tv Discussion on Americas Global Image CSPAN June 28, 2017 8:55am-10:05am EDT
[applause] >> global views have declined since barack obama left office and donald trump became commander-in-chief. according to recent report. the pew research center examined global attitudes of the u.s. in 37 countries. the study study showed a large decline in approval ratings in germany, the uk, mexico and canada, and a ratings increase in two places, russia and israel. the brookings institution hosted a forum examining the report.
>> [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everyone, and welcome to brookings. i'm a visiting fellow here at brookings and a university of pennsylvania's perry world house and delighted to welcome all of you here for an event on america's global image, cohosted by both brookings and the pew research center. this year marks the third year running that we're cohosting a public event to launch and discuss the important regular survey data about america's place in the world and other pressing global issues are as many of you are probably already aware, if you glance at the newspaper or check your social media accounts this morning, last night pew release delays addition of its global attitudes survey which is been conducted since 2002. 2002. with these your survey covering 37 countries and more than 40,000 respondents, all conducted after the inauguration of president trump between
figure 16 and may 8 of this year here and the findings argues worthy particularly during a week in which the white house is hosting the prime minister of india on thursday hosting the president of the republic of korea, and a week ahead of president trump's travel to germany for this year g20 summit. where come which will feature meetings including a possible meeting between president trump and russian president putin. so to share with us the highlight of this your survey where privilege to have richard white, director of global attitudes at the pew research center. richard has been the author of numerous recent pew survey reports and you like a great his analyses in a variety of newspapers and seems cometary on television, not just in the united states but also abroad. richard holds a doctorate in political science from emory and pray support of the research and strategy consulting firm greenberg. following richards 20 minute
presentation i will look into the stage a stellar panel of analysts from brookings and the council on foreign relations whom of introduced to you when we are all seated. will have a 45 minute discussion of whether and if so how the survey results matter. and then we would then turn to a 25 minute q&a with all of you here today. i want to extend a special thanks before we get started to sadie, jonas and wilma for putting together this event to get along with her counterparts with you. and with that, richard, please take it away. >> all right, thank you and thanks very much to brookings for hosting this. thanks to all the panelists for being here, and thanks to all of you for being here. really happy to have a chance to talk about our most recent survey that we conducted at the pew research center and in particular happy to have a chance to talk about this topic.
we looked at lots of different topics in her international survey work at tu but this is the one we've done the most work on consistently over the years. how does the world see the united states? we've been doing that now for a decade and a half. and as you can imagine we have seen last of the changes over that decade and a half and we certainly have a lot of changes this year. so what i'll do is i will walk through a few slides that highlight some of the key findings from this report that we released last night. before i do that i will just take a look at about the pew research center and who we are and what we do. we've been around over two decades now. we are funded largely by the pew charitable trust, also get funding from the foundation. we are nonprofit, nonpartisan, non-advocacy if we like to call ourselves a fat tank rather than a think tank because we put such an emphasis on data and
empirical research -- fact kankakee can see from the topics that we tend to look at in our research and output a plug-in for the website while i'm here. all of our reports are there, things like it's an blog post come increasingly we have some cool interactive features including one associated with this report that you can go in and play around the data for yourself. .. in most countries it is actually a face-to-face. you can see the margin of error there which is pretty typical for this kind of thing.i'm happy to talk more about the
methodology or answer questions about how we go about conducting this type of work around the world during the q&a if you're interested. so these are the 37 countries that were included in the survey. each year there is always countries that we like to include but were not able to for one reason or another. in general i think we do a pretty good job of including countries from regions around the world. so, what did we find? let me start off by showing you some data on what i think are the two most fundamental measures in the survey. one is a question we have asked about world leaders for years. we asked about president bush when he was president. president obama and this year president trump. how much confidence you haven't president trump to do the right thing in world affairs?
the other question is a basic question that we and others have asked. we call this us favorability. very simply give favorable or unfavorable opinion of the united states? and what we see in this year's survey is that if you look at the confidence measure, there has been a big shift in how the world sees the us president. if you look at these 37 countries and will back to the last couple of years of the obama era, 64 percent said they had confidence in president obama. just 23 percent said that they lacked confidence in him. this year same question about president trump. 74 percent say they do not have confidence in him to do the right thing in world affairs. just 22 percent across the 37 countries say they do have confidence in him. so a big shift in terms of how the world sees the us president. we also see in this data that
the change in who is in the white house has had a big impact on how the world sees the united states. this is the question about whether they have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the us. back again the end of the obama era, 64 percent favorable, 26 percent unfavorable. as you can see, the favorable line has gone down. the unfavorable line has gone up. a big change in terms of how the world sees the us president and a change in how they rate the united states as a country. let's take a look at some specific countries in terms of this confidence measure.just about every country resurveyed we see a significant gap in terms of ratings for obama to the end of his presidency and ratings for donald trump this year.
