On the eve of President Barack Obama’s visit to Mexico, the United States is enjoying a resurgence of good will among the Mexican public, with a clear majority favorably inclined toward their northern neighbor and more now expressing confidence in Obama.

A national opinion survey of Mexico by the Pew Research Center, conducted March 4-17 among 1,000 adults, finds that roughly two-thirds (66%) of Mexicans have a favorable opinion of the U.S. – up from 56% a year ago and dramatically higher than it was following the passage of Arizona’s restrictive immigration law in 2010, when favorable Mexican attitudes toward the United States slipped to 44%.

Obama also receives higher ratings than he did in recent years. About half (49%) of Mexicans express confidence in the American president to do the right thing when it comes to world affairs, compared with 42% who said the same in 2012 and 38% in 2011. Still, Mexicans’ confidence in Obama has yet to return to the level in his first days in office in 2009, when 55% gave him a high rating.

Mexicans are also now more of the view that the U.S. takes their country’s interests into account when deciding international policy. About half (51%) say Washington considers their country’s interests, while 45% say it does not. In 2012, opinion leaned in the opposite direction – 56% said the U.S. did not consider Mexico’s interests, compared with 40% who said it did.

Bilateral issues, particularly the deepening of economic and commercial relations between the U.S. and Mexico, are expected to be among the key items on the agenda when Obama meets with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto this week. The survey finds that, overall, 70% of Mexicans consider the deep economic ties between the two countries to be good for Mexico, down slightly from 76% in 2009, when Pew Research last asked this question.

When asked specifically about the influence the U.S. is currently having on economic conditions in their country, views are more mixed. One-third of Mexicans say the U.S. is having a positive impact on national economic conditions in Mexico, while 28% think the U.S. is having a bad impact on their country’s economy.

Views on Immigration

More than 11 million Mexicans live in the U.S., including about 6 million who are in the country illegally.¹ Mexicans are divided on whether this is good or bad for their country; 44% say it is good for Mexico that many of its citizens live in the U.S., and an equal share say this is bad for Mexico.

About six-in-ten Mexicans (61%) say they would not move to the U.S. even if they had the means and opportunity to do so. However, a sizable minority (35%) say they would move to the U.S. if they could, including 20% who say they would emigrate without authorization.

Mexicans are less likely than they were a year ago to say that people from their country who move to the U.S. have a better life there; 47% say life is better in the U.S., compared with 53% in 2012. About one-in-five (18%) say Mexicans have a worse life in the U.S., while 29% say it is neither better nor worse. However, among those who have close friends or relatives living in the U.S., 70% say these friends or relatives have achieved their goals, while just 25% believe they have been disappointed.

Three-in-ten Mexicans say they personally know someone who went to the U.S. but returned to Mexico because the person could not find work. About a quarter (27%) know someone who has been deported or detained by the U.S. government for immigration reasons in the last 12 months.

Fewer See Progress on Drug War

Less often than a year ago, Mexicans say their government is making progress in its campaign against drug traffickers; 37% say this is the case, compared with 47% in 2012. An additional 29% now say the government is losing ground against the cartels, and 30% see no change in the way things are going. As in the past, Mexicans overwhelmingly support the use of the Mexican army to fight drug traffickers; 85% are in favor of this approach.

There is also support for some cooperation from the U.S. in the fight against Mexican drug cartels. About three-quarters (74%) would welcome U.S. assistance in training Mexican police and military personnel. A majority (55%) would also approve of the U.S. providing money and weapons to the country’s police and military, although this position has lost some support in recent years; 61% backed this form of U.S. assistance in 2012 and 64% did so in 2011. However, there is little enthusiasm for the deployment of U.S. troops to Mexico to fight drug traffickers; just 34% of Mexicans would welcome this approach, while 59% would oppose it.

Most Mexicans (56%) blame both the U.S. and their own country for the drug violence in Mexico; 20% say the U.S. is mostly to blame and 17% blame Mexico. When Pew Research first asked this question in 2009, far more blamed the U.S. (25%) than blamed Mexico (15%), while about half (51%) said the countries shared responsibility.

Mixed Ratings for Peña Nieto on Key Issues

Peña Nieto, whose election as president in 2012 marked the return to power of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) after 12 years in the opposition, is generally viewed positively in Mexico; 57% say he is having a good influence on the way things are going in the country, while 38% see his influence as bad.

However, Mexicans expressed mixed views of Peña Nieto’s handling of some key issues. In particular, the same share approves as disapproves of the way the president is dealing with the economy (46%). Similarly, 47% approve of his handling of organized crime and drug traffickers, while 45% disapprove. And when it comes to dealing with corruption, 44% approve of Peña Nieto’s approach and 48% disapprove.

Not surprisingly, on all three issues, those who are affiliated with the PRI offer more positive ratings of the president than do those who are affiliated with Felipe Calderón’s National Action Party (PAN). At least six-in-ten supporters of the PRI approve of the president’s handling of the economy (68%), organized crime and drug traffickers (62%) and corruption (62%). In contrast, 46% of PAN supporters approve of the way he is dealing with the economy and corruption, and 51% give him high marks for his handling of drug cartels.

Special to The German Marshall Fund of the United States

The 2012 U.S. presidential election was marked by the two candidates — the incumbent Democrat Barack Obama and the Republican challenger Mitt Romney — competing over who would be tougher on China if elected. What does Obama’s return to the White House portend for U.S.-China economic relations? The U.S. public wants Washington to ratchet up the pressure on Beijing, but history suggests that there are geo-political constraints to doing so.

European, U.S., and Chinese observers of the U.S.-China relationship may wonder whether commitments made in the heat of a presidential election really matter once a candidate becomes president. In general, they do. One of President Obama’s unbroken pledges in his first term was to be tougher on China than George W. Bush, and over the last four years the Obama administration has filed more trade cases against China than his predecessor.

Thus it is reasonable to assume that Obama will continue to press China on economic and trade issues, especially when buttressed by the support of the U.S. public. However, experience suggests a more cautionary conclusion. For at least the last three decades, whenever the U.S. position as the world’s economic and strategic hegemon has been threatened, U.S. presidents and presidential candidates have promised to face down the foreign challenger: first Japan and now China.

As a candidate in 1992, Bill Clinton vowed to be tougher on Japan and China than his predecessor George H.W. Bush. But in 1994, on the verge of filing a major trade case against Japanese auto policy, with the possibility such a move would destabilize financial markets, Clinton backed down. Similarly, after campaigning against the “butchers of Beijing” and withholding most favored nation trading status from China in an attempt to leverage a better human rights record, Clinton relented and eventually championed China’s entry into the World Trade Organization. His successor, George W. Bush, criticized Clinton for treating China as a “strategic partner” and then proceeded to treat China as a “responsible stakeholder.”

When campaign promises clash with the demands of governing, the latter often prevail. But this does not mean that the economic and political context of the current U.S.-China relationship can be ignored. The bilateral trade relationship remains a destabilizing factor, fostering political support for confrontational policies, with the possibility that China’s growing foreign investment in the United States could serve to either aggravate tensions or ameliorate them over time.

By more than two-to-one (65% to 29%), Americans see relations with China as good, according to a 2012 Pew Global Attitudes survey. And by about four-to-one (66% to 15%), they see China as a competitor not an enemy.

But such amorphous good feelings belie underlying economic concerns. About two-thirds (68%) of Americans think China is untrustworthy and nearly three-in-five (59%) worry about Beijing’s economic strength. In its 2012 Transatlantic Trends survey, the German Marshall Fund found the concern: 59% of Americans said that they see China as an economic threat. As a result, the Pew survey showed that more Americans think it is important to get tougher on China (49%) than it is to build a stronger relationship (42%). And support for a more hard-nosed stance is up nine percentage points since March 2011.

Such sentiment grows out of Americans’ widespread concern about the trade imbalance, which accounts for 42% of the total U.S. merchandise trade deficit and is up 6.8% in the first three-quarters of 2012 over 2011. About three-in five Americans (61%) say the U.S. trade deficit with China is a very serious problem. More than seven-in-ten (71%) believe that the loss of jobs to China is very serious. And 78% think that the large amount of U.S. debt held by China, a direct consequence of the trade imbalance, is very serious.

But this is where the election might matter. Romney lost, and it was Romney supporters who were most supportive of the next president confronting China. Nearly two-thirds of Republicans backed getting tougher with Beijing, up 11 percentage points in just a year. Democrats, on the other hand, prioritized building stronger economic relations with China (53%) over getting tougher with China (39%). Democrats’ backing for confrontation was up 6 points since 2011, but it remained the minority sentiment among those in Obama’s party.

Similarly, Republicans (71%) were more worried about the trade deficit with China than Democrats (54%). Republicans were also more concerned about the loss of U.S. jobs to China, by 76% to 67%. And they were more likely to say the U.S. debt held by the Chinese was a very serious problem, by 87% to 75%.

The polling data are clear: Democrats are strongly concerned about the trade imbalance, the loss of U.S. jobs, and Chinese holding of U.S. debt. But the fact that their negative sentiments are less intense may give Obama more room to maneuver on China policy, especially if China lessens its export dependence and pursues economic growth through domestic consumption.

So what will be the pillars of the Obama administration’s economic policy toward China in its second term?

The first will likely be more complaints about Chinese subsidies and trade practices filed with the WTO, given the president’s campaign promises and his record during his first term. Washington has been relatively successful with such cases in the past, and pursuing multilateral dispute settlements has the added advantage of avoiding a direct bilateral confrontation with China.

The second will be the pursuit of trade agreements that notably do not include China. The most important of these is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a free trade agreement among a growing list of nations bordering the Pacific. It is the Obama administration’s avowed aim to construct a TPP with standards so high — especially rules regarding behavior by state-owned enterprises — that China could never join without transforming its economic system. This stance in part reflects the fact that two-thirds (67%) of the U.S. public believe China practices unfair trade, according to a 2012 survey by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

The likely 2013 launch of a U.S.-European Union free trade negotiation — effectively a Trans-Atlantic Partnership, a bookend for the TPP — primarily reflects majority (58%) sentiment in the United States that increased trade with Europe would be a good thing for the United States. But it can also be seen as an attempt to establish U.S.-European, rather than Chinese, technical and regulatory standards as global business norms.

The Obama administration is unlikely to label China a currency manipulator, which is something Mitt Romney promised he would do on his first day in office. In Obama’s first term, the White House had multiple opportunities to do so and declined, even though the renminbi was weaker against the dollar than it is now.

The unknowable factor in future U.S.-China economic relations is the political impact of what is expected to be growing Chinese foreign direct investment in the United States. Chinese investment flows to the United States are expected to grow significantly in the years ahead. And experience with Japan suggests that if such investment creates and preserves jobs (and recent data suggests much Chinese investment is doing just that), Chinese investment may not create significant new political frictions.

U.S.-China economic relations are driven by underlying fundamentals and geo-political realities, not U.S. campaign rhetoric. Nevertheless, U.S. elected leaders ignore public opinion at their peril. Unless and until the U.S. trade deficit shrinks (lowering the United States’ dependence on Chinese loans to fund that debt) and domestic job growth rebounds, there is likely to be public animosity toward China in the United States and bilateral economic frictions. While history suggests that these frictions are manageable, they will pose political headaches for both U.S. and Chinese leaders that could periodically adversely affect the strategic relationship.

Europeans generally reacted to President Obama’s re-election with a mixture of excitement and relief, just as they did four years ago. For many across the Atlantic, Obama’s 2008 victory signaled the end of the Bush-era estrangement between the U.S. and its Western allies, and the emergence of an America that would see the world a lot like Europeans do. However, despite Obama’s re-election at home and continued popularity in Europe, his presidency has not closed the long-running transatlantic values gap. Instead, on issues such as the use of military force, religion, and individualism, Americans and Europeans continue to disagree.

Obama has been popular in Europe since he toured the Continent as a presidential contender. Following George W. Bush’s two terms in office, Europeans immediately embraced Obama’s presidency. A stunning 93% of Germans expressed confidence in Obama in the early months of his first term, compared with just 14% for Bush during his final year in office. In Britain, France, and Spain, the new American president also received stratospheric ratings.

The result was a dramatic “Obama effect” on attitudes toward the U.S. In France, for instance, America’s favorability rating soared from 42% in 2008 to 75% in 2009. And importantly, support for American policies grew, especially support for U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. The enthusiasm that greeted Obama’s election has waned a bit over time, even in Europe, but vestiges of “Obamamania” remain. The 2012 Pew Global Attitudes survey found at least eight-in-ten expressing confidence in the U.S. president in Germany, France, and Britain.

However, while the pervasive anti-Americanism of the Bush years has receded, the “values gap” between Americans and Europeans is alive and well. Polls consistently find a transatlantic divide when it comes to fundamental beliefs on a variety of political and cultural issues. Americans and Europeans view each other with less hostility today, but they still don’t see the world in the same way.

Take the issue of military force. Americans remain more inclined than Europeans to say it’s necessary to use military force to maintain order in the world. Meanwhile, they are significantly less likely than Europeans to believe that getting UN approval is necessary before using military force to deal with international threats. America’s willingness to “go it alone” in world affairs has become an ingrained piece of the country’s international image – and it hasn’t changed much in the Obama years. Majorities across Europe continue to see the U.S. as acting unilaterally, not taking into account the interests of other nations when making foreign policy.

The Obama administration’s use of drone strikes illustrates the divide over hard power. About six-in-ten Americans – including majorities of Republicans, Democrats, and independents – approve of U.S. drone attacks against extremist leaders and organizations in countries such as Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. But in seven of the eight EU nations surveyed by Pew in 2012, more than half oppose these strikes, including nine-in-ten Greeks and 76% in Spain. The lone exception is the British, who are almost evenly divided on this issue.

Religion is another topic where Americans and Europeans hold very different views. In largely secular Western European nations such as Spain, Germany, Britain, and France, less than a quarter consider religion very important to their lives. Even in Poland, where Catholicism still plays an important role in public life, only 27% say religion is very important. By contrast, fully half of Americans hold this view. Similarly, solid majorities in the six EU nations surveyed by Pew in 2011 said you do not have to believe in God to be a moral person, but only 46% of Americans felt this way.

The same 2011 poll asked Christians from the U.S. and eight European nations whether they identify first with their nationality or their religion. Americans were evenly split: 46% said they think of themselves first as Americans and 46% as Christians. In seven of the eight European countries, a majority of Christians identified primarily with their nationality. Only 8% of French Christians, for example, said they thought of themselves first as Christians.

Individualism also continues to differentiate Americans and Europeans. Most Americans believe individuals largely control their own fate – just 36% agree with the statement “Success in life is pretty much determined by forces outside our control.” However, half or more in Germany, France, and Spain agree with this statement.

Europeans also believe in a very different relationship between the individual and the state. When asked which is more important, that everyone be free to pursue life’s goals without interference from the state, or that the state play an active role in society to guarantee that no one is in need, 58% of Americans choose the former. Majorities across Western and Eastern Europe, on the other hand, say making sure no one is in need should be a bigger priority.

Of course, even on fundamental values like these, opinions can and do shift over time, and on a few key issues, the values gap is shrinking. For instance, Americans are not as convinced as they used to be about their own cultural superiority – in 2002, six-in-ten agreed with the statement “our people are not perfect, but our culture is superior.” By 2011, just 49% held this view, much closer to the levels typically registered in Europe.

Public opinion on homosexuality has also shifted dramatically. The percentage of Americans saying society should accept homosexuality rose from 49% in 2007 to 60% just four years later. This is still much lower than the high levels of acceptance witnessed in Europe – more than eight-in-ten in Spain, Germany, France, and Britain believe homosexuality should be accepted – but the gap is clearly closing. The recent passage of marriage equality ballot initiatives in four U.S. states highlights how quickly public opinion on this issue is changing.

Moreover, young Americans increasingly look like their cohorts across the Atlantic on these questions. Nearly seven-in-ten Americans under age 30 say homosexuality should be accepted and only 37% think their culture is superior to others. Young people are also much more likely than older Americans to believe the government should make sure no one is in need. If these trends continue and expand to other topics, the transatlantic values gap could someday vanish. But for the foreseeable future, the divide will likely persist, regardless of who occupies the White House.

Much of the world cheered the November 6 re-election of U.S. president Barack Obama. But the president’s honeymoon may be short lived. Disappointment with Obama’s first term foreign policy may challenge both his popularity and his ability to present a positive image of the United States around the globe.

Prior to the election, overwhelming majorities in Western Europe, Japan and Brazil supported Obama’s reelection. But they were upset with signature elements of his foreign policy. In particular, a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project earlier this year found widespread opposition to drone strikes, a cornerstone of the Obama administration’s anti-terrorism policy, and many believe the president hasn’t sought international approval before using military force, as they expected he would when he first took office. In addition, publics around the globe say Obama failed to meet their expectations that he would tackle climate change and take an even-handed approach to the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

Four years ago, Obama came to office with the world behind him, reversing a decade-long trend of negative opinions of the U.S.  Between 2008 and 2009, the percentage of Germans, French, Spanish and Indonesians expressing positive views of the U.S. increased by at least 25 percentage points, and double-digit increases were also evident in Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Britain, India and Nigeria.  Even in some Muslim countries, where Obama has never enjoyed broad popularity, the image of the U.S. saw modest improvements in Jordan, Egypt and Lebanon when Obama was first elected.

But clouds loom on the horizon, as overall approval of Obama’s international policies and confidence in the American president have declined around the globe since 2009. Among Obama’s biggest problems is his administration’s drone campaign against extremist leaders and organizations.  Majorities in virtually every country surveyed in 2012 oppose this policy, which is a key component of American anti-terrorism efforts.  Opposition is especially prevalent in Muslim countries – at least eight-in-ten in Egypt, Jordan and Turkey are against drone strikes – but about three-quarters in Spain, Japan, Mexico and Brazil are also against drones, as are 63% in France and 59% in Germany.

Obama is now confronted with a sense of disappointment over unmet expectations during his first term, especially when it comes to his handling of global climate change, and especially in Western Europe.  In 2009, large majorities in France, Germany, Britain and Spain believed Obama would take significant measures to control climate change. By Spring 2012, however, fewer than three-in-ten in these countries said Obama had, in fact, done this.  Significant gaps between expectations and evaluations of Obama’s performance on climate change were also evident in Poland, Russia, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, China, Japan, and Mexico.

In Western Europe, Obama also failed to meet expectations on his handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Although 61% in Germany, 57% in France, and nearly half in Britain still believed Obama had been fair in dealing with both sides in the Spring 2012, as many as 79% in each of these three countries said they expected Obama to be even-handed on this issue at the beginning of this first term.

In most of the predominantly Muslim countries surveyed, where expectations that Obama would be fair in dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict were already low in 2009, even fewer said the American president had handled the conflict fairly. For example, after Obama took office, about a quarter of Egyptians believed he would be fair, compared with 11% who said Obama had been fair in 2012. Double-digit gaps between expectations and evaluations were also evident in Turkey and Pakistan.

More generally, many publics around the globe are disappointed with Obama’s approach to foreign affairs. Shortly after Obama took office, majorities in Britain, France and Germany, and at least four-in-ten in Spain, Poland, Russia, Japan and Mexico, expected Obama to act multilaterally when making international policy decisions. In the Spring 2012 survey, the percentage in these countries that said the president had, in fact, done this had dropped by 14 percentage points or more.

Similarly, in most countries, fewer said Obama had sought international approval before using military force than said they expected him to do so in 2009. Disillusionment with the president on this issue is especially common in Spain, Germany, Egypt and Japan, where the gap between expectations and evaluations is larger than 20 percentage points.

But despite some disappointment with Obama and a decline in the president’s popularity in some parts of the world, large majorities in Western Europe, Japan and Brazil continued to express confidence in the American president to do the right thing in world affairs in the Spring 2012 survey. And America’s image, which had declined dramatically during the Bush presidency, remained largely positive three years into Obama’s tenure.

A reelection is a time for renewal. And Obama has much support from the global community to build upon. Whether he continues to enjoy that good will, however, may hinge on how he approaches issues like drone strikes, climate change and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the extent to which he reaches out to the rest of the world in his second term.

By Bruce Stokes, Director of Pew Global Economic Attitudes, Pew Research Center

Special to YaleGlobal

The American people have spoken. Barack Obama remains the president of the United States – and by extension leader of the world – for the next four years. The people of Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America had no say in this choice, but they must live with the consequences.  The policies pursued by the reelected American president, be it dealing with the economy, Iran, terrorism or trade, promise to have a profound effect on the lives and livelihoods of billions of people in all parts of the globe.

The promises that presidential candidates make on the campaign trail do not necessarily dictate the policies pursued, But presidents tend to attempt to implement their promises. Moreover, American public opinion on a range of issues facing the next president is clear, with priority on the economy, preventing a nuclear Iran and catching up with China. Obama will defy such sentiment at his political peril.

The potential for either collaboration or friction between the new administration and foreign governments is ever-present. Europeans, Asians, Africans and Latin Americans attempting to gauge the implications of Obama’s victory understandably wonder if commitments made in the heat of a US presidential election really matter once a candidate becomes president. They do.

Read the full commentary at YaleGlobal

Special to EuropeanVoice

The re-election of Barack Obama as the next president of the United States has ramifications—good, bad and indifferent—for transatlantic relations.

Whoever had emerged victorious November 6, the American pivot toward Asia was to continue because of China’s growing magnetic economic and geo-political appeal. But Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Russia, terrorism and trade are still likely to dominate the immediate transatlantic agenda. And differences in public perception on both sides of the Atlantic could pose new tests for the EU-U.S. alliance in the years ahead.

Iran is the most immediate challenge to transatlantic solidarity.

There is extremely strong American and European opposition to the Iranian nuclear weapons program, according to the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes survey in spring, 2012.

But among those who oppose Iran acquiring a nuclear arsenal, Americans’ support for the use of military force to halt the Iranian efforts exceeds that in any other country. About six-in-ten (63%) Americans would support military action, compared with 51% in France and Britain and 50% in Germany. Only 24% of Russians would back such a move.

The absence of strong international backing for a strike on Iran could complicate the new president’s ability to build and hold together a united diplomatic front in any effort to deny Tehran nuclear weapons.

Washington’s likely continued offensive against terrorists poses similar, if less threatening, alliance frictions. Europeans are generally supportive of U.S.-led efforts to fight terrorism. But they take a sharply negative view of the drone strikes that are likely to continue to be one of America’s principal methods of prosecuting that war. Drones have the overwhelming support of the American public (62%). But they are disapproved of by 76% of the Spanish, 63% of the French and 59% of the Germans.

Afghanistan, Syria and Russia are issues that may divide the alliance less than the campaign rhetoric in the United States presidential race might have suggested.

Obama has promised to get out of Afghanistan by 2014. Both American and European publics are clear, they want all troops out.

Obama has shown no stomach for military intervention in war-torn Syria. And neither the American nor the European publics support allied military involvement in Syria: 59% of Europeans and 55% of Americans say their governments should stay out completely, according to the 2012 German Marshall Fund’s Transatlantic Trends survey.

Obama’s promised reset of relations with Moscow was more of an ambition than a policy. Time will tell if it can be realized in his second term.

But European and American publics are clear. They don’t trust Russia: 55% of Europeans and 48% of Americans have an unfavorable view of Russia, according to the GMF survey. But they like the status quo. Half of Europeans (56%) and Americans (53%) approve of the way Obama has managed relations with Russia so far.

Trade promises to be a unifying transatlantic issue in the next administration. Later this year, the Obama administration is expected to announce plans to negotiate a free trade agreement with Europe. And Brussels is in agreement.

Overwhelming majorities on both sides of the Atlantic think trade is good for their countries, despite worries about its impact on jobs and incomes. France and American unions, both long skeptical of trade liberalization, have been largely silent about a transatlantic free trade deal, a positive sign. European and American farmers are likely to be wary. But prospects for completing such an agreement during the next U.S. administration are better than they have ever been.

Obama will continue the U.S. pivot toward Asia. Nevertheless, the European-American agenda will remain busy, with a number of issues that have to be properly managed to avoid alliance tensions. But with the re-election of Barack Obama, who is more popular across Europe than any other European leader and who most Europeans wanted to remain in the White House, there is no danger of a return of the transatlantic tensions that marked the Bush administration in the last decade.

Now that the election is over, the hard work begins. The U.S. economy is careening toward a so-called fiscal cliff that could dramatically shrink output in 2013. Confrontations loom with Iran over its nuclear weapons program and China over its trade practices.

Yet while the American people have chosen Barack Obama to navigate these shoals over the next four years, they remain deeply divided over what to do about these challenges. Obama has a mandate to govern, but his mandate on specific issues is far from clear. His biggest challenge may be to bridge the divides among the American people.

The economy was issue number one for voters on election day: 59 percent named the economy as their top concern, 15 percent said the government deficit, according to election day exit polls released by AP. The results echo a CNN exit poll that suggested 60 percent of voters see the economy as their top concern, with 38 percent saying that unemployment was their top economic worry.

Unless a comprehensive deficit reduction plan is agreed upon by January 1, 2013, dramatic cuts to U.S. defense and social welfare spending and significant tax hikes will kick in.

The non-partisan U.S. Congressional Budget Office estimates that implementing such measures would shrink the American economy by 0.5 percent in 2013. Such a course would ripple through a global economy already hobbled by recession in Europe and a slowdown in China, India and Japan.

Read the full commentary at CNN’s Global Public Square blog

President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney meet in their third and final presidential election debate October 22. The topic will be foreign policy. Sparks will fly: over the Obama administration’s handling of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya; over what to do about the Iranian nuclear program and over China. Debating points will likely be scored and lost. But the impact on the ultimate outcome of the election is doubtful. American voters have been clear all year: few believe that international concerns are the most important problems facing the country in the run up to the November 6 election. And most favor focusing attention on domestic rather than foreign challenges.

Nevertheless, the American public has definite views on international issues. And there are some sharp differences between Republican and Democratic voters. So, while political pundits generally agree that there are no great substantive differences between the two candidates on most foreign policy matters, Obama and Romney may draw what distinctions they can in the debate to reap whatever electoral gain is available.

The Libya attack—which resulted in the deaths of four Americans—is sure to be a highly contentious topic, as it was briefly in the second debate on October 16. It promises to be a wrangle about who is to blame for the tragedy. The public is evenly divided on the issue, with 35% approving the administration’s performance and 38% disapproving. And sentiment is sharply divided along partisan lines: 60% of Democrats approve of the administration’s handling of the tragedy, 73% of Republicans disapprove. But just 56% of the public say they are following the Benghazi investigations closely, an indicator that it may not affect many voters’ decisions.

More broadly, an inward-looking public sees changes in North Africa and the Middle East through a distinctly American lens. A majority (54%) say it is more important to have stable governments in the region, even if they are less democratic, according to a new survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

Americans are also increasingly dubious that Arab Spring changes will lead to lasting improvements for people in the region. Only a quarter believe that changes in political leadership in the region will result in lasting improvements for people living in these countries, down from 42% who had such hopes in a March/April 2011 poll. More than half (57%) now think the Arab Spring will not lead to lasting improvements. And few (14%) think that the changes in political leadership in the region will be good for the United States, a view that is down ten percentage points from March/April 2011.

The public is less equivocal about Iran and its nuclear weapons program. Americans have long favored tough measures to prevent Tehran from amassing a nuclear arsenal. A majority (56%) say it is more important to take a firm stand against Iran’s nuclear program, while just 35% say it is more important to avoid a military conflict. In January, half favored taking a firm stand against Iran and 41% said it was more important to avoid a confrontation.

But this is a partisan issue in the United States. 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. Yet Americans are evenly divided—with 45% saying Obama and 44% picking Romney—over who would do better job as president in dealing with Iran’s nuclear program.

If Iran is the most immediate strategic challenge facing the next U.S. president, China is widely acknowledged to post the greatest long-term economic challenge. And the American public backs a tougher stance with Beijing. Nearly half (49%) say getting tougher with China on economic issues is more important than building a stronger economic relationship (42%). And support for toughness is up nine percentage points since March, 2011.

Independents and Republicans 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 continue to prioritize building stronger economic relations with China (53%) over getting tough with China (39%).

People think Romney is more likely to stand up to China. By 49% to 40% they say the former Massachusetts governor would do a better job dealing with China’s trade policies.

When Americans elect a president they are also effectively electing the leader of the world. So voters’ views on Libya, Iran, the Arab Spring and China will shape the conduct of international relations for years to come. This year’s presidential election may not turn on foreign policy, but the world certainly has a stake in the outcome.

Special to CNN

Tensions are mounting between China and its Asian neighbors, most recently over long-disputed territories in the South China and East China Seas. At the same time, the negative coverage that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton received in state-run Chinese media during her trip to Beijing last month underscored ongoing differences between China and the U.S. on a host of issues. But tensions like these are not just apparent at the diplomatic level or in government propaganda. Now, as China prepares for its once-in-a-decade leadership transition, the Chinese public is increasingly hostile toward rival nations, according to polling by the Pew Global Attitudes Project. This can only complicate Beijing’s relations with its neighbors and global rivals in the years ahead.

In particular, Chinese sentiment about the U.S. has cooled over the last few years. In 2010, 68 percent of Chinese characterized their country’s relationship with the U.S. as one of cooperation, while just 8 percent said it was one of hostility. Now, only 39 percent describe ties in terms of cooperation and 26 percent say they are hostile.

The Chinese were fairly pleased with President Barack Obama’s election, but since he took office his ratings in China have fallen dramatically. Of course, the People’s Republic is not alone in this regard – Obama’s approval has declined at least somewhat since he took office in most countries regularly surveyed by Pew. However, the drop off in China has been especially steep. In 2009, 62 percent of Chinese said they had a lot or some confidence in Obama to do the right thing in world affairs, while just 23 percent had little or no confidence. Today, the Chinese public is almost evenly split – 38 percent express confidence; 41 percent lack confidence.

Read the full commentary at CNN

As China prepares for its once-in-a-decade change of leadership, the Chinese people believe their country faces serious and growing challenges. In particular, the side effects of rapid economic growth, including the gap between rich and poor, rising prices, pollution, and the loss of traditional culture are major concerns, and there are also increasing worries about political corruption. While the Chinese have consistently rated their national and personal economic situations positively over the last few years, they are now grappling with the concerns of a modern, increasingly wealthy society.

The Chinese public also increasingly expresses reservations about relations with the United States. Over the last two years, ratings for the U.S. and President Obama have declined significantly, and the percentage of Chinese who characterize their country’s relationship with the U.S. as one of cooperation has plummeted from 68% to 39%. Still, many Chinese embrace aspects of America’s soft power, including U.S. science and technology and American ideas about democracy.

Inflation remains the top concern of the Chinese public – six-in-ten consider rising prices a very big problem. Meanwhile, half say corrupt officials are a major problem, up from 39% four years ago.

Worries about consumer protection have also increased significantly. After a number of high-profile food safety scandals in recent years, concerns about the safety of food have more than tripled since 2008.

And while China’s economy has grown at a much faster rate than most countries since the onset of the global economic downturn, concerns about economic inequality have also increased. About half now say the gap between rich and poor is a very big problem, and roughly eight-in-ten agree with the view that in China the “rich just get richer while the poor get poorer.”

Moreover, the rapid changes that have transformed their society in recent years have not been welcomed by all Chinese. Most still say they like the pace of modern life, but fewer hold this view today than four years ago. Nearly six-in-ten say their traditional way of life is getting lost and even more think their way of life should be protected against foreign influence.

These are among the key findings from a survey of China conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 3,177 respondents between March 18 and April 15. The sample represents approximately 64% of the adult Chinese population.¹ This poll in China is part of the broader 21-nation spring 2012 Pew Global Attitudes survey.

