Friday, October 24, 2008 - 5:52 PM
I think the notion that mere election of Obama would represent a “soft power surge” as it were, should be tempered. It’s not that there would be no Obama effect. It’s just that it would be concentrated in places where elites are enthusiastic about him and his policies. This would mean Europe, Africa and Latin America, I suspect. Other regions — the Middle East, Russia and Asia — might be less receptive.As the race draws to a close, I see prominent commentators are starting to speculate about whether electing Obama would bring a soft power surge. Hey, now we have some real live data! Foreign Policy and Gallup have run polls in 70 countries from May to September 2008. The big findings:
Gallup Polls conducted in 70 countries from May to September 2008 reveal widespread international support for Democratic Sen. Barack Obama over Republican Sen. John McCain in the U.S. presidential election. Among these nations, representing nearly half of the world's population, 30% of citizens say they would personally rather see Obama elected president of the United States, compared with just 8% who say the same about McCain. At the same time, 62% of world citizens surveyed did not have an opinion.Looking at the interactive map, I see that my initial supposition was partly in error. I was right about Europe and Africa leaning heavily towards Obama. I was surprised to see, however, that Japan, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia all trended towards Obama as well. On the other hand, large swathes of Latin America and South Asia are pretty indifferent to the whole election. As for McCain, there was no country in which enthusiasm for him outpaced Don't Know/Refuse to Say. He did the best in Georgia (23% to 18% over Obama, with 62% not knowing or saying). One final thought -- it's too bad that other countries (Russia, China, Brazil, Ukraine, Iraq, Israel, Indonesia) were not polled. UPDATE: Two online and unscientific global responses: one from the Economist and one at If the World Could Vote. At The National Interest, Nikolas Gvosdev points out that the global affection for Obama could be fleeting:
It would be foolhardy for the Obama team to assume that these strong ratings can easily and swiftly be translated into renewed acceptance of U.S. policies. And publics in other countries that are expecting an Obama administration would reverse or alter every last policy of the Bush administration are going to be disappointed.
Dude, we all know that McCain would have kicked butt in Chimna. Chimna is totally Republican.
Whoops! Fixed now.
Do you know why DK/RF is so high in Pakistan? It's probably one of the most relevant foreign countries to the campaign, and yet it appears to be the country with the second lowest opinion of the importance of the US president, after India.
Three times more people in Bangladesh think the election is important than in Pakistan, despite the relative likelihood of an American military strike in those countries over the next four years.
The Economist has another (unscientific) poll here:
http://www.economist.com/Vote2008/
While this obviously suffers from potentially unrepresentative sampling, it does give a good sense of where the ROW stands on this question.
I think it is completely stupid to care what the world thinks of Obama because all they know is what the media has put forth.
He tried to execute some foriegn policy when he violated the Logan Act when he attemped to get the Iraqi Govt to suspend an agreement that would get our troops home quicker. What an idiot telling us he wants an end to the war but in secret negotiating differently.
I am an American with a vote - don't try to shape my vote by what the rest of the world thinks when they can't vote.
I have traveled the world and the hate for the USA is big... but after talking to numerous people over the years I have found they just don't know what they are talking about.
If you took a vote for capitalism world wide I don't think the results would be in favor of it.
JonQ:
Here is your answer;
http://65.109.167.118/pipa/images/jan06/FreeMarkets_Jan06_grph1.gif
SpeciousRiches
http://speciousriches.wordpress.com
The survey research firm Synovate did a poll for Readers Digest in 17 countries, including Indonesia:
http://www.rd.com/your-america-inspiring-people-and-stories/the-global-presidential-poll-all-countries/article102259.html
If you want America to be more like the rest of the world, please vote for the candidate they would vote for.
But when America has become like the rest of the world, who will keep international order? Maintain global capitalism? Set the example of a free society?
I don't want America to be like the rest of the world. America was invented as an alternative to the old ways of the rest of the world. Why ruin a good idea?
