Current Leadership Gets High Marks

Two-thirds have a favorable view of Ennahda leaders PM Hamadi Jebali and Rached Ghannouchi, making them the most popular politicians polled in Tunisia.⁴ Ettakatol party leader Mustapha Ben Jaafar and independent Beji Caid Essebsi, interim prime minister from February to December, 2011, are also popular, drawing majority support from Tunisians (58% and 56%, respectively).

Maya Jribi, leader of the centrist Republican Party is less popular, with only a third of Tunisians viewing her favorably, 39% expressing an unfavorable view and 28% offering no opinion.⁵

Hachmi Hamdi, a journalist and the leader of Aridha Chaabia (i.e. Popular Petition Party), is the least-popular politician tested. Only 26% see him favorably, while over half (54%) have an unfavorable view of the politician who many believe has close ties to ousted former President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali.

Positive ratings of these politicians are related to views of democracy. Tunisians who favor democracy over a strong leader give the scholar-politician Ghannouchi a 73% positive rating, while only 58% of those who favor a strong leader agree. On the other hand, 64% of Tunisians who prefer a strong leader have a favorable view of former Prime Minister Essebsi, while roughly half (52%) of those who choose democracy say the same.

Coalition Partners Seen Favorably

The ruling moderate Islamist party Ennahda receives strong support from the Tunisian people. Nearly two-thirds (65%) have a favorable view of the Assembly’s leading party, while only three-in-ten have an unfavorable view.

Ennahda’s more secular coalition partners, Congress Party for the Republic (CPR) and Ettakatol (FDTL), garner notably less support – 48% and 44% of Tunisians have favorable views of these parties, respectively. However, more educated Tunisians have a sunnier view. For example, 57% of Tunisians with a college degree have a favorable view of Ettakatol, while only 38% with primary schooling or less feel the same.

Tunisians have more negative views of other major parties in the assembly. The Progressive Democratic Party (PDP), which recently merged with other centrist parties to form the Republican Party, is seen favorably by only 31% of Tunisians and unfavorably by 45%.

Meanwhile, majorities have a negative view of Aridha Chaabia, a populist leaning party, and the Tunisian Workers Communist Party (PCOT). Only about one-in-five Tunisians have a favorable view of either Aridha Chaabia (23%) or PCOT (17%).

Military Gets Exceptional Ratings

The military is far and away the most popular of the leading institutions tested in Tunisia, with 97% saying it is a good influence on the way things are going and almost three-quarters (72%) saying it is a very good influence. Majorities also see the police and media positively (69% and 63% respectively).

On balance, Tunisians say the court system (53%) and religious leaders (50%) are a good influence on the country, but opinions about the Constituent Assembly (NCA), which is charged with writing Tunisia’s new constitution, are more divided. An almost equal number of Tunisians say the Assembly is a positive influence (45%) as say it is negative (47%). Meanwhile, trade unions are seen negatively – only 32% say they are a good influence on the country and half say they are a bad influence.

Generally, lower income and less educated Tunisians have a higher opinion of the police, the media, the court system and religious leaders than their better educated and wealthier compatriots. For example, nearly seven-in-ten (69%) Tunisians with a primary education or less think the media is a good influence on the way things are going, while only half with a college degree agree. And while two-thirds of low-income Tunisians see the media positively, only 52% of high-income earners agree.⁶

In addition, views of the Assembly are shaped by religiosity and commitment to democracy. Roughly half (49%) of Tunisian Muslims who pray five times per day have a favorable view of the Assembly, but only 37% who pray less than that agree. And half of Tunisians who prefer democracy to a strong leader say the Assembly is a good influence, while only 38% of those who prefer a strong leader say the same.

A 21-nation Pew Global Attitudes survey finds widespread opposition to Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. And in most countries, there is majority support among opponents of a nuclear-armed Iran for international economic sanctions to try to stop Tehran’s weapons program. The Chinese and the Russians are notable dissenters in this regard. The poll also found majorities in Western Europe and the United States disposed to taking military action to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. Again, the Russians and Chinese disagreed.

The U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China – known as the E3+3 – are currently negotiating with Iran in an effort to keep Tehran from crossing a threshold that would enable it to quickly produce a nuclear bomb. But there are differences between these negotiating partners in their opposition to the Iranian nuclear weapons program, in their support for economic sanctions and in their willingness to resort to the use of military force if necessary to blunt Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Nine-in-ten people or more among the transatlantic E3+3 partners oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons aspiration. But just over half (54%) of Chinese agree. There are even greater differences among the negotiating partners over economic sanctions. Among those who oppose Tehran’s nuclear armaments program, about eight-in-ten Americans, Germans and British back sanctions, but only 38% of Chinese and 46% of Russians are in agreement.

The military option is even more divisive among those who are against Iran’s nuclear weapons program. A solid majority (63%) of Americans would turn to military force to prevent Iran from going nuclear. Roughly half of Washington’s European allies would support such a move. And there is very little Chinese or Russian support for a military strike.

These are among the findings from a survey by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, conducted March 17 to April 20, 2012.

No To a Nuclear Iran

There is almost universal opposition to Iran acquiring nuclear weapons across the 21 nations surveyed by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project.

Among the United States and its fellow European negotiating partners, the opposition is overwhelming: 96% of the French and the Germans, 94% of Americans and 91% of the British oppose Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. Other Europeans have similar sentiments. Fully 95% in Spain, 94% in Czech Republic and 91% in Italy do not want Tehran to have an atomic bomb. This opposition is effectively unchanged since the first Pew Global Attitudes survey on this issue in 2006.

Russians and Chinese, whose governments are the other two partners in the E3+3 process, also oppose the Iranian nuclear weapons program, but less strongly. Roughly three-in-four Russians (77%) are against Tehran acquiring nuclear armaments. In China, 54% oppose Tehran’s nuclear weapons ambitions, down 15 points from 2007.