Despite Success, Many See Problems

While the global financial crisis has taken a serious toll in many nations over the last few years, most Chinese report continued economic progress – indeed, 70% say they are better off financially than they were five years ago. Among the 21 nations polled, Brazil is the only country where the public reports a comparable level of economic advancement. Additionally, a remarkable 92% of Chinese say their standard of living is better than their parents’ at a similar age. (For more on international economic mobility and other economic issues, see “Pervasive Gloom About the World Economy,” released July 12, 2012).

Given this economic mobility and the overall success of economic reforms since the late 1970s, it is not too surprising that free markets are popular. Roughly three-in-four Chinese agree that most people are better off in a free market economy.

However, there is a general consensus in China that the economic gains of recent years have not benefited everyone equally: 81% agree with the statement the “rich just get richer while the poor get poorer,” and 45% completely agree. Roughly half (48%) say the gap between rich and poor is a very serious problem, up from 41% four years ago (fully 87% consider it at least a moderately big problem).

And some Chinese doubt whether simply working hard is enough to guarantee success in today’s China. While 45% agree with the statement “most people can succeed if they are willing to work hard,” one-in-three disagrees. Those who are doing better economically are much more likely to see a link between effort and success – 62% of higher-income Chinese believe most people can be successful if they work hard, compared with 45% of middle- and 44% of lower-income respondents.²

In another sign that many do not see a level playing field in Chinese society, there are growing worries about corruption. Half now say corrupt officials are a very big problem, up 11 percentage points since 2008; and 32% say this about corrupt business people, also up 11 points from four years ago.

Consumer protection is another rising concern. Four years ago, just 12% rated food safety a very big problem; today, it’s 41%. The percentage expressing very serious concerns about the safety of medicine has more than tripled, from 9% in 2008 to 28% today. And more now are very worried about the quality of manufactured goods (13% in 2008; 33% now).

Increasingly, people are also anxious about having a social safety net. Since 2008, the percentage of those rating old age insurance a very big problem has more than doubled (from 13% to 28%), while the percentage who say the same about health care has jumped from 12% to 26%. The environment is also a serious concern to many. A third or more rate air (36%) and water pollution (33%) as very big problems.

In addition, many Chinese are worried about the current state and direction of their culture and traditions. Most (57%) think their way of life is getting lost and 71% want to see their way of life protected from foreign influence. While 59% still say they like the pace of modern life, this is down from 71% four years ago. Wealthier Chinese are more likely to embrace modern life; 73% of those with higher incomes say they like it, compared with just 61% of middle and 54% of lower income Chinese.

Growing Wariness of the U.S.

Over the last two years, Chinese views about their country’s relationship with the U.S. have shifted substantially. In 2010, roughly two-in-three described the U.S.-China relationship as one of cooperation; today, just 39% view it this way. Meanwhile, 26% now say the relationship is one of hostility, up from 8% in the 2010 poll.

Similarly, while 58% had a positive view of the U.S. in 2010, only 43% do so today. President Obama’s ratings have also slipped – currently, 38% express confidence that he will do the right thing in world affairs, down from 52% two years ago.

Nonetheless, many Chinese – especially younger, wealthier, well-educated, and urban Chinese – continue to embrace certain elements of American soft power. In particular, many admire the U.S. for its scientific and technological achievements.

And in a country that remains a one-party state, American-style democracy has a strong appeal. Roughly half (52%) say they like American ideas about democracy; just 29% say they dislike these ideas. About seven-in-ten Chinese in the higher-income category have a positive opinion about American democratic ideals.

Just like opinions regarding the U.S.-China relationship, views about the India-China relationship have cooled over the last two years. In 2010, 53% described relations between the two Asian powers as one of cooperation, compared with 39% now.

Views on the Japan-China relationship are, on balance, negative. Just three-in-ten Chinese say their relationship with Japan is one of cooperation; fully 41% describe it in terms of hostility.

Views of China’s Economic Power

Globally, perceptions of Chinese economic power have been on the rise since the onset of the financial crisis in 2008, and today many believe China is the world’s top economy. Across the 21 countries included in the spring 2012 Pew Global Attitudes survey, a median of 41% said China is the economic leader, while 37% named the U.S. (For more on international perceptions of China and the U.S., see “Global Opinion of Obama Slips, International Policies Faulted,” released June 13, 2012).

The Chinese, however, do not believe they have ascended to the top spot. About half (48%) say the U.S. is the world’s leading economy, while just 29% believe it is China. Americans, meanwhile, are divided: 41% think China is the top global economy, while 40% believe the U.S. remains the leader.