i cannot fit all of them onto the slides so this is just where we see 50 percentage point gap or greater. takes waiting for example. 93 percent in our survey there lester said they had confidence in president obama. just 10 percent say that about president trump. a big gap in other european countries.but also in south korea, canada, australia, often the biggest gaps in some of america's closest allies. there are two countries where we see president trump getting higher ratings than president obama. israel and russia. slightly higher ratings for president trump in israel. significantly higher ratings for president trump in russia. obama's ratings have gone down a good bit after the ukraine crisis and did not bounce back this year. much higher ratings among russians for president trump.
now, let's take the timeline back a little bit to the bush years. same question. this data from four western european countries that we surveyed. just about every year for the past decade and 1/2. president bush starts off his term not especially popular in western europe. the numbers come down over time. he is unpopular, there is a lot of opposition with key policy and by 2008 his ratings are pretty low. president obama comes into office in 2009. he gets astronomical ratings in some countries. more than 90 percent positive. for example in 2009 in germany, france. come down a little overtime for the nsa, the snowden scandal had an impact on views towards president obama in germany. and some other companies. but ratings bounced back a
little towards the end of his term. he leaves office pretty popular. then this year it is a very steep slope downward. donald trump's ratings this year in the western european countries look a lot like what we saw in 2008 four president bush when he left office. the same measure, this time comparing president trump with other world leaders. these are all median percentages across the 37 countries that we surveyed. we asked about angela merkel, the only one of the four leaders who get on balanced positive rate is 42 percent same have confidence and 31 percent say they do not have confidence in her. she and vladimir putin both get negative ratings for the most part. but not as negative as what we see for president trump. she and vladimir putin, it is not positive but the negative ratings are not as high as what we see for president trump.
here is the question on the us favorability on a country basis. as you can see, often we see variations among regions across the world. we also see variations within regions quite often. you can see that in europe. like poland, italy, uk. mostly positive for the us. elsewhere mostly negative right now. putting germany for example 62 percent saying they have been unfavorable view of the us. if you look in asia again, you get a lot of variation across countries. a very high rating in vietnam, philippines, south korea. australians if you look at the bottom of the screen you can see it essentially is divided right now in terms of viewing in the us with australia being a longtime ally of the us. in the middle east consistently high ratings for the us in
virtually all of our surveys in israel. even if users us president fluctuated a bit over time. negative ratings mostly in the middle east. something lived seen consistently over time. when president obama came to office he hoped to turn around america's image in the region. having a famous speech in cairo in 2009. to kick off the efforts. we do not see a real change during the obama presidency in terms of views of the us and it is certainly very negative this year especially in turkey and jordan. africa is a region where we have typically seen mostly positive views towards the united states. that was true during the bush era when it was anti-americanism. in many regions. he was pretty popular there, his policies were relatively popular there and leaders continue to get good ratings there. same is true or even more so during the obama era. even though there have been some decline in this survey,
the countries we surveyed at least continue to see the us in a positive light. latin america again, some differences across the latin american nations that we surveyed. mexico stands out as a place in this year's survey that has very negative views of the us. you can see that a little bit on this map here. this is a map that illustrates the change in us favorability since the last time we surveyed in all of these countries. red countries where there has been a negative change. dark gray is where there has been essentially no change. blue are places where america's image has improved on favorability measures. so there are only two blue countries on the map. when is vietnam and i would not make too much of that. i believe the change in vietnam was from 78 percent favorable to 84 percent.
it went from already very high to slightly higher. i think the big change was in russia. i believe the numbers there last time we surveyed in 2015 was 15 percent favorable and then 21 percent this year. so again, different places in the survey russia is in ally. lots of dark red in europe, lots of dark red in latin america. the darkest lead in mexico. as the country will receive the biggest decline. favorability has gone from 66 percent in 2015 down to 30 percent this year. we want to understand better how the world sees president trump. we asked about some of his policies and his character traits. when it comes to policy we tested five, his proposal to withdraw from the iranian nuclear deal. restricting people from certain majority muslim countries from
entering the united states. withdrawing from climate and trade agreements and building the wall on the border with mexico. these again our global medians across all countries we surveyed and as you can see, these policies are all widely unpopular across the countries that we surveyed. iranian nuclear deal a little less so but even there. the global public tells us they disapprove of this proposal. there are pockets of support for some of these. i believe the iranian pulling out of that nuclear deal for his apple is popular in israel and jordan. there are certain places where some of these policies are embraced but on the whole we see pretty widespread global opposition to the policy proposals that we tested on the survey. we also asked about certain characteristics positive and negative and whether people
associate those with president trump. we read them this list. some positive and some negative. as you can see the negative characteristics people tend to say yes i would describe donald trump in that way. in particular americans. majorities around the world also say they think that he is intolerant and even dangerous. relatively low numbers say he cares about ordinary people. that he is well qualified to be president. about forton 10 say they think of him as charismatic. the bright spot in terms of views about him around the world is this question of being a strong leader. you do see majorities around the world say yes they associate the term strong leader with him. that includes places where other ratings for trump are pretty negative. take france for example.i think 54 percent there say that they think that trump is a strong leader. while just 14 percent say that they have confidence in trump to do the right thing in world affairs.