Iran’s regional neighbors generally would rather not see an Iranian nuclear arsenal. But opinions do vary and they are fluid. About three-in-four Jordanians (76%), two-in-three Egyptians (66%) and 54% of Turks oppose Tehran acquiring nuclear weaponry, while Tunisians are divided (42% favor, 43% oppose). Half of Pakistanis back Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, while just 11% oppose them. Nearly four-in-ten Pakistanis (39%) have no opinion.

Lebanon is an interesting sectarian case study. Overall, the Lebanese oppose Iran having nuclear weapons by a 62% to 35% margin. But there is a deep cleavage in opinion among religious groups in the country: 94% of Sunni Muslims are against the Iranian nuclear program, as are 61% of Lebanese Christians. Nearly three-in-four Shia Muslims (73%), however, support it. Iranians are mostly Shia Muslims.

And views within the region are changing. Since 2006, opposition to Iran’s nuclear ambitions is up 34 percentage points in Jordan and 24 points in Egypt. While 54% of Turks still oppose their neighbor Iran having nuclear weapons, that opposition is down 11 points since last year. And opposition in Lebanon is also down seven points since 2006.

Opposition to Iran’s nuclear program among its neighbors generally tracks public fears of the threat an Iranian atomic bomb might pose to their country. A majority of Lebanese (57%) see a nuclear Iran as threatening. A majority of Tunisians (57%) and Pakistanis (57%) do not.

The outlier is Jordan. A very strong Jordanian majority opposes Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, but a majority (55%) also say that such an Iranian force would pose no danger to their safety.

Opposition to the Iranian nuclear armaments program is overwhelming in Japan (94%), Brazil (91%) and Mexico (86%).

Divisions Over Tougher Economic Sanctions

Economic sanctions have been imposed on Iran by the international community in an effort to dissuade Tehran from continuing its efforts to build a nuclear arsenal. Additional EU sanctions are scheduled to be put in place July 1, 2012.

Among those who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, Americans and citizens of their European negotiating partners in the E3+3 talks with Iran strongly support tougher international economic measures against Tehran to try to stop its atomic weapons program. This includes 80% in the U.S. and Germany, 79% in Britain and 74% in France.

In some of the negotiating partners, there is a bit of a generation gap among those who oppose a nuclear-armed Iran. Sanctions are generally supported by the young. But in Britain, people ages 18-29 are 17 points less likely to back sanctions than people 50 years of age and older. Similarly, in France the young are 14 points less likely than their elders to be supportive. And in the United States they are 13 points less likely.

The Chinese and Russians do not agree with their negotiating counterparts on economic sanctions. Moreover, support for sanctions is eroding in these two pivotal members of the E3+3 talks. Just 46% of Russians who oppose the Iranian nuclear program back new sanctions, down from 67% in 2010. In China, 38% favor more sanctions, a drop of 20 percentage points over the last two years.

Other Europeans are generally supportive of sanctions, including 79% of Czechs who oppose the Iranian program and 78% of Italians. But only 55% of Greeks agree. Some publics whose governments are further removed from the current negotiations with Iran are also somewhat less supportive: the Brazilians (62%) and Japanese (61%).

Iran’s regional neighbors are fairly sympathetic toward sanctions, including 74% of Lebanese who oppose Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons, 70% of Egyptians and 68% of Jordanians. The Turks, with a lively cross border trade with Iran, see sanctions in a different light. Roughly half of those who oppose Iran’s program in Turkey (52%) disapprove of tougher economic sanctions against their neighbor.

Divisions Over Military Action

Among those who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, Americans are the most willing to take military action if necessary to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapons program. The British and Germans lean toward the use of military force, while the French are split. The Russians and the Chinese show no support for a military strike and lean toward accepting a nuclear Iran.

If necessary to keep Tehran from developing nuclear weapons, 63% in the U.S. are willing to go to war. And that proportion has not changed significantly since 2010. Only 28% are ready to accept a nuclear-armed Iran.

Only about half of those who oppose an Iranian nuclear program among America’s European allies in the E3+3 talks agree: 51% in Britain and France and 50% in Germany. This sentiment is unchanged in Britain and Germany, but down eight points in France since 2010. Thus there is a significant 12-13 point transatlantic divide on whether to take military action if the E3+3 talks fail to end the Iranian weapons program. Roughly two-in-five or more of the British, French and Germans could live with a nuclear-armed Iran.

Within the E3+3 countries there are significant political differences on resorting to force. In the United States, among those who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, Republicans (79%) are more supportive of turning to military force if necessary than are Democrats (61%) or independents (58%).

In France there is also a left-right split. Only 43% of the French on the left of the political spectrum favor military action to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. A majority (56%) could accept a nuclear Iran. French conservatives take exactly the opposite view: 56% back military force. In Britain and Germany there is no significant ideological division on the issue.

For the most part there is no generation gap among the E3+3 over the use of force, except in Britain. Younger British, ages 18-29, are 19 points more likely to support military action than British 50 years of age and older.

Publics in Russia and China, the other two E3+3 negotiators with Iran, definitely do not back a military solution to the Iranian nuclear challenge. Only 30% of Chinese who oppose Iran’s nuclear ambitions support the use of force. In Russia 24% hold this view, down from 32% in 2010. Roughly four-in-ten Russians (41%) and Chinese (39%) want to avoid war, even if that means Tehran gets the bomb. But 36% of Russians and 31% of the Chinese volunteer that they reject both options or have no opinion.

Sentiment in other parts of Europe is comparable to that among the European E3+3 participants. About half or more of Czechs (55%), Spanish (53%), Italians (52%) and Poles (51%) who oppose an Iranian nuclear program would back a military strike to halt it. The outlier is Greece, which is deeply divided: only 27% support a military solution, 30% would accept a nuclear-armed Iran and 43% reject both options or express no opinion.

By considerable margins, Egyptians and Jordanians who oppose Tehran acquiring nuclear weapons would support military action against Iran. Fully 52% in Egypt and 50% in Jordan back the use of force, only 17% of Egyptians and 25% of Jordanians say they can live with a nuclear Iran. And that sentiment has not changed much in the last two years.

