world are more inclined to credit globalization for conditions they see as improving, such as increased availability of food in stores and more modern medicines and treatments.

While anti-globalization forces have not convinced the public that globalization is the root cause of their economic struggles, the public does share the critics’ concerns about eroding national sovereignty and a loss of cultural identity. Large majorities in 42 of 44 countries believe that their traditional way of life is getting lost and most people feel that their way of life has to be protected against foreign influence. There is less agreement that consumerism and commercialism represent a threat to one’s culture. However, that point of view is prevalent in Western Europe and Latin America.

The polling finds, however, that the idea of “global” forces is something of a red flag to people around the world. “Global economy” is seen as more threatening than “trade with other countries.” People worry about the impact of global trade on themselves and their families even though they believe that global trade is probably a good thing for their country as a whole.

Globalization Foes Fail to Get Through

People around the world generally have a positive view of the symbols of globalization. Large corporations from other countries get a favorable review in much of the world, as do international organizations.

In Africa, people express highly favorable opinions of foreign corporations, while the Middle East is more divided. Dislike of foreign firms is mostly limited to people in the major advanced economies of Western Europe, the U.S. and Canada. Even in these countries, however, positive evaluations of multinationals outweigh negative assessments.

Similarly, the impact of international financial organizations such as the World Bank, the IMF and the World Trade Organization is seen as much more positive than negative in most parts of the world. This is overwhelmingly the case in Africa. Argentina, Brazil, Jordan and Turkey stand out for their highly critical view of these institutions.
In contrast, people generally have a negative view of anti-globalization protesters. The French give higher ratings to multinational corporations than to the protesters. And in Italy, site of a major clash in 2001 between police and anti-globalization forces in Genoa, the public by nearly two-to-one (51%-27%) says the protesters are having a bad influence on the country. It should be noted that majorities in many countries declined to give an opinion of anti-globalization protesters. This is mostly the case in developing countries, but also in more advanced nations like South Korea (61%) and Japan (55%).

But “Foreign” Still a Negative

Most people in the world feel their way of life needs protection from foreign influence, and majorities in nearly every country surveyed favor tougher restrictions on people entering their countries. Overwhelming majorities in the Western European countries surveyed support tighter borders. In fact, Western Europeans expressed as much support for such restrictions as they did in the Pulse of Europe survey 12 years ago, when Europe was less unified. Eastern Europeans also have become much more wary of porous borders than when the Cold War was ending, a time when many people were more concerned with getting out of their countries than with keeping others from getting in.

In that context, Western Europeans take a much dimmer view of foreign workers from Eastern Europe, as well as the Middle East and North Africa, than they do of foreign workers from other European Union countries. This is especially the case in Germany, where 59% say Middle Easterners and North Africans who come to work in Germany are bad for the country; 53% say that about foreign workers from Eastern Europe.

This European concern about foreign influence and sovereignty also is seen in other ways. There are still sizable minorities of people in Great Britain, France, Germany and Italy who think that there are parts of other countries that really belong to them. This sentiment has not diminished — and in some cases has risen dramatically — since the end of the Cold War. Fully 63% of Russians believe that “there are parts of neighboring countries that really belong to Russia.” In 1991, just 22% agreed with that statement. Broad majorities in the Philippines, India, Lebanon, South Africa, Pakistan, Nigeria, South Korea and Turkey also feel that parts of other nations rightfully belong to their country.

As was the case in 1991, the American public has a more favorable view of ethnic and racial minorities than do Western European publics. African Americans and Hispanics are viewed much more positively in the U.S. than are Turks in Germany, North Africans in France, and Albanians in Italy.

Modern Times

People around the world are struggling with some elements of modern life, while easily accepting others. Many people say that they do not like the pace of modern life. Yet they broadly endorse the things that make life go fast, especially cell phones and the Internet.

There is significant opposition to modern commercial culture in advanced countries, where opinions about the pace of life and such modern conveniences as fast food and television are more mixed than they are in the developing world. Western Europeans and Latin Americans are most likely to express the view that commercialism represents a threat to their cultures.

Underscoring the conflicted views many people have of the modern world, people in Africa are the most likely to express the concern that their traditional way of life is being lost. Yet they also are the most enthusiastic about modern conveniences and fast food.