that is a characteristic that stands out as being positive even in places where overall attitudes towards trump are very negative. something we have done in the past in our surveys and again this year is look at attitudes towards different aspects of what we might think of as american soft power. so again, in global medians on some questions we think should tap into the notion of soft power. the american people continue to score pretty well on our surveys. 58 percent across the country we surveyed say they think of the american people in a positive light. people tend to say they like american popular culture. 55 percent say i like american movies and music and television. the uss pretty good ratings in times of respecting the individual liberty of its citizens. that is a question we've seen some downward trending on in
the last few years in the wake of the nsa story. but people still think that the us government respects personal freedoms. mixed views when it comes to american ideas about democracy. they see the negative ratings on the question about whether it is a good thing or a bad thing that american customs and ideas are spreading to our country. and this overall pattern is pretty typical of what we have seen on these questions.the numbers have come down a bit in some countries but the overall pattern is pretty consistently true. if you look for example at the american customs and ideas question in the popular culture question is an interesting contrast. people want their jay z and taylor swift and superhero movies they are worried about american culture pushing out their own local cultures and traditions. it is representative of this kind of push and pull that people feel about the united states and lots of ways.
then a final topic we wanted to look at was what do they think about the near future of relations with the us? we asked people know that trump is president to think that relations between your country and the us are going to get better? worse? or about the same? outside of africa you do not see a lot of people saying things are going to get better. we see pretty significant numbers in many countries. as you can see from the slide across regions, really the prevailing view, in many places is that things are going to stay about the same. some interesting findings given the negativity towards president trump and policies. nonetheless people do not necessarily think there will be radical change in the country's relationship. and i think that this illustrates a border thing and
that is that even with this pretty negative picture of how the world currently sees the us, there are so first class. i think that this is something that we see over the last decade and and a half in our research. even if there is a pretty unpopular american president, the us foreign policy are pretty unpopular. there is still some strong states in america's global image and something that people value about the united states. even if it is a time of great tensions with the american and russian. i will stop there and i look forward to the panel discussion. thank you. [applause]
brookings institution. he is the author of among other books islamic exceptionalism how the struggle is reshaping the world. and just yesterday a new piece on turkey's president could -- i highly recommend that. prior to that he spent time on a project for middle east democracy. and the inaugural senior fellow in the center of the united states in your appear at the brookings institution. she's the author of numerous publications on german, european and transatlantic foreign policy and strategy. most recently publishing work i recommend to all of you on the legacy of german chancellor - tomorrow she will be testifying at some of the senate intelligence committee. if you like to capture their. and previous has been a journalist and holds a doctorate in law.