In Lebanon, a plurality (46%) would approve resorting to armed intervention. The Turks, for their part, are very leery of the use of force. Barely a quarter (26%) would agree to military intervention in Iran, while 42% want to avoid a military conflict even if that means the Iranians develop a nuclear weapons capacity.

In other parts of the world, the Brazilians (55%) and the Mexicans (54%) would back the use of force. But only two-in-five Japanese (40%) would agree to do so. Sentiment in Japan seems to be shifting somewhat. In 2010 a majority of Japanese (55%) supported avoiding conflict at all cost. Today only 49% hold that position.

Iran’s Negative International Image

Overall ratings of Iran remain largely negative across much of the world. Solid majorities in the United States and the European Union have an unfavorable opinion of Iran, including more than eight-in-ten people in Germany (91%), France (86%), Italy (85%) and Spain (84%).

Negative assessments are also common in E3+3 member China (62%). In Russia, however, views are divided, with 38% expressing a negative and 36% a positive view. Iran’s image has declined slightly in Russia since last year, when 42% had a favorable opinion.

Iran is also unpopular in many predominantly Muslim nations who are its neighbors. Roughly six-in-ten Lebanese (61%) give the Islamic Republic a negative rating, although views are sharply divided among the country’s major religious communities. About nine-in-ten Lebanese Shia Muslims (91%) hold a positive view of Iran, compared with just 5% of Sunni Muslims and 32% of Christians.

In Turkey, where diplomatic tensions with Iran have increased over the last year, 55% of the people have an unfavorable opinion about Iran, while only 26% express a favorable view.

Jordanians (79% unfavorable) and Egyptians (76%) give Iran especially poor marks. Moreover, ratings for Iran have declined precipitously since 2006, when 59% of Egyptians and 49% of Jordanians expressed a positive view.

There is also a generation gap on this question in some countries in the region. Young people in Tunisia, ages 18-29, are 16 percentage points more likely to have an unfavorable view of Iran than are people 50 years of age and older. In Turkey the generation gap is 14 points, while in Lebanon it is ten points.

Pakistan sees its neighbor quite differently: 76% of Pakistanis give Iran a positive rating. Meanwhile, Tunisians are roughly divided (43% unfavorable, 39% favorable).

Ahmadinejad Unpopular

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad receives largely negative reviews in most of the predominantly Muslim nations surveyed. However, Pakistan is again a major exception. About half of Pakistanis (47%) express a favorable opinion of Ahmadinejad, while just 6% give him an unfavorable rating (47% do not offer an opinion). Also, a plurality of Tunisians (42%) hold a positive view of the Iranian leader.

Once more, Lebanese opinions are split along religious lines, with nearly all Shia (95%) expressing a favorable view of Ahmadinejad and nearly all Sunnis (92%) offering a negative rating. Nearly six-in-ten Christians (57%) also see him in a negative light.

About half of Turks (48%) and large majorities of Jordanians (83%) and Egyptians (73%) have an unfavorable view of the Iranian president.

When President Barack Obama travels to India next month, he will visit a country in which both he and the nation he leads are broadly popular.  More than seven-in-ten Indians have confidence in the American president and about two-thirds express a favorable opinion of the United States.  Indians are also feeling positive about their own country’s role in world affairs and they are optimistic about its economic future.

India has enjoyed impressive economic growth in recent years, and today nearly six-in-ten Indians (57%) say their nation’s economy is in good shape.  Among the 22 publics included in the spring 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey, only the Chinese and Brazilians are more satisfied with their economic situation.  Still, Indians believe their country faces a number of major challenges, including crime and corruption.  And nearly two years after the deadly Mumbai attacks, 81% say terrorism is a very big problem.

Moreover, a plurality of Indians characterize Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group widely blamed for the Mumbai attacks, as the greatest threat facing their country.  One-third name Pakistan as the greatest threat – and overwhelmingly Indians believe there is a link between these two threats: 58% say the Pakistani government actively supports extremist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba, while another 21% think it at least tolerates them.  And if these groups were to conduct another terrorist attack against India, most would support military action against them in Pakistan.

Overall, Indians take a dim view of their neighbor and longtime rival: 81% express a negative opinion of Pakistan.  Concern that the Pakistani state will be consumed by extremism is widespread: 78% are worried that extremists groups will take over Pakistan.

Despite these tensions and a history of hostility between the two nations, most want better relations and deeper economic ties with Pakistan.  More than eight-in-ten Indians (83%) say it is important that relations with Pakistan improve, while more than six-in-ten (63%) believe an increase in trade and business ties between the two countries would be good for India.  And 63% also favor further talks between India and Pakistan to reduce tensions.

These are the latest findings from a spring 2010 survey by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project.  Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 2,254 adults in India from April 9 to April 30, 2010.  The sample, which is disproportionately urban, represents approximately 61% of the adult population.¹ (India was surveyed as part of the Spring 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey, which included 22 nations.  For more findings from this survey, see “Obama More Popular Abroad Than at Home, Global Image of U.S. Continues to Benefit,” released June 17, 2010, as well as other reports and analyses at pewglobal.org.)

U.S. Image Strong

The United States enjoys a largely positive image in India.  Nearly two-thirds (66%) express a favorable opinion of the U.S., although this is down from 76% last year.  By contrast, only 51% rate Russia favorably, and even fewer feel this way about the EU (36%) or China (34%).

While many publics around the world continue to believe the U.S. acts unilaterally in world affairs, Indians see a more multilateral America.  More than eight-in-ten (83%) say the U.S. takes the interests of countries like India into account when it makes foreign policy decisions – the highest percentage among the 21 nations surveyed outside the U.S.  This view has become increasingly common among Indians over the last eight years – in 2002, only 51% said the U.S. considered their interests.

U.S. President Barack Obama, who is scheduled to visit India and other Asian countries in November, is widely popular: 73% express confidence that Obama will do the right thing in world affairs.

India as a World Power

Indians express confident views about their country’s role in the international arena.  Almost four-in-ten (38%) think India is already one of the world’s leading powers and roughly half (49%) say it will be one eventually.  Only 8% believe it will never be a major power.