I don't understand how "would personally rather see Obama elected" translates into more soft power for the United States. Assuming (safely I think) that the respondents are self-interested, couldn't they be saying they think Obama's foreign policy would benefit them more? And couldn't that benefit take any form, e.g. peaceful relations (good), stronger U.S. support for U.N. bureaucracy (hmm), or weakened U.S. military (bad)?
In Russia, the magazine PROFIL just ran a cover with a composite picture of McCain and Obama on the cover. (Basically, it was McCain in blackface, with Obama's 'do.) The caption was ONE DEVIL. The depth of racism in Russia never ceases to amaze me.
When Obama's done "fixing the country" in "8 to 10 years" (his quote, not mine"), he'll be ready to step right up to President of the World. Much like Tony Blair is hoping for becoming President of the EU.
Well, obviously they aren't going to include Israel in polls like this. Who cares what the freaking Jews think? The best thing Obama could do, in terms of making the rest of the world like him, would be to get rid of Israel. People would be dancing in the streets from Tehran to Paris and London, chanting "Obama."
The only reason why China likes a Republican is because having people like Bush only gives them more room to manuever themselves in the international spectrum!
y81 wrote:
Well, obviously they aren’t going to include Israel in polls like this. Who cares what the freaking Jews think?
What does it say that you couldn't even be bothered to google that. Were you afraid what you'd see?
bemused wrote:
But when America has become like the rest of the world, who will keep international order? Maintain global capitalism? Set the example of a free society?
Good thing I don't have to choose, eh?
You know, one big angle is that, because you're right, we do have a special place in the world, the world feels it's important that the man in office not mess up all those things you just mentioned, which, of course, the man in office now has. Do you really believe McCain would do better than Obama at those things? The job needs a man of calm, thought, and understanding, not the most entertaining figure.
Sorry, y81, for the temper - I'm having a bad night.
International support should not be a gauge for anything in this election. I'm trying not to be paranoid about Biden's whole "testing" prophecy, but first and foremost, other nations have their own interests in mind, and frequently that is taking us down. Also, countries in support of the liberal illuminati's agenda--largely socialism--have likely never lived in a capitalist society. They don't know what they're missing.
The desire for a leader that the outside world would admire comes in part from the feeling that Bush has damaged America's image abroad.
Living here in Québec one sees reflexive anti-Bushism at work every day. I doubt that this sentiment will disappear the day that Bush leaves office. Much of it reflects an attitude that comes from a resentment of America,which was present here long before the Bush presidency. I am sure that's true elsewhere.
Why would this resentment disappear as if by magic if Obama wins? Much of it is based on a degree of envy. It isn't only a product of specific U.S. policies.
In any case, I don't think that you should elect a President on the basis of how he is perceived abroad. People here would be offended if anyone suggested that we a elect a government on the basis of the image it projected in the U.S of A.
That being said, the degree of international cooperation that has existed in the face of the present economic crisis is impressive. It does not seem to have been impeded by President Bush's unpopularity. Au contraire, the French have proposed an economic summit that will take place after the election but before the inauguration of a new President.
Proof ,if proof were, needed that nations work together when their national self-interest dictates that they do so,regardless of the image of the U.S. President
Someone needs to tell me what it is we want those foreigners to do, that they won't now, but will once Obama takes office.
My son said he'd like to be able to expect a friendly reception when he goes to Europe.
Actually, we (the parents) have been to Europe and Canada several times the last few years. We're always nice to them, they're always nice to us, Bush or no Bush.
What does it say that you couldn’t even be bothered to google that. Were you afraid what you’d see?
For what it's worth, I've seen actual polls in Israel, as opposed to people who go to the Economist website, that showed a strong advantage for McCain.
See for example here, though of course those polls are from July.
[...] of this claim, and The National Interest’s Nikolas Gvosdev captures exactly why (via Dan Drezner): It would be foolhardy for the Obama team to assume that these strong ratings can easily and [...]
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Read More
(20)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE