Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 12-1: America's "Good" Leadership

Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 12: America's "Good" Leadership

Topic 1: The World Wants America's "Good" Leadership

Topic 2: Unsubstantial Korea-U.S. Relations

Topic 1. The World Wants America's "Good" Leadership

□ Stop Being the World's Policeman



America's international credibility has hit rock bottom. According to a survey conducted in 2006 by the East Asia Institute (EAI, Director Professor Kim Byong-kook of Korea University) and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs (CCGA), when asked how much people trusted the U.S. to act responsibly in the world, negative assessments outnumbered positive ones in 10 out of 15 surveyed countries, excluding the Philippines, Israel, Australia, Poland, and Ukraine. These findings had been partially confirmed in previous international opinion polls conducted by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR: predecessor to CCGA) since 2004, as well as in the annual International Issues Monitor surveys conducted by the BBC, EAI, and Maeil Business Newspaper.



According to the survey results, negative public opinion was particularly high in South America (Argentina 84%, Peru 80%), and in France (72%) and Russia (73%), which have been in constant opposition to the U.S. under the Bush administration. In Asia, distrust towards the U.S. was significant in Indonesia (64%), China (59%), Thailand (56%), South Korea (53%), and India (52%), countries that have historically resisted the U.S.-led world order. [Figure 1]



Various reasons have been proposed to explain this critical perception of the United States. While the definition of 'anti-Americanism' varies significantly among scholars, it can generally be categorized into: (1) anti-Americanism as an ideology seeking to subvert and resist the U.S. hegemonic order, often linked with 'anti-imperialist and nationalist' ideologies such as Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East or North Korea's Juche ideology; (2) critical attitudes towards U.S. unilateralist policies; and (3) 'anti-American sentiment' stemming from a general public aversion or cultural dissonance. In South Korea, where the issue of 'anti-Americanism' has been prominent since the 1980s, some criticize it as 'left-wing ideology,' while others view it as a product of 'emotional nationalism' that emerged after the deaths of two middle school girls in 2002 (Kim 1989; Shin 1996; Kim 2003, Lee and Jeong 2004).

What, then, is the nature of the current global anti-American sentiment? While a more rigorous conceptualization and index-based analysis are needed at the academic level, this paper posits that the escalating global anti-American sentiment is not primarily an ideology or a temporary emotion, but rather a combination of policy opposition and resentment towards the U.S.'s unilateralist policies and its diplomacy centered on military power.



First, when asked about the legitimacy of the U.S. responsibility to act as the world's policeman wherever international legal order is challenged, even major U.S. allies expressed negative views (U.S. 75%, Australia 70%, South Korea 60%). Furthermore, when asked if the U.S. was appropriately fulfilling its role as the world's policeman, 13 out of 15 countries believed the U.S. was exercising its public authority 'excessively.' A significant 72% of respondents across the 13 countries were critical of the U.S.'s excessive use of power. In contrast, only 48% in Israel and 31% in the Philippines responded negatively. [Figure 2]

□ U.S. Leadership is Needed to Resolve International Issues: A Call for "Good" Leadership



It is clear that criticism of the U.S.'s excessive use of power does not equate to a fundamental opposition to U.S. involvement and leadership in international affairs. (However, in Palestine and Argentina, deep-seated sources of anti-Americanism, public opinion exceeded a majority in opposing U.S. international intervention itself.)



This sentiment differs from ideological anti-Americanism, which advocates for the dismantling of the U.S.-led world order. As shown in [Table 1], only an average of 22.4% believed that the U.S. should maintain overwhelming leadership as the world's sole superpower in resolving international issues. Simultaneously, the stance that 'the U.S. should withdraw from intervening in international affairs' was also a minority opinion, at an average of 24%. The majority of countries (56.3% of respondents across 15 countries) urged the U.S. to cooperate with other nations in resolving international issues. They are neither comfortable with the U.S. being the world's sole hegemon nor concerned about it being indifferent; instead, they expect cooperative leadership, or "good" leadership, rather than unilateral power politics.



Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, the U.S. has led the first two wars of the 21st century: the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. While achieving swift victories through military force, the U.S. pushed forward unilaterally rather than garnering the consent and cooperation of the international community during these conflicts. However, as confirmed by the current survey results, the situation has evolved to a point where the U.S. itself acknowledges failure in securing the support of the public in the involved countries, the international community, and its allies. The Bush administration is seeking to improve its image by replacing some neoconservatives in its foreign policy and national security teams and by attempting to garner international support in its approach to the Iranian and North Korean nuclear issues. While it remains to be seen how these efforts will contribute to improving a negative image that has become deeply entrenched, the fact that the international community still expects U.S. leadership offers some solace to the United States.

[Figure 1] How Responsibly Does the U.S. Act in the World? [Figure 2] The U.S. Role as World Policeman

Source: EAI·CCGA (2007)

Note 1) [Figure 1] "Negative" is the sum of "Not at all" + "Somewhat not." "Positive" is the sum of "Somewhat" + "Very."

Note 2) [Figure 2] is the percentage of "Agree" responses out of "Agree" and "Disagree."

[Table 3] The Role the U.S. Should Play in the World (%)

Source: EAI·CCGA (2007)

Note 1) Don't know/No response are not indicated.