Indians also believe their country is well-regarded abroad; 87% say India is generally liked by people in other counties.  Among the 22 publics surveyed, only Indonesians (92%) are more likely to think their country enjoys international popularity.

However, India actually receives mixed ratings in other Asian countries.  On balance, Indonesians, Japanese, and South Koreans express positive views of India, but opinions toward India in China, and especially in Pakistan, are largely negative.

Most Say Economy Is Strong

Over the last several years, Indians have not shared the gloomy economic mood that has been pervasive across much of the globe.  Again this year, most Indians see their country’s economy in a positive light; 57% say the economy is in good shape, although this is down from 73% in 2009.

Overwhelmingly, Indians give their government high marks for its handling of the economy; 85% say it is doing a good job.  And most are optimistic about the future, with 64% saying the economy will improve over the next 12 months.

These ratings look even more positive when compared with other countries around the world, many of which are still struggling with the effects of the global economic downturn.

China (91%) and Brazil (62%) are the only countries surveyed in which a larger percentage of respondents describe their economic situation in a positive light.  China is the only nation in which the government gets higher marks for dealing with the economy (91% of Chinese approve of how their government has handled this issue).  And India ranks fourth out of 22 nations in terms of optimism about the near term economic future.

India also ranks fourth on overall satisfaction with national conditions.  Even so, only 45% of Indians say they are satisfied with the way things are going in their country, while 54% are dissatisfied.  In 2009, a majority (53%) had a positive view of national conditions and 46% offered a negative assessment.

Indians see a number of specific challenges facing their nation.  In particular, at least 80% say crime, terrorism and corruption are very big problems.  More than six-in-ten characterize the situation in Kashmir, pollution, and illegal drugs as very big problems.² And about two-thirds say this about economic problems, suggesting that Indians continue to confront economic challenges, even if they believe their country is generally on the right economic path.

Also of Note

• Prime Minister Manmohan Singh receives extremely positive ratings (87% favorable), as do Congress party leader Sonia Gandhi (87%) and her son Rahul Gandhi (85%).
• The Indian military also receives high marks: 92% say it is having a good influence on the nation, and 65% describe its influence as very good.
• Indians embrace key elements of economic globalization.  Nine-in-ten describe growing trade and business ties between India and other nations as a good thing; 79% believe most people are better off in a free market economy, even if that means some are rich while others are poor; and 72% think large foreign companies are having a positive impact in India.

Moreover, Indians assign higher ratings to the U.S. than to other leading powers.  About half (51%) have a positive opinion of Russia, while only 36% say the same about the EU.

Meanwhile, views toward China have turned sharply negative over the last year.  In 2009, 46% of Indians expressed a positive view of China, compared with just 34% this year.

Indians see their own country as a rising global power.  Nearly nine-in-ten Indians say their country already is (38%) or will eventually be (49%) one of the most powerful nations in the world.  Just 8% say India will never be one of the world’s leading powers.

Most Indians also think their country is popular abroad.  However, India actually receives mixed reviews from its Asian neighbors.

Positive Ratings for U.S.

America’s image in India has been generally positive in all Pew Global Attitudes surveys dating back to 2002, and this year roughly two-thirds (66%) of Indians have a favorable opinion of the U.S.; just 24% express an unfavorable view.  Still, positive ratings for the U.S. are less common now than in 2009, when 76% held a favorable view.

Indians with higher household incomes and higher levels of education are especially likely to express a positive view of the U.S.⁴ At least seven-in-ten high- (72%) and middle- (70%) income respondents give the U.S. favorable ratings, compared with 54% of those in the low-income group.

Similarly, Indians who have attended college (70%) and those with a high school education (68%) are more likely than those with five to nine years of schooling (47%) and those with four years or less (39%) to have a positive opinion of the U.S.  Nearly one-in-five (19%) low-income respondents do not offer an opinion about the U.S.; about three-in-ten of those with less than a high school education also do not offer an opinion.

About half of Indians (51%) consider the U.S. a partner to their country, down slightly from 56% last year, but considerably higher than the 40% observed in 2008.  Meanwhile, 24% regard the U.S. as an enemy, up from 9% in last year’s poll.  The percentage that sees the U.S. as neither a partner nor an enemy has dropped significantly over the last two years, falling from 38% in 2008 to 17% today.

A common complaint about American foreign policy in many countries is that the U.S. acts unilaterally in world affairs, failing to take into account the interests of other nations, but this is not the case in India.  Fully 83% of Indians think the U.S. takes into account the interests of countries like theirs when it is making foreign policy decisions – the highest percentage among the 21 countries surveyed outside the U.S.  The view that the U.S. considers India’s interests has become steadily more common since 2002, when only 51% held this view.

President Barack Obama also receives largely positive ratings in India.  Nearly three-in-four (73%) say they have a lot or some confidence in Obama to do the right thing in world affairs.  Just 15% have not too much or no confidence in the American president.

Most Say U.S.-India Relations Have Improved

Six-in-ten Indians think that relations between their country and the U.S. have improved in recent years, while 29% say they have not improved.  Indians are less likely to say the relationship is improving than was the case in 2009, when 70% held this view.

Indians are divided over whether relations between the U.S. and neighboring Pakistan have improved in recent years: 40% say they have improved, while 44% believe they have not.

A 38% plurality believes that U.S. policies toward India and Pakistan favor India too much, while 33% say they are fair and 14% say they favor Pakistan.

Looking at Pakistani public opinion on these same questions, 37% believe relations between the U.S. and India have improved in recent years, while 32% say they have not.  Pakistanis are also somewhat divided over whether relations between their own country and the U.S. have improved: 36% say yes, 39% no.  Regarding American policy in South Asia, nearly half of Pakistanis (47%) say the U.S. favors India too much; 13% believe U.S. policy is fair and just 6% say it favors Pakistan.

Declining Ratings for China

Indian views of China have grown significantly more negative over the last year.  Currently, just 34% hold a favorable opinion of China, while 52% have an unfavorable opinion.  In 2009, 46% expressed a positive and 39% a negative view.  As recently as five years ago, positive ratings of China outweighed negative ones by a 56% to 20% margin.

The percentage of Indians who consider China an enemy has almost doubled since last year’s poll.  Today, 44% hold this view, compared with 23% in 2009.  Roughly a third (32%) now label China a partner, down from 43% last year.

About four-in-ten Indians (42%) consider China a very serious threat to their country; another 28% say it is a somewhat serious threat.  Fewer than one-in-five think it is either a minor threat (11%) or no threat at all (8%).

Concerns about China’s economic power are also on the rise – 56% say China’s growing economy is a bad thing for India, up from 45% in 2008.

China’s expanding military might is viewed even more negatively.  More than six-in-ten (64%) believe that China’s growing military power is a bad thing for India; 27% consider it a good thing.  Opinions on this question have changed little since 2008, when 62% said it was bad for India and 24% believed it was good.

India’s International Image

Overwhelmingly, Indians believe that their own country is perceived positively abroad; 87% say India is generally liked around the world, while just 12% think people in other countries dislike India.  Of the 22 nations surveyed, only in Indonesia do more (92%) say their country is well-regarded.

However, India does not receive uniformly positive ratings from the five other Asian publics included in the survey.  Majorities in Indonesia (64%) and Japan (62%) offer favorable opinions; views of India are also, on balance, positive in South Korea, where half give the country a favorable rating and about a third (34%) give it an unfavorable rating.

In contrast, just one-in-five Pakistanis express positive views of their country’s longtime rival; seven-in-ten have a negative opinion of India.  Overall views of India are also negative in China – only about one-third of Chinese respondents (32%) have a favorable opinion and 51% have an unfavorable opinion of India.

In Indonesia, Japan and South Korea, ratings for India are higher than those for China, another major Asian power.  Just 38% in South Korea and even fewer (26%) in Japan give China a favorable rating, while majorities in both (56% and 69%, respectively) give it an unfavorable rating.  And while most Indonesians (58%) offer positive opinions of China, even more express favorable views of India.  Pakistanis, on the other hand, have far more positive views of China than they do of India; more than eight-in-ten (85%) in that country give China a favorable rating.

Views of India’s Economic Power

With the exception of Pakistan, majorities in all of the Asian countries surveyed see India’s growing economy as a good thing for their countries.  Views of India’s economic power are particularly positive in Japan and South Korea, where at least two-thirds consider it a good thing (76% and 68%, respectively).  Nearly six-in-ten in Indonesia (57%) also offer positive assessments of India’s growing economy.

Despite the fact that only about one-third of Chinese have a favorable overall opinion of India, six-in-ten say India’s growing economy is good for China.  Moreover, 53% of Chinese characterize the relationship between India and their country as one of cooperation; only 9% describe it as one of hostility; 23% say it is neither, while 15% have no opinion.

Just 27% of Pakistanis say India’s growing economic strength is good for their country; a majority (53%) considers India’s growing economy bad for Pakistan.  In contrast, about eight-in-ten (79%) Pakistanis offer positive views of China’s economic power.  Majorities in Japan and Indonesia (61% each) also consider China’s economic might a good thing for their countries, while South Koreans are divided – 45% say China’s growing economy is good and 49% say it is bad.

Strong majorities in India express favorable views of the military, the media, the national government, and large foreign companies.  Decidedly fewer offer these positive feelings towards the police and religious leaders.

Views of National Leaders

Close to nine-in-ten (87%) Indians have a favorable view of Prime Minister Singh.  Moreover, 47% have a very favorable opinion of India’s leader, with only 13% expressing an unfavorable opinion.  Singh, who was first elected prime minster in 2004 and then reelected in 2009, is viewed favorably across demographic groups within the Indian population.

Meanwhile, the two members of the Gandhi political dynasty included in this survey have similarly high levels of favorability.  Sonia Gandhi – widow of assassinated former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi – is viewed favorably by 87% of Indians, including 45% who view her very favorably.  Her son Rahul also gets high marks, with 85% of the Indian public expressing a positive opinion of him, and nearly half (49%) expressing a very favorable view.

As with Singh, both Gandhis are well-liked across demographic groups.  Fully nine-in-ten women view Sonia positively, as do 84% of men; likewise, nearly the same percentage of women (85%) and men (84%) give Rahul favorable ratings.  Solid majorities across all age, income and education groups also express favorable opinions of both Sonia and Rahul Gandhi.

Nitin Gadkari, current president of the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has significantly lower favorable ratings, partially due to the high number of respondents who offer no opinion.  A slim plurality of those surveyed have a favorable view of the politician, with four-in-ten expressing this sentiment, 26% holding a negative view, and 35% not sharing an opinion.

Views of Groups and Institutions

The military is seen as having a good influence by over nine-in-ten (92%) Indians; nearly two-thirds (65%) of those surveyed say the military is a very good influence on the way things are going in India.  This is the highest level of support among the seven groups and institutions tested on the survey.

Those in the higher income category give the military more enthusiastic ratings, with over seven-in-ten (72%) rating the military as a very good influence.  Still, majorities (65% and 54%, respectively) in the middle- and low-income brackets share this enthusiasm.

At least eight-in-ten in India believe Prime Minister Singh (85%), the media (85%), and the national government (80%) are having a positive influence, and 72% say the same about large companies from other countries.

Indians are divided over the impact of the police: 49% say the police are having a positive impact, while 50% say their impact is negative.  Women are more likely to have a positive opinion of the police; 55% believe they are a good influence versus 45% among men.

Religious leaders are seen as exerting a good influence by only 38% of Indians, with a majority (58%) describing them as a bad influence.  Unsurprisingly, those who say that religion is very important to their lives have a higher opinion of religious leaders (41% say they have a good influence) versus those who say religion is either somewhat or not important to them (32%).

