As fighting in Syria rages on between government forces and anti-government groups, the public continues to say that the U.S. does not have a responsibility to do something about the fighting there. And there continues to be substantial opposition to sending arms to anti-government forces in Syria.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Dec. 5-9 among 1,503 adults, also finds little change in the public’s sympathies in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians: 50% say they sympathize more with Israel while just 10% sympathize more with the Palestinians.

Only about quarter of Americans (27%) say the U.S. has a responsibility to do something about the fighting in Syria; more than twice as many (63%) say it does not. These views are virtually unchanged from March.

Similarly, just 24% favor the U.S. and its allies sending arms and military supplies to anti-government groups in Syria, while 65% are opposed. These opinions also are little changed from March.

Comparable majorities of Republicans (66%) , Democrats (61%) and independents (65%) say the U.S. does not have a responsibility to do something about the fighting in Syria, and all partisan groups also oppose arming anti-government groups.

Those who have heard a lot about the situation in Syria offer modestly more support for U.S. involvement than those who have heard less (35% vs. 22%), but still, on balance, say the U.S. does not have a responsibility to get involved.

Opinions about the United States’ responsibility to act in Syria are similar to views about obligation to act in Libya, before the U.S. and its allies launched airstrikes against Moammar Gadhafi’s forces. In March 2011, just 27% said the U.S. had a responsibility to do something about the fighting in Libya — the same percentage that says that about Syria today. Higher percentages said the U.S. had a responsibility to do something about the fighting in Darfur in 2006 (51%) and fighting between Serbs and Bosnians in Kosovo in 1999.

There has long been little public interest in the conflict in Syria. In a separate survey conducted last week (Dec. 6-9), just 19% say they are paying very close attention to political violence in Syria, while 28% say they are following this story fairly closely. About half (52%) are paying little or no attention to developments there.

Public Continues to Sympathize with Israel over Palestinians

For decades, the public has sympathized with Israel over the Palestinians and that remains the case today. Overall, 50% say they sympathize more with Israel, compared with just 10% who say they sympathize more with the Palestinians; almost a quarter (23%) do not offer an opinion while 13% volunteer that they sympathize with neither side, and 4% say both.

Attitudes on this question have been stable over the past six years, after showing more volatility in the middle of the last decade.

There continue to be stark partisan differences in Middle East sympathies. Conservative Republicans maintain strong support for Israel with fully 75% saying they sympathize with Israel compared with just 2% who sympathize with the Palestinians. By contrast, liberal Democrats are much more divided: 33% sympathize more with Israel, 22% with the Palestinians. Independents sympathize more with Israel by a 47% to 13% margin.

Among religious groups, white evangelical Protestants remain strongly supportive of Israel. Two-thirds (67%) say they sympathize more with Israel; only 5% say they sympathize more with the Palestinians. Opinion among other religious groups is more mixed. Catholics, for example, offer more sympathy for Israel than the Palestinians by a 44% to 11% margin.

There also are age differences in Mideast sympathies. About four-in-ten (38%) people younger than 30 sympathize more with Israel than the Palestinians. That is only slightly lower than the percentage of 30-49 year olds who sympathize with Israel (46%). However, more than half of those 50 and older (58%) sympathize with Israel more than the Palestinians. Age differences were more modest in 2011 and 2010.

As next week’s third and final presidential debate on foreign policy approaches, a national survey by the Pew Research Center finds increasing public pessimism about developments in the Middle East and more support for tough policies to deal with Iran’s nuclear program and economic issues with China. However, there is no change in the consensus in support for ending U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan.

Doubts have spread about the political direction of countries swept up in the Arab Spring protests that began almost two years ago. Nearly six-in-ten Americans (57%) do not believe the changes in the Middle East will lead to lasting improvements for people living in the affected countries, up sharply from 43% in April 2011.

And a majority of Americans (54%) continue to say it is more important to have stable governments in the Middle East, even if there is less democracy in the region. Just 30% say democratic governments are more important, even if there is less stability.