There also is a significant global generation gap on views of modern life. Younger and better-educated people are more comfortable with the pace of modern life. Younger people also have a better opinion of fast food and television than do their elders.

Globally, people have a broadly favorable view of birth control and family planning, with the notable exception of populations in aging industrial nations, such as Italy, Japan and Germany. Only about three-in-ten Japanese (32%) and fewer than half in Italy and Germany (41%, 47%, respectively), view birth control as a positive change. In most of the developing nations of Africa and Asia, 70% or more say birth control and family planning have changed things for the better.

Divided Over Religion, Homosexuality

Homosexuality and the centrality of religion to personal morality divide the peoples of the world. Majorities in most countries say it is necessary to believe in God to be a moral person. But Canadians and Europeans — both in the West and the East — take the secular view that it is possible to be moral without believing in God. Opinion in the United States is closer to that in most developing countries, where agreement is nearly universal that personal morality is linked to belief in God.

Acceptance of homosexuality divides the publics of the world in a similar way. People in Africa and the Middle East strongly object to societal acceptance of homosexuality. But there is far greater tolerance for homosexuality in major Latin American countries such as Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil. Opinion in Europe is split between West and East. Majorities in every Western European nation surveyed say homosexuality should be accepted by society, while most Russians, Poles and Ukrainians disagree. Americans are divided — a thin majority (51%) believes homosexuality should be accepted, while 42% disagree.

Women’s increasing role in the workplace is broadly supported around the world. Large majorities in 41 of 44 countries believe the more satisfying way of life is when both spouses work and share the burdens of childcare. Pakistan, Egypt and Jordan are the only countries in which majorities believe it is better for women to stay home and take care of the children while the husband provides for the family.

Most Americans continue to support free trade, in spite of last fall’s destructive protests in Seattle against the World Trade Organization (WTO). But the public wants international trade agreements to protect jobs and economic growth at home, and improve the global environment. And while the nation backs free trade in principle, there is considerable opposition to granting China permanent normal trade benefits — a key aspect of the broad agreement to admit China into the WTO. The public is still largely in the dark about the agreement, however, so attitudes on the overall deal may be susceptible to change.

A strong majority of Americans (64%) believe that free trade is good for the country, while nearly as many (62%) say the same about U.S. membership in the WTO. Those in households that include union members support free trade by better than a two-to-one margin (65%-31%). While union leaders were active in the Seattle protests, a majority in this group (51%) says participation in the WTO is good for the country, against 34% who disagree.

Yet the public has clear ideas about what should be taken into account in trade deals. Protecting American jobs is the top trade priority, cited by more than three-quarters of Americans (78%), followed by maintaining economic growth (74%), and improving the global environment (52%). Among those who cite the environment, there is surprisingly strong support for free trade and the WTO; 64% of those who mentioned the environment as the top trade priority favor U.S. participation in the WTO.

But Americans oppose granting China permanent normal trade relations by a two-to-one margin (56%-28%). That is a central element in the trade agreement, under which China has agreed to make concessions in order to win admission to the WTO, along with permanent trade benefits from the United States. Even those who believe free trade is good for the United States come down against granting permanent normal trade status for China (50%-36%). However, non-whites, a category that includes many Asian-Americans, are less opposed to the agreement than whites.

The latest nationwide survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Feb. 9-14, shows that, while there is considerable opposition to permanently granting China normal trade status, most Americans (62%) have not yet heard of the trade agreement. When respondents are told something about it, a plurality (34%) says the deal will be good for the country, but 32% believes it will make no difference and 20% believes the deal will be bad for the country.

Skepticism toward the China agreement — and free trade generally — runs strongest among Americans with lower incomes and less education. More than half (54%) of college graduates say the trade agreement would be good for the United States, against just 24% of high school graduates. Among those with family incomes above $50,000, 48% sees the agreement as positive, against just 29% of those with family incomes of less than $50,000 a year.

Wages Matter

Nearly four-in-ten Americans (39%) with family incomes of less than $30,000 a year say that free trade is bad for the country, while a narrow majority (54%) rates it as positive. Higher-income Americans overwhelmingly endorse free trade, with more than three-quarters (76%) of those with family incomes above $50,000 saying it is good for the country. This conforms with recent surveys showing that Americans who are most worried about job security and wages tend to feel threatened by globalization and increased foreign trade.