and prior to joining the brookings institution a senior transatlantic fellow at the german - where she directed -- china studies in the council on foreign relations where he writes on us china relations, regional security in east asia and us national security policies. he was published most recently in the current issue of foreign affairs on china's maritime events. and he was a colleague in the obama administration served in 2015 through 2017 to the vice president and focus in particular on security and he also previously worked at the state department and senate relations committee. to get started i thought that we would consider the question of what these survey results
matter in parts of the world where you study. so the drop in confidence from obama to trump is obviously - knows if you take a look at the top 10 countries where the drop was most precipitous none of the 10 countries are us treaty allies. we talk a lot about the advantage of the states in the world drawing from a coalition of allies and partnerships around the world. but i do think we should sit back for a moment and i would like to ask each of you in the regions where you focus, what difference do these results really matter from the perspective of the us interest and regional order? >> okay, i focus on a region where favorability ratings towards the us have been very low for a long time. you see slight increases under obama when he is elected, after the cairo speech. but after that expectations were not met. we see a drop and in some cases in several countries
favorability towards the us was lower under obama than it was in the bushes final here. which is an important point to emphasize because sometimes that is sort of hard to process. how can that possibly be? even the case of jordan, it's only a one percent increase but us favorability went up from 14 percent in 2015 to 15 percent under donald trump. so pretty much the same. but it shows that at least in places where there is strong anti-american sentiment that has been there for a long time, do people really care that much of donald trump was elected? they may not like him but for them, their lifelong experience with us policy is a very negative one. and they are very skeptical that anyone can ron change that. and i think the obama years really underscore that point because again, the title speech was quite well received but then people did not actually
see significant changes in policy. also if you look at turkey, it was and what is under bush there was about 12 percent in approval only as under obama in 2011 and jumps up. now is that 18 percent. depending what year she looked at again, under trump in 2017 is higher than some of the years of obama's tenure. it is important to keep in mind that the metathesis ornament outlier if you look at some of the rest of the results. i think it next to a question that applies to a lot of the results in this survey and how much does any of this really matter? what does it mean to say that favorability ratings drop tremendously for increase tremendously under a certain president? does it actually matter as much
as we might think it does? clearly, when you have any president they can shoot up 60 percent or go down 60 percent. as we have seen from the bush obama transition but also the obama trump transition. so the world does not end with these changes. in a sense. and the last thing i would say is, i think that you can also argue that even though i would argue this to be clear. that even if favorability ratings were quite high under obama in a place like europe, we will talk about this more, it is a legitimate debate to be had rather obama's policies were better for you. had to be judged by? you can say that the refugee fight in cereals because of obama's in action there in part. lead to serious problems in europe. so there are different ways to look at this. i think what we are seeing now
is a kind of natural experiment over the next four, possibly eight years where it is if you're introducing the most offensive problematic president to the world. and then we can now see in real time how much that affects our relationships with other countries. does it lead to things that are very very bad? i think that is a presumption that a lot of people on the left have. after four to eight years of donald trump terrible things will be the result and we might never recover from it. i'm very skeptical of this narrative. but we will actually find out for years now we can all sit down and in eight years will see. we will be able to say hey, what is the relationship between people hating our president and the world falling apart? [laughter] >> well, i am here
as a proxy for germany and europe. as he said i once ran a survey myself. which in general, and i have tremendous respect for pew and tremendous budget envy. and capability envy. i tend to take this with a bit of salt. i tend to think nothing really substitutes for examining actual policy. let me try and say how this looks from europe. first like most of the countries with some exceptions have been america's allies since 1949. the germans since 1956. we have had some - during the cold war which is often forgotten.but also under bush with the iraq war and under
obama with the nsa spying allegations which did not do the relationship much good. and of course there wasn't all the criticism about obama's actions or inactions with regards to the middle east. there is a feeling that it may have had some impact on the refugee or the record refugee influx that we experience in 2015 and 2016. but that said, it is also a resilient relationship. it is one where policymakers know that even when there is huge turbulence, at the official level policymakers tend to actually move closer to it. and to try and prevent the work and try and make sure that there is no bleeding as it were from areas in the agreement into areas where we have this.
it has been a pretty done resilient relationship overall. i will also say that this ã this particular administration holds challenges for europe all the time that we have not encountered. we have simply not encountered an american president that has refused in public to merely have a commitment -- i think that really shocked most people. not just policymakers and not just european government. and of course this feeds into whatever anti-western attitude is that they are. we can say that this is a section of our own fears and a complicated future without the control but the fact is that this is articulated and
favorite others -- [inaudible] do i think i can predict will happen four years? no. i've not been able to predict anything that has happened. >> people remove i want to ask you since you have been up on the russian interference. i was struck by the fact that respondents and seven nato allies including germany, 221 so they have more confidence and vladimir putin then president trump. so what are we to make with that in respect to russia and europe relations? >> i assume it is less of a vote of confidence with vladimir putin. and i think if you look at other opinion polls which i do a lot, you will see that this for america i'm sorry for russia has increased
significantly. in the last three or four years but went continued meddling not just in the ukraine, i mean but also different in the european - that is the context that you have to keep in mind. and i have seen very few other european polls except for those who were trying to. [inaudible] that suggests vladimir putin is in any way well received in europe by majority. i think that this is a reflection of people and their unhappiness with trump. in the same way i would urge you to take the findings about angela merkel with a grain of salt. and i think we are assuming that she would see the same result.