The public has long favored tough measures to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, and 56% now say it is more important to take a firm stand against Iran’s nuclear program, while 35% say it is more important to avoid a military conflict. In January, 50% favored taking a firm stand against Iran and 41% said it was more important to avoid a confrontation.

When it comes to China, 49% of Americans want the U.S. to get tougher with China on economic issues, compared with 42% who say it is more important to build a stronger relationship. In March 2011, the balance of opinion was the reverse: 53% said building a stronger relationship was more important while 40% advocated tougher policies.

The national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Oct. 4-7, 2012 among 1,511 adults, including 1,201 registered voters, finds that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney run about even on most foreign policy issues. On the question of who can do a better job making wise decisions about foreign policy, 47% of voters favor Obama and 43% Romney. This represents a substantial gain for Romney, who trailed Obama by 15 points on foreign policy issues in September. Romney gained on several domestic issues as well, including the deficit and jobs. (For more, see “Romney’s Strong Debate Performance Erases Obama’s Lead,” Oct. 8, 2012.)

Romney holds a nine-point lead over Obama on dealing with China’s trade policies (49% to 40%). Among independent voters, Romney holds a 16-point advantage (50% to 34%).

On dealing with other issues – Iran’s nuclear program and political instability in countries like Egypt and Libya – neither candidate has a clear advantage.

A separate survey finds that the public is divided over the Obama administration’s handling of last month’s terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya, which killed U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. The administration’s handling of the attack became a major point of contention in the Oct. 16 debate between Obama and Romney.

About four-in-ten (38%) Americans disapprove of the Obama administration’s handling of the deadly terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate, while 35% approve. About a quarter (27%) express no opinion.

Skepticism about Changes in Middle East

A majority of Americans (54%) say it is more important to have stable governments in the Middle East, even if there is less democracy in the region, while 30% say it is more important to have democratic governments, even if there is less stability. The percentage prioritizing democracy in the region has slipped over the past year and a half. In March 2011, in the early days of the Arab Spring, 37% said democracy in the region was more important than stability.

There is little partisan difference on this question; both Republicans and Democrats place a higher priority on stability. Independents also prioritize stability over democracy in the Middle East (62% vs. 27%).

By more than two-to-one (57% to 25%), the public does not think changes in political leadership in Middle Eastern countries such as Libya and Egypt will lead to lasting improvements for the people living there. Wide majorities of Republicans (68%) and independents (60%) do not anticipate lasting improvements for the people living in these countries. Democrats are more divided: 37% say they will lead to lasting improvements, 45% say they will not.

While there is no public consensus on how changes in the Middle East are likely to affect the United States, few think the effects will be positive. Just 14% believe the leadership transitions in the region will be good for the United States, down from 24% in April 2011. More than twice as many (36%) say these changes will be bad for the United States, while 38% say they will have little effect.

Nearly half (49%) of Republicans say changes in the Middle East will end up being bad for the United States, while the plurality view among Democrats (48%) is that the effect for the U.S. will be minimal.

Public Favors Less U.S. Involvement in Region

More than six-in-ten (63%) say they think the U.S. should be less involved with changes of leadership in the Middle East, compared with just 23% who say the U.S. should be more involved.

Although Republicans are more likely than Democrats or independents to favor greater involvement, just 34% of Republicans advocate this (compared with 20% of Democrats and 19% of independents).

Mixed Approval of Administration’s Handling of Libya Attack

A separate survey, conducted Oct. 12-14 among 1,006 adults, finds that 38% disapprove of the Obama administration’s handling of the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya, while 35% approve. About a quarter (27%) express no opinion.

The administration gets lower ratings from those who followed news about investigations into the embassy attack very or fairly closely. Among this group, 36% approve of the administration’s handling of the situation and 52% disapprove.

More Republicans (67%) followed news about the Libya investigations than did Democrats (53%) or independents (55%). However, looking only at independents, those who followed news about the Libya investigations disapprove of the administration’s handling of the situation by two-to-one (59% disapprove vs. 29% approve).