Opinions of most of these groups and institutions in India have not changed much since the question was last asked in 2007.  However, positive ratings for religious leaders are down decidedly, falling 14 percentage points since 2007.  On the other hand, ratings for the prime minister have risen 6 percentage points since 2007.

And while Indian views on the influence of foreign companies have not changed significantly since 2007, views are up 11 percentage points from the 61% measured in 2002.

An overwhelming majority of Brazilians gives the government good ratings for the way it is handling the economy, and many expect economic conditions to improve over the next year. Yet, a large percentage of those who say the country’s current economic situation is bad blames the government primarily; many also say Brazilians themselves are responsible for the country’s economic troubles.

Mixed Views of National Conditions

When asked whether they are satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in their country, Brazilians are nearly evenly split: 50% offer a positive assessment and 49% offer a negative view of their country’s direction.  Still, the only nation surveyed where views of national conditions are more positive than in Brazil is China, where 87% are satisfied with the way things are going in their country.

Brazilian men are considerably more likely than women in that country to say they are satisfied with the way things are going; 56% of men offer a positive assessment of national conditions, compared with 43% of women.

Satisfaction with national conditions is also more widespread among the less educated.  Nearly six-in-ten (58%) of those with no more than a primary education are happy with the way things are going in the country.  In contrast, 45% of those with at least some secondary education and 49% of those with some college or more offer positive assessments of national conditions.

Respondents in rural areas are much happier with the state of the nation than are those in urban areas.  A majority (62%) in rural parts of the country say they are satisfied with the way things are going, while 36% say they are dissatisfied.  Those in urban areas are nearly evenly split; 48% are satisfied and 50% are dissatisfied with national conditions.

Regionally, those in the Northeast are especially inclined to express satisfaction with the way things are going in Brazil; about six-in-ten (61%) say they are happy with national conditions while 36% say they are not.  Views are more mixed in the other regions of the country.  For example, 45% in the Southeast say they are satisfied with the way things are going in their country, while 53% say they are dissatisfied.

National Economy Gets Good Ratings

Of the 22 publics surveyed, Brazilians offer the second-most positive evaluations of economic conditions in their country.  A solid majority (62%) describes the current economic situation in Brazil as very or somewhat good, while just 36% say the economy is bad.  China, where 91% rate their country’s economy as good, is the only country where views are more positive than those of Brazilians.  Majorities in 17 of the 22 nations surveyed say their countries’ economies are in bad shape.

Men and those with at least some college education give Brazil’s economy particularly high marks.  While nearly seven-in-ten (69%) men say economic conditions are good, a narrower majority of women (56%) share this view.  Among respondents who have attended college, 70% give the economy a positive rating, compared with 62% of those with some secondary education and 59% of those with a primary education or less.

Ratings of economic conditions do not vary significantly across income or age groups.² Respondents in all regions also offer similar evaluations of Brazil’s economy, as do those in urban and rural areas.

Government’s Handling of the Economy

Of those who think the economy is in bad shape, an overwhelming majority (80%) blames the government for their country’s economic problems. More than half (55%) say Brazilians themselves are among the top culprits, while 26% blame banks and other financial institutions for Brazil’s economic troubles.  Few name the U.S. (5%) or the European Union (2%).

Still, a solid majority of Brazilians (76%) give their government a good rating for its handling of the economy; just 23% say the government is doing a bad job.  This view is prevalent across demographic groups and regions.

Even among those who say the economy is in bad shape, more give the government a good rating (51%) for its handling of the economy than give it a bad rating (46%).  And those who blame the government for the country’s economic troubles are divided – 49% say the government is doing a good job on the economy and 50% say it is doing a bad job.

Most Say Economy Will Improve

Brazilians are optimistic about their short-term economic future.  Three-quarters say they expect their country’s economic situation to improve over the next year.  Just 4% say the economy will worsen, while 17% expect it to remain the same.

Among those who rate the current economic situation positively, 80% expect it to be even better in the next year, while 16% expect it to remain the same; just 2% say things will get worse.  Optimism is less widespread among those who say the economy is currently in bad shape; still, 68% in that group expect economic conditions to improve in the next year, while 21% say things will remain the same and 9% think the economy will worsen.

Views of Trade and Globalization

An overwhelming majority of Brazilians (87%) say that growing trade and business ties between Brazil and other countries is a good thing. This view is widespread across demographic groups and regions, but those with some college education and the more affluent, as well as those in urban areas, are somewhat more likely than the less educated, those with lower incomes, and those in rural parts of the country to say growing trade is good for Brazil.

Brazilians also support the free market approach.  Three-quarters agree that most people are better off in a market economy, even though some are rich and some are poor; 21% disagree with this view.  By comparison, fewer than half in the other two Latin American countries surveyed endorse free markets; 44% in Mexico and 40% in Argentina agree that most people are better off in a market economy.

Drugs, Crime Top Concerns

More than eight-in-ten Brazilians say illegal drugs (85%) and crime (83%) are very big problems in their country.  Large percentages also see corrupt politicians (79%) and social inequality (66%) as very big problems, while somewhat narrower majorities express similar concern about pollution (62%), the spread of HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases (58%) and economic issues (53%). Relatively few (27%) say access to drinking water is a major problem in Brazil.

For the most part, views of national problems vary little, if at all, across demographic groups.  However, those in rural areas are often more likely than those in urban areas to characterize Brazil’s challenges as major.  For example, 75% of respondents in rural parts of the country describe the spread of infectious diseases as a very big problem, compared with 56% of those in urban areas.  And while about three-quarters (74%) in rural areas say pollution is a major problem, 60% in urban areas share this opinion.

Blacks are more likely than whites and those who are of mixed race to see social inequality as a major challenge.  Nearly eight-in-ten (77%) blacks describe social inequality as a very big problem in Brazil; 68% of those of mixed race and 63% of whites do so.  Brazilians across income and educational groups offer similar views about the extent to which social inequality is a problem in their country.

Fear of Crime

More than half of Brazilians (55%) say there are areas within a kilometer of their home where they would be afraid to walk alone at night; 45% say they feel safe walking alone in their neighborhood. Women, those over 50 and those who live in urban areas are especially likely to feel unsafe.