>> will come back to that. as richard indicated in some respects, the survey on asia perhaps not as much as africa i should say what she had room for more chairs on the station with also talk about africa and latin america. but 76 - i think in vietnam, philippines and korea favorable views of the united states exceed 75 percent. as you think about these results one question is administration poised to take advantage of some of the positive sentiment toward the united states? >> i will get to that in just a second. just to build on what has been said so far, to the question of the disease matter?i think it's important to ask that because in asia as well as elsewhere obama had a very favorable rating but it did not always translate into policy successes.
so like north korea missile program was developing, china's maritime assertiveness was continuing and etc. we should not assume that again, this a one-to-one relationship between popularity and policy success. but i think it does matter in asia perhaps more than else for the following reason which is that the united states is in an emergent geopolitical conflict with china and it is starting in the first instance over competition over the future of the original order in asia. and while these countries even out countries are not going to make some fundamental binary choice between the united states and china, every day they are making choices as to how they will approach trade issues, how they will approach human rights issues, how they will approach security issues and in every single country in asia it is different from place to place but publix and every country including south korea, and everywhere have various
debates about how they balance competing interests as it relates to china, often economic benefits of their relationship with china with the historical cultural security and economic relationships with the united states. to the extent that these types of public opinion these are shifting and changing the public discourse in the countries. it is important because it will affect the degree to which leaders are willing to stick their necks out and work with the united states. and willing to push back with china. in asia's case i think it really does matter. i think the survey had potentially even more good news than bad news as it relates to the region. for some of the reasons you suggested. i think agent is a historical beneficiary of american leadership. certainly less complicated than the middle east. some of our allies in asia and elsewhere have been less affected by what's happened. i think some of president trump's more liberal social policies resonate less northeast asia than the
sentencing in europe and in other progressive australia, other countries like that. so this does seem to be a wellspring of goodwill there. very high favorability ratings. the highest of any region of confidence or approval in american democracy, american values. i think to the extent that part of the theory of the obama initiation with asia's rebalancing attention and resources to asia was saying asia as the future or a future if the united states continued its now 70 year plus project to try and expand a liberal order in the world. i think the promise and importance of that nature is perhaps more than anywhere else in the world. what we see in this data is that there is still opportunity there to work on some of that. i think the other, at least from a perspective of the nature of the china competition, i think the very negative views of - were striking. i think a lot around the world
hoping that this does not make its way to beijing because they are spending billions of dollars trying to improve their statement propaganda, and i think this tells you is not working. and so whereas yes, donald trump may be particularly favorable, the alternative is not rating very high. i think matters in terms of opportunities for the sp that's the good news. the bad news of course is what lurks behind the figures.the questions here were about various policy issues and there is diversity in the region. you know what's worrying the south koreans is not what's worrying that indonesians and also the australians. but some of the things the trump administration has done withdrawing from the trans-pacific partnership, raising concerns about the alliance commitments and just
more generally, not putting forward a view of american leadership in the world. your you know again, what i read from the state is that if the united to get your initial limit if the trump administration at a phase to seize upon this? i think if they do want to be in asia the opportunity is still there. public support and politics to do that still support it. i think what we see in the data is real concern that the united states is not in the absence of american leadership. left they do not want to live in the china letter they will have no choice but to do so. >> and we will go back to richard in a moment about the resilience and the data he mentioned that while we are on leaders, you mentioned the president - >> you are not going to let go of this! [laughter] >> and the ratings are 50 percent higher so you have many people say as they have already
that the new leader of the free and maybe even the less the free world. but what does that mean for someone like a chancellor who as you have written, depends on and takes advantage of ambiguity and to quote - inhabits leadership culture ambivalent about public policy? >> thus are you punished for your words. by way of reminder, the president - had approval ratings in germany that were basically 250 percent you know, going up. i was at the speech that he gave, britain's version of central park. in the summer of 2008, it was 200,000 people that came to see him. when he was still just a candidate. i think he still pretty much has rockstar studies in my country.
so that is a benchmark that no german politician is going to achieve that easily. the other thing is of course that merkel is an odd candidate for the title of a beacon of the free world. because she herself has i think despite i think she has become friends with obama. the one thing she was always skeptical about was the ability to sort of you know, go forward endlessly and turn on the reminiscent of someone standing at a historical rather than a political world. she is a public speaker viability but also information. i think to some degree because germans of our age, she is 10 years older than i am.
they tend to be suspicious of this kind of public power because of obvious reasons. it is something we are careful about. it has been abused too many times. the other thing of course is that germany has in recent years become somewhat by default, by circumstances not created by self -- in other words this is not just a title given to us by other people. it is a political fact that carmen politicians and policymakers have tried to live up to recently. some may remember when the president and former defense minister said we have great power therefore we must exercise greater responsibility. and a great deal is happening
in response to that crisis with russia over ukraine and meddling in europe. that is making germans develop additional institutional and political - to deal with all of this. but there's also an understanding in europe that you cannot do this on your own. it can only be europe as arab. and so we need our neighbors, our friends and allies to pick up some of this as well. europe is not the political project that one large state can lead. as is not how it works germans and politicians are aware that. >> i would like to talk to richard. you know that there is a fairly large - about 35 points between the median percentage of those i had no confidence in the president trump and then those others.