The survey finds particularly large partisan differences in attentiveness to specific aspects of the Libya situation. Republicans (47%) are far more likely than Democrats (19%) to say they heard a lot about reports that the U.S. embassy in Libya had requested more security prior to the attacks but did not receive it; about a third of independents (32%) heard a lot about this.

And 41% of Republicans say they heard a lot about incorrect statements by the administration that there were protests outside the embassy at the time of the attacks; that compares with just 17% of Democrats and 28% of independents.

More Want to Get Tougher on China

Since last year, the public’s priorities have shifted when it comes to economic and trade policy toward China. Currently, 49% say it is more important to get tougher with China on economic issues, while 42% say it is more important to build a stronger relationship with China on economic issues. In March 2011, more favored building stronger economic ties (53%) than getting tougher with China (40%).

Independents and Republicans now are much more supportive of getting tougher with China than they were a year and a half ago. Nearly half of independents (47%) now say it is more important to get tougher with China on economic issues, up from just 30% in March 2011. The percentage of Republicans favoring a tougher stance has increased by 11 points (from 54% to 65%) over this period.

There has been less change in opinions among Democrats, and more Democrats continue to prioritize building stronger economic relations with China (53%) over getting tough with China (39%).

This partisan divide is reflected in the vastly different views of Obama and Romney voters. By 51% to 42%, Obama voters favor building a stronger economic relationship with China. By contrast, Romney voters say it is more important to get tough with China on economic issues, by 67% to 26%.

China Concerns: Economics Trump Security Issues

A survey earlier this year by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found that far more Americans are concerned about economic issues than security issues in U.S.-China relations. (For more, see “U.S. Public, Experts Differ on China Policies,” Sept. 18, 2012.)

Fully 78% said the large amount of American debt held by China is a very serious problem for the United States, while 71% said the loss of U.S. jobs to China is a very serious problem. About six-in-ten (61%) viewed the U.S. trade deficit with China as a very serious problem.

Fewer Americans (49%) viewed China’s growing military power as a very serious problem for the United States. Comparable percentages were highly concerned about cyber attacks from China (50% very serious problem), China’s impact on the global environment (50%), and China’s human rights policies (48%).

Despite partisan differences over the seriousness of some of these issues, substantial percentages of Republicans, Democrats and independents viewed the large amount of U.S. debt held by China and the loss of U.S. jobs to China as very serious problems for the United States.

More Republicans (71%) and independents (66%) than Democrats (54%) said the U.S. trade deficit with China is a very serious problem. About half of Democrats (54%) and independents (53%) viewed China’s impact on the global environment as very serious, compared with 41% of Republicans.

Consistent Support for Firm Stance Against Iran

Since 2009, the public has maintained that it is more important to take a strong stand against Iran’s nuclear program than to avoid a military conflict with Iran. In the current survey,

56% say it is more important to take a firm stand against Iranian actions, while just 35% say it is more important to avoid a military conflict with Iran.

There are wide partisan and ideological differences in priorities for dealing with Iran. Fully 84% of conservative Republicans favor taking a firm stand against Iran’s nuclear program. Fewer than half as many liberal Democrats (38%) agree. There also is a sizable age gap in these opinions. Just 44% of those younger than 30 favor taking a strong stand against Iran; clear majorities in older age categories support a firm stance.

Among registered voters, 78% of those who support Romney say it is more important to take a firm stand against Iran; just 17% say it is more important to avoid a military conflict with Iran. Obama supporters are divided – 48% say it is more important to avoid a military conflict, while 43% say it is more important to take a firm stand against Iran.

Deep Partisan Divide over Israel

Overall, Americans are split in their views about the level of U.S. support for Israel. While a 41% plurality say that the level of American support for Israel is about right, 22% say the U.S. is too supportive, and about as many (25%) say it is not supportive enough.

Views on U.S. support for Israel are deeply divided along partisan lines. Nearly half (46%) of Republicans say the U.S. is not supportive enough of Israel, compared with just 9% of Democrats and 24% of independents.

Majority Support for Quick Troop Withdrawal from Afghanistan

As was the case earlier in the year, six-in-ten Americans (60%) now say U.S. troops should be removed from Afghanistan as soon as possible. Just 35% currently say troops should remain in the country until the situation there has stabilized.

By more than three-to-one, Democrats say U.S. troops should be removed as soon as possible (73%), rather than remain in Afghanistan until the situation stabilizes (22%). A smaller majority of independents supports a quick withdrawal (58% vs. 38% remain until stable). Republicans are evenly divided on this question: 48% say the troops should be removed as soon as possible, and an identical proportion says they should remain in place. These partisan differences are little changed from the spring.

Most Democrats (66%) say Barack Obama is handling the removal of troops from Afghanistan about right, as do 46% of independents (33% say he is not removing U.S. troops quickly enough, 14% say he is removing them too quickly).

Just 25% of Republicans believe Obama is removing troops from Afghanistan at the right pace. Instead, 42% of Republicans believe he is removing troops too quickly, while 25% say he is removing them too slowly.

By contrast, more say they oppose the Tea Party movement than support it (44% vs. 32%), according to the latest survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and The Washington Post, conducted Oct. 20-23 among 1,009 adults. One-in-ten (10%) say they support both, while 14% say they oppose both.

Partisanship plays a strong role in attitudes about the two movements. About six-in-ten Republicans (63%) say they support the Tea Party. That jumps to 77% among Republicans who describe themselves as conservative. Just 13% of Democrats support the Tea Party movement, while 64% are opposed.

About half of Democrats (52%) – and 62% of liberal Democrats – say they support the Occupy Wall Street movement. Among Republicans, 19% say they support the anti-Wall Street protests, while more than half (55%) oppose them.

Independents have mixed opinions of the Occupy Wall Street movement: 43% support the movement and 35% are opposed. By contrast, the balance of opinion among independents toward the Tea Party is much more negative: Just 30% support the Tea Party movement while 49% are opposed.

Those following news about the Occupy Wall Street protests closely also tend to be more supportive than those following less closely. Six-in-ten (60%) among those who followed news about the protests very closely last week say they support the movement; 31% say they oppose it. Support drops to 33% among those who say they have not followed this news too closely – and just 12% among those who say they have followed this news not at all closely.

Americans do not have a clear point of view on how the massive anti-government protests in Egypt will affect the United States. More than half (58%) say the protests will not have much of an effect (36%), or offer no response or are noncommittal (22%). Of the minority that thinks the protests will have an effect on the U.S., nearly twice as many say their impact will be negative rather than positive (28% vs. 15%).

This lack of agreement notwithstanding, a majority (57%) says the Obama administration is handling the situation in Egypt about right, while much smaller numbers say the administration has shown too much support (12%) or too little support (12%) for the protestors.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Feb. 2-7, 2011 among 1,385 adults, finds that nearly half (48%) say they have heard a lot about the anti-government protests in Egypt; about the same proportion (52%) report hearing little or nothing.

The survey finds that majorities of Democrats (69%) and independents (57%) say the Obama administration is handling the situation in Egypt about right; fewer Republicans (43%) give the administration positive ratings. Roughly equal numbers of Republicans say the administration is showing too much support (19%) and too little support (15%) for the protesters.

Republicans and independents are more likely than Democrats to say the Egyptian protests will end up having a bad effect on the United States. Nearly four-in-ten Republicans (37%) say the protests will have a negative effect on the U.S., while just 8% think their effect will be positive. Twice as many independents say the protests will end up having a negative (28%) rather than positive (14%) effect on the U.S. Among Democrats, as many say their impact will be positive as negative (21% each).

Among those hearing a lot about the anti-government protests, 35% think they will have a bad effect on the U.S. while 18% think the impact will be positive. Among those who have heard little or nothing, 21% say the protests will end up having a bad effect on the U.S., while 12% say the impact will be positive. Fully 67% of those who have heard little or nothing about the protests in Egypt say they will not have much an effect on the U.S., express no opinion or volunteer another response, compared with 48% of those who have heard a lot about the protests.

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).