About two-thirds (66%) of women say there are areas near their homes where they would be afraid to walk alone at night, compared with 43% of men who say that is the case.

Among those 50 and older, 65% say there are areas within a kilometer of their homes where they would be afraid to walk alone at night. By contrast, half of those ages 30 to 49 and about the same share of those younger than 30 (52%) feel unsafe in their neighborhoods.

And while solid majorities of urban and rural dwellers describe crime as a very big problem in Brazil (83% and 87%, respectively), those who live in urban areas are more likely to feel personally unsafe.  More than half (56%) of respondents who live in urban areas say there are parts of their neighborhood where they would be afraid to walk alone at night; 44% of those in rural areas say that is the case.

As the eight years of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s presidency draw to a close, Brazilians offer largely positive assessments of where their country stands.  At a time when global publics are mostly glum about the way things are going in their countries, half of Brazilians say they are satisfied with national conditions, and 62% say their nation’s economy is in good shape.  Of the 21 other publics included in the 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey, only the Chinese are more upbeat about their country’s overall direction and economic conditions.

A solid majority of Brazilians believe the outgoing president and the national government are having a good influence on the country, and most give the government good ratings for its handling of the economy.  Moreover, the Bolsa Família program, Lula’s signature initiative, which provides cash incentives to the country’s poorest families for keeping their children in school and getting them vaccinated, is popular with Brazilians among all demographic groups.

Lula is also praised for his performance on the world stage.  Nearly eight-in-ten Brazilians express confidence in their president to do the right thing in world affairs, and about three-quarters say Brazil already is (24%) or will eventually be (53%) one of the most powerful nations in the world.  A large majority believes their country is well-liked around the globe.

Yet, despite the generally positive national mood, Brazilians say their country faces some major challenges.  In particular, more than eight-in-ten say that illegal drugs and crime are very serious problems in Brazil; more than half say there are areas near their homes where they would be afraid to walk alone at night.  More than six-in-ten Brazilians also describe corrupt political leaders, social inequality and pollution as major problems.

These are the latest findings from a spring 2010 survey of Brazil by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project.  Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 1,000 adults in Brazil between April 10 and May 6, 2010.  The sample is representative of the country’s adult population, and the margin of sampling error for the results is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.  (Brazil was surveyed as part of the Spring 2010 Pew Global Attitudes Survey, which included 22 nations.  For more findings from this survey, see “Obama More Popular Abroad Than at Home, Global Image of U.S. Continues to Benefit,” released June 17, 2010.)

Positive Views of U.S. and China Too

Brazilians offer favorable opinions of the U.S. and China, their country’s two biggest trading partners, although America’s image is somewhat more positive.  About six-in-ten (62%) give the U.S. a favorable rating; 29% have an unfavorable opinion.  Looking at the other Latin American nations in the survey, 56% of Mexicans offer a favorable opinion, while 35% have a negative view of their

neighbor to the north.  And in Argentina, about the same number rate the U.S. favorably (42%) as rate it unfavorably (41%).

U.S. President Barack Obama also receives higher marks in Brazil than in Argentina and Mexico; 56% of Brazilians have confidence in the American president to do the right thing in world affairs, compared with 49% of Argentines and 43% of Mexicans.

Views of China are also more positive in Brazil.  While a slim majority of Brazilians (52%) give China high marks, fewer than half in Argentina (45%) and Mexico (39%) offer favorable opinions of the Asian superpower.

When asked whether they consider the U.S. and China partners or enemies of their country, most Brazilians (56%) say the U.S. is a partner, while 45% say the same about China.  About one-in-ten see each of these countries as an enemy, while many say the U.S. and China are neither partners nor enemies of Brazil.

Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program

While Brazilians express confidence in Lula’s overall approach to world affairs, they largely disagree with him on how to handle Iran and its nuclear weapons program.  The president has opposed additional international economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic.  Yet, of the 85% of Brazilians who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, nearly two-thirds approve of tighter sanctions to try to prevent it from developing such weapons; 31% oppose tougher economic sanctions against Iran.¹ Majorities of those who oppose a nuclear-armed Tehran in 18 of the other 21 countries surveyed also endorse such a measure.

In addition, most (54%) Brazilians who do not want to see a nuclear-armed Iran are willing to consider the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons; a third say avoiding a military conflict with Iran, even if it means it may develop these weapons, should be the priority.

Overall, Brazilian views of Iran are among the most negative of the 22 publics included in the 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey.  About two-thirds (65%) express unfavorable opinions of Iran; a similar percentage of Americans (67%) and Egyptians (66%) offer similarly negative views, as do more than seven-in-ten in Spain, Japan, France and Germany.

Also of Note

• More than six-in-ten Brazilians say the media, foreign companies, religious leaders and the military are having a good influence on the way things are going in their country; a slim, 53% majority give the police similarly good ratings.
• Many Brazilians say gender inequalities persist in their country, and seven-in-ten say it would be a good thing for a woman to be elected president, putting aside their opinions about presidential candidate Dilma Rousseff.
• Of the 22 publics surveyed, Brazilians are among the most supportive of the free market approach; 75% agree that people are better off in a market economy.  Only in China, Nigeria, India and South Korea is this view more prevalent.
• Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez receives the most negative ratings of five international leaders tested; just 13% have at least some confidence in him, while seven-in-ten say they have little or no confidence in the Venezuelan leader.  About half also lack confidence in Russian President Dmitri Medvedev.
• Brazilians express more concern about global climate change than any public surveyed; 85% say it is a very serious problem. Moreover, eight-in-ten say protecting the environment should be given priority, even if it results in slower economic growth and loss of jobs.

Solid majorities also describe large companies from other countries, the media, religious leaders, and the military as having a good influence.  The police receive the least favorable ratings of the groups tested; a slim majority says the police are having a positive effect on the way things are going in Brazil.