so is that sustainable based on previous survey data? is it something that you expect to converge over time? >> obviously how the world feels about the us president and us foreign policy does have a big impact on how the world sees the us. but we know from our surveys that it is complicated too. there are a lot of things influence how people see america. i think the signs in his data and sizing up surveys we conducted over time that will highlight we really resilience in terms of trump you do not see a huge majority u.s. speculations necessarily get worse with the us. and we asked about soft power in american culture and the american people etc. we have seen in the survey and we are
seen pretty consistently over time that people tend to still life a lot of things about the us. even when they're not very happy with the us administration. and in some ways the obama era i think the administration had resiliency. you had anti-americanism in many parts of the world during the bush era. we have had anti-americanism in different varieties for a very long time along before george w. bush. and yet, it sounds bad at different times as well. there was a lot of numbers that were negative about that during our surveys in the obama presidency. mixing up some precedents for resiliency and think there are signs of it even in the survey this year despite all of the negativity. >> on that subject for each of you, how are we to read the survey results that indicate that the public's unbalance unnecessary bilateral with the us are going to change? do you agree that kinship should change despite their
disregard for the president? or the related in the sense that they think the ground will shift because they have faith in the us institutions or perhaps there on? >> i think one thing here is that we have an unusual situation where the us does not have a reform policy. there always divisions within the bureaucracy and among different institutions. i think particularly under trump there are about four simultaneous us foreign policies. even if you do not like trump, if you follow things closely enough you might like the other three foreign policies. the nikki haley has her own foreign policy, secretary james mattis has his own policy, mcmaster has a different one. bannon, the list goes on. we have asked ourselves the question. who speaks for the us trump to the extent that you have just in the past couple of weeks, rex tillerson and donald trump sang almost diametrically
opposed things on one of the most potentially destructive prices we have seen in recent months but perhaps even in recent years the gcc crisis. so i prefer tillerson's foreign policy over donald trump in this regard. i think it makes it a little bit more challenging that this is such an unusual president at such an unusual time that it is very hard to compare it to what has come before. that i think is one thing. but, i think there's also this you know people do not necessarily - there is a status quo bias. things are more likely to stay the same and i think if i was responding to these kinds of things i would say i personally do not like trump at all but you know isn't going to change the bilateral relationship with x, y or z country? i think i can see why a lot of
people would say probably not so much. >> i think there is some optimism bias. >> i take more hope from the fact that survey respondents think or make a distinction between the president himself in the country. that was also the case when i ran. people made up between president bush and america and i think that is good. and it shows a certain maturity. i think also for your quick come from a different place than many of the people. relationships have survived a great deal already. there is a sense that we are so deeply integrated with each other and what is actually despite a leader's best
efforts, quite difficult to completely rip apart the fabric. and so there is an assumption that the machine to some degree is going to be my soft gossip at the gentleman on the deck is attempting to do. over time that could obviously change if the gentleman on the deck a long time. but for now there is a feeling you know this is just, this relationship is so much bigger than one single government that we will weather this. this too shall pass. >> i think that is right.
civil society, congress, the update, i think it was a sense of the senate and activated the alliance managers and it was a demonstration of how many people that part would think this relationship is important that will fight and work for it and ultimately will not allow donald trump to do something like that because of the long historical relationship. this question about the bilateral relationship is potentially important but to get back to my earlier comment, in asia in particular you have a situation where you have a resurgent china in the context of concerns about at least i'm committed united states and the concern i personally but the concern people have in the
region are the things that will happen over the next couple of years that will put the region on the path dependence on a much less democratic future or certain trade or political institution that becomes predominant or security order that is redefined to chinese revisionism. that means even when acts is elected in 2020 and he or she goes out and says america's back in who we are, the region has been transformed in a fundamental way across some pretty important issues that the nature of the bilateral relationship isn't as important as the changes that happen in the region order. i would suspect if you started looking at if you went into the people that are concerned about these issues and follow them closely and some of these regions, what's working behind his concerns about american additional leadership role forfeiting economic leadership on things like that transpacific partnership and concerns about allies commitment and these come together potential in a very negative way.