The divide among income groups is not as pronounced regarding U.S. membership in the WTO. Among those with family incomes above $50,000, 68% sees WTO membership as a positive, against 21% who do not. Those with family incomes below $30,000 regard WTO membership as good for the country by a 56%-27% margin.

Contrary to the image youthful protesters presented in Seattle, younger Americans are far more inclined than older people to support free trade and the WTO. By an eight-to-one margin (80%-9%), those under age 30 regard U.S. participation in the WTO as positive. Those over age 50 are more skeptical, with 47% expressing a favorable opinion of U.S. membership in the WTO and 33% saying it will be bad for the country. Among those over 65, support for U.S. participation in the trade body drops to 39%.

Politics, for the most part, do not have a major impact on people’s attitudes on free trade and the WTO. More than six-in-ten Democrats (63%) and Republicans (62%) agree that WTO participation is beneficial for the country. However, Americans who disapprove of President Clinton are somewhat less supportive of the U.S. presence in the WTO than those who approve of the president.

Jobs Come First

Despite the strong economy, Americans rank protecting jobs as the top trade priority, followed by maintaining economic growth and improving the environment. They regard other objectives — promoting human rights, helping developing nations and aiding U.S. businesses abroad — as much lower priorities. When asked which single priority is most important, nearly four-in-ten cite protecting U.S. jobs (38%), followed by maintaining growth (33%) and improving the global environment (16%).

But there are clear differences — based on education, income levels, age and politics — over the relative importance of these priorities. Maintaining economic growth is considered most important by college graduates, with 38% rating it as the leading trade priority. Protecting the jobs of American workers ranks second, with 25%. For high school graduates and those who never completed high school, jobs are much more important — at least four-in-ten people in these categories rank that objective first (44% and 53%, respectively) — with maintaining economic growth a distant second. A similar divergence exists with regard to income. Americans whose family income is less than $30,000 rate protecting jobs more highly than continuing economic growth; for those with incomes above $50,000 a year, the order is reversed.

Improving the global environment is a particularly important trade priority for young people. Among those under age 30, one-quarter considers it most important, placing it behind jobs (35%) and maintaining growth (27%); only about half as many of those age 30-49 (13%) rate it that highly. Women under the age of 30 rate improving the environment as more important than maintaining economic growth.

Republicans and Democrats have different trade priorities, with GOP partisans rating economic growth as most important and Democrats citing jobs first. Members of the two parties also disagree over how much importance to place on improving the global environment. Six-in-ten Democrats consider it a top priority and 18% regards it as most important. Only 40% of Republicans consider the environment a top trade priority and 14% regards it as most important.

Mixed Verdict on China Trade

Overall, opposition to permanently granting China normal trade relations is largely unchanged since last June, when 54% were opposed to that idea and 32% in favor. College graduates and upper-income Americans, in spite of their support for free trade and the WTO, are adamantly opposed to granting China this benefit: College graduates say no by nearly a two-to-one margin (60%-31%), while those with family incomes above $50,000 are opposed, 58%-32%

Still, most Americans say they have not yet heard of the proposed agreement with China. Only 22% of young people (age 18-29), 20% of African-Americans and 23% of those with family incomes of under $20,000 know about the deal. A majority of college graduates, Americans over age 50 and those with incomes of $75,000 and above say they are aware of the agreement.

Those who know about the proposed deal endorse it by a sizeable margin — 45% says it will be good for the country, 24% believes it will make no difference, while 24% says it will be bad for the country. Six-in-ten Americans who have heard of the agreement and believe in free trade back the deal, against 24% who says it will make no difference, and just 10% who opposes it. Among those who haven’t heard about the agreement, most (37%) say it will make no difference, while 28% thinks it will be beneficial and 17% has a negative view.

Americans who cite protecting jobs as a top trade priority are skeptical of the agreement — almost as many say it will be bad for the country (25%) as good (29%), while 35% believes it will make no difference. Those who say maintaining economic growth is a high priority have a much more favorable view; four-in-ten (40%) say it will be good for the country. Among those who cite the global environment as a top priority, 35% holds a favorable view.

The attitudes of members of union households on this question are not markedly different from the rest of the public. About one-third (32%) of this group says the agreement is good for the country (against 34% of the public); 22% has a negative view (20%, public); and 29% believes it will make no difference (32%, public).