>> can add one point. i think we have to remember that peoples attitudes towards the u.s. especially in my region are very complex and it's almost like this love-hate aspect to. i don't know how similar that is in certain parts of europe but to even ask a sort of binary question, how do you feel about the u.s., gold or bad. i mean, i can imagine someone like writing a long essay on that in like egypt or jordan and would be like a very complex position just because the history, there's so much of their two sort of unpack. one kind of amusing result that i was reminded of, looking at the numbers come in 2005 in jordan confidence in george w. bush was 1% in jordan. i was living in jordan in 2005, and i think i knew the 1%. [laughing] so i was just like, you know. these are people who would never
say that to a pollster. but there was the sense that george w. bush is supporting the first arab spring which is happening in 2004-2005. more people were protesting. there was a sense of optimism at least among elites, but these are also people who historically were very suspicious of the u.s. u.s.. so they were like weight, is george w. bush improving this? thinking we know the history. and again, there's almost an internaintro struggle as peopleo make sense of what they feel about the u.s. >> i wanted to raise yesterday supreme court decision to hear arguments regarding the immigration been. this was covered in the survey. disapprove of the administrations immigration restrictions is quite pronounc pronounced, unsurprisingly 77% opposed in opposed in turkey, 73% internation, 96% from jordan. what would be the impact of the decision to allow portions of
those bands to stand, depending a full hearing later this year? >> i think it's understandable that people would be against a band like that which targets muslims. although it is worth noting, and here's that is interesting public leadership divide. many arab governments supported trump's man on the muslim ban or whatever, even countries that claim to speak for muslim like saudi arabia. and for right of complex reasons which we don't get into right now, but i think that part of it is interesting, even though you have very strong public disapproval of trump's muslim ban, that doesn't necessarily filter up to the government. that's because most of these countries are not democracies. when we are at the result writ large, discussion of how much governments are responsive to the own people is pretty critical because if you have
strong levels of public anti-americanism come naturally if you're running in a campaign you are going to have to feed off of the anti-american sentiment. one thing we'll see in the next four years, if politicians would say europe or asia assuming democracies see that the people are pissed off that trump, they might say well, we're going to run on this and really try to use that to our advantage. >> it's already become visible in germany's election campaign. we have a federal election on september 24, that's less than 100 days out. this past weekend angela merkel said challenger scholz went on to a full throated campaign mode, which essentially said forget 2%, whenever going to do that. that would mean arming germany to the teeth. in other words, playing on all of the anti-american pacifist,, anti-nato things you can think of. i am very disappointed by this.
i thought they'd is going to be more responsible than that, but he's also 14 points behind in the polls. so clearly he feels that has to do this. there you go. these are means or narratives that people can pull up and no doubt that will have a, that will have an impact. on the other hand, i'm also seeing some more social democratic friends on facebook agonizing over this and saying all my god, now we're really going to hell in a handbasket. this is not what you get is elected, and it shouldn't. >> it's in your question to the extent that seemed to be the case -- is an interesting question, trump wasn't traveling because her concerns there. as compared to asia again, president trump is scheduled to go out to the philippines and vietnam for major multilateral meetings latest issue. he accepted an invitation from president modi yesterday to go to india. he told president xi he will go to china.
he will probably go to japan and south korea. i don't think you with a set public opposition in those places. it will be interesting to see how it changes his worldview and sort of how this public resistance or support will affect him if he traveling the world. he will be very welcome in place like vietnam and the philippines. he'll have a different expense than somebody's other countries. i think it will matter. >> insulting your friends is worth something. >> richard, i want to ask you, within political science now or international relations even, there's more study of the role that leaders play in international politics. in that sense i wonder, has the pew research consider doing research in parallel of elites? >> we have done some of that. it's not always easy to survey elites. they won't respond to your surveys but quite often -- >> so snooty. >> yes. but we have done some of that.
we did a little project where we surveyed some folks who attended one of conferences. you do see some gaps sometimes. issues like globalization, for example, trade, these kinds of issues can be seen very differently by each elites and average citizens across the globe. that survey where we did survey transatlantic elites essentially i think had some common findings in terms of these transatlantic elites were very concerned about the trump administration, concerned about trajectory of transatlantic relations. on that front right now we're seeing some correspondence between elites and average citizens. >> because president modi will the authors have wanted to ask you -- president moon -- despite the relatively kind of positive, high approval rating of the
united states in south korea, it was striking that 76% of south koreans consider president trump dangerous. this is also a country where we have nearly 30,000 u.s. troops. what does this mean for president meant when he walks into the oval office on thursday? >> that's striking. that's a good do demonstration of diversity between what their interests are. what's driving that result is clearly the concern that president trump will be overly aggressive toward north korea and one way or another and could start a conflict there. so i read that as reflecting that. president moon has come in to office in a much more conciliatory position toward north korea and his predecessor, who is about as hard as you're going to get and about is willing to go along with the type of global pressure campaign that the united states was trying to conduct. i think this is a good example of the type of tight rope walks that leaders have to do now when they come to me with president trump.
because they have once have to serve their domestic publics and not be seen as being overly deferential, but at the same time don't want to signal to trump that somehow south korea isn't up for this alliance anymore. you could imagine if trump got the signal that south korea was no longer willing to cooperate with the united states on tackling the north korean issue, given his history of questions about alliance and whatnot, the first question he would ask himself is, why do we have tens of thousands of troops there? why are americans wanted to die for the country if they're not willing to work and deal with the mounting threat of the north korea that could soon test an icbm that could hit the continental united states. again, this is a potential volatility that the domestic politics bring into this but i think it's something that because of, it's a good example of a relationship that is very deep. there have been moved officials in washington, to over the last couple of weeks meeting with people on the outside as well as
doing a number of meetings inside to try to find a way to thread the needle through this. i think there are good examples. president modi to set a good visit. when justin trudeau came to washington he had a good visit but you couldn't have two more different types of leaders. it is doable but it requires careful diplomacy. >> how do you interpret modi sort of like tackling and bearhug donald trump yesterday? this amazing little clip. they're going to shake hands but then modi jumps on it and gives him like -- >> a pretty intense hug. >> i don't know, was he trying to signal something? >> not appropriate for a woman leader to do. >> i don't know what was in his head. he loves twitter so maybe it was a something for social media i don't know. it's a good example again where in some ways there some sharp differences between the united states in india but they were able to comment say we had some common ground. we want to work together.
both probably, some of the folks in the white house but particularly people in the international community are learning over time the best you these kinds of visits and had to engage with president trump, how to stay away from things that could go sideways. so i think, i don't know, it's a good question. >> one more question on the u.s.-china relations before we go to questions from the audience. there was news this morning administration is now poised to take a tougher line on china. if that is right, do you think the risk of just china confrontation is going to be seen with trepidation among these countries or will a stronger u.s. stance be welcome? >> a defensive tone and whether they do it well or not. at tough on china policy that is a confident america that is leading institutions, that's leading on economics, that's committing to its alliances, that's an important voice for freedom and democracy in the world that takes on china like that, will have the support of the region. but a tough one-china policy that's purely america first,, protectionist, abandons
registrations and takes unnecessary risk on military matters will lose the region entirely. it's really a question of how well they do it. >> richard has survey results coming out later this year on the u.s.-china relationship. >> we will have a survey that's global views toward china and use about the balance of power between the u.s. and china, both in asia and around the world. in the last few years we frame a lot of our research on the u.s. not only in terms of how they see the u.s. in and of itself but how they see the u.s. vis-à-vis china. that something we will have coming up on sin. >> let's open it up. in the back. >> thank you very much. i'm from the united states of africa -- [inaudible] i use it like to ask the last question but this is very important. the opening synopsis that the gentleman did, he asked this, how the world sees the u.s., how the world sees trump.
we ask people, can you clarify when you say how the world? are you referring to your survey results from the government and political classes of those countries? is that what you're talking about why would you say the world when those leaders are not ala large is represented of the world? also you need to understand this. trump is undermining, sabotaging the foundation of what world leaders have experienced or followed over the last 70 years. so you have to look at in those contexts, not in what i call it, unnecessary -- >> let's take one more as well and we will answer both together. also in the back. far left. >> thank you all very much. i'm going to ask a question out
of righ rightfield, leftfield, whichever field you care to call it. what's the role of public diplomacy today? how does the pew research look at it? iri come in the eye, fulbright program, universities bringing 1 million students a year into the u.s. your comments, please. >> in terms of for these people are talking to in these surveys? it's not just the leak elites or leaders in these countries. essentially it's a nationally representative sample of these populations. in terms of demographic profile of the people in our sample it looks like the demographic profile of the countries population. there are some countries where for one reason or another may be a relativist while parts of the country we can't get to logistical or security reasons but for the most part is a nationally representative samples. it looks like what the citizen looks like. in terms of a public diplomacy,
we don't get into policy recommendations, the pew research center, so we don't make recommendations about worthiest or of the country ought to do in terms of public diplomacy. maybe the panel has thoughts about that. we see there's an appetite for this type of information in the public diplomacy community. i think they are very -- >> you can watch the last few minutes of this discussion on our website c-span.org. we're going live now to the rayburn house office building on capitol hill with house armed services committee will be considering the 2010 defense programs and policy bill. we are expecting this hearing could last late into the night,, possibly even into the early morning hours. mac thornberry is chair of this committee. our mullets way from getting started. live coverage here on c-span2. -- we are moments away from