Lula’s Positive Ratings

More than eight-in-ten (84%) Brazilians describe Lula’s influence as good. Just 14% say the outgoing president is having a negative impact on the way things are going in the country.  Lula’s influence is seen as positive among those in all demographic and regional groups, but respondents with lower incomes and lower levels of education, as well as those in the Northeast, give the president particularly good ratings.

Nine-in-ten respondents with monthly household incomes of R$600 or less say Lula is having a good influence on the way things are going in Brazil, and a similar percentage (87%) of those in the middle income range share this view.  A solid but smaller majority of those with monthly household incomes above R$2000 offer positive views of the president’s influence; 73% say it is good.  Similarly, 88% of those with a primary school education or less describe Lula’s impact on the country positively, compared with 79% of those who attended college.

Respondents in the Northeast region give the president better ratings than those in other regions, although Lula is popular across the country. More than nine-in-ten (95%) in that region say he is having a good influence on the way things are going in Brazil; by comparison, in the Southeast, where Lula gets his lowest ratings, 78% say the president is having a positive impact.

Widespread Support for Bolsa Família

Brazilians strongly endorse Bolsa Família, Lula’s flagship initiative which many credit with reducing poverty in Brazil since its inception in 2003.  About eight-in-ten (81%) say the program has been good for the country.  Fewer than one-in-five (17%) think the cash-transfer program has been bad for Brazil; just 1% said they had never heard of Bolsa Família.

Majorities across all demographic groups support the Bolsa Família program, but the initiative is especially popular among those with less education and lower incomes.  For example, nine-in-ten of those with monthly household incomes of R$600 or less say the program has been a good thing for Brazil; 81% of those in the middle income and considerably fewer (65%) of those with monthly household incomes higher than R$2000 share this positive assessment of Bolsa Família.

Bolsa Família also receives more support among those in rural areas, where the decline in the poverty rate has been most apparent in recent years, according to Brazil’s Institute for Applied Economic Research (IPEA).  Nearly all (97%) respondents in rural areas say the program has been good for their country.  Support is also widespread, but less so, among urban dwellers; 79% say Bolsa Família has been good for Brazil and 18% say it has been bad.

Not surprisingly, Lula’s supporters are especially enthusiastic about the president’s signature program.  Fully 85% of those who see Lula as having a positive influence on the way things are going in Brazil say Bolsa Família has been good for their country; just 13% say it has been bad. By comparison, 57% of those who express negative views of Lula endorse the Bolsa Família program and 36% do not.

Views of Groups and Institutions

Brazilians give the media high marks; 81% say it is having a good influence on the way things are going in the country.  About three-quarters also say large companies from other countries and the national government are having a positive impact on the country (77% and 75%, respectively), and about two-thirds are satisfied with the influence of religious leaders (67%) and the military (66%).  The police receive more mixed ratings. A slim majority (53%) says the police have a good impact on the country; 45% give the police negative reviews.

Opinions about the impact the president and various groups and institutions are having on Brazil are consistently more positive among those with less education and lower income, and, to some extent, among those in rural areas.  For example, 63% in the low income group think the police are having a good influence.  In contrast, just 39% of those in the high income group share that view, while a majority (61%) says the police are having a negative influence on the country.

Low income respondents are also more likely than the more affluent to say religious leaders, the military, the media, and the president have a positive effect on the country. Similar differences are evident across educational groups, with those with a primary education or less much more likely than those who have attended college to see the president and key groups and institutions in a positive light.

Religious leaders, the police, the military and the media also receive more positive ratings in rural than in urban areas.  For example, while about seven-in-ten (69%) of those who live in rural areas say the police are having a good influence on the way things are going, those in urban areas are divided, with 51% saying the police have a good impact and 47% saying they have  a bad impact on the country.  And while clear majorities among both groups offer positive views of religious leaders, the military and the media, those in rural areas are more upbeat in their assessments.

Most Pakistanis hold their country’s military in high regard, while many also express positive attitudes about the media, religious leaders, and the court system. On the other hand, many Pakistanis view the national government and police as having a bad influence.

Zardari vs. Sharif

Views of Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari are decidedly negative; 76% offer an unfavorable view of him, while 20% hold a favorable opinion. Negative views of Zardari have increased in recent years; 65% expressed an unfavorable opinion of him in 2009, while just 24% did so in 2008.

Unfavorable views of Zardari are equally widespread across most demographic groups. Even among those who are affiliated with the political party he co-chairs with his son, the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), opinions of Zardari are largely negative – a majority (59%) has an unfavorable opinion of him while 38% offer a positive opinion. Similarly, in Sindh province, a traditional stronghold of support for the PPP, a majority (56%) views Zardari unfavorably, while 41% view him favorably.

In contrast, Nawaz Sharif – Zardari’s primary political rival and leader of the opposition Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) – remains widely popular. Roughly seven-in-ten (71%) have a positive opinion of Sharif; 79% expressed a favorable opinion last year. Sharif is almost universally popular among those affiliated with his party; 95% of those who self-identify as Pakistani Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) supporters offer a favorable opinion of the opposition leader. Sharif also enjoys broad support from those in the PPP (64% favorable).

Prime Minister, Chief Justice, Army Commander Viewed Favorably

While Pakistanis express largely negative views of Zardari, the vice-chairman of his party, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, remains popular, though slightly less so than a year ago. Nearly six-in-ten (59%) in Pakistan have a favorable opinion of Gilani while one-in-four (25%) express an unfavorable view of him and 17% offer no opinion. In spring 2009, two-thirds (67%) of Pakistanis rated Gilani favorably. Gilani is well-regarded by members of both leading political parties; 60% of those that affiliate with the PPP see the prime minister in a positive light, and even more (71%) who identify with the opposition PML-N party share that view.

Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, the Chief Justice of Pakistan’s Supreme Court, also receives positive ratings. About six-in-ten Pakistanis (61%) hold a favorable view of Chaudhry, who was suspended by former President Pervez Musharraf before being reinstated in March 2009. Only 16% express an unfavorable view of the chief justice and 24% do not offer an opinion. While Chaudhry is widely popular among self-identifiers of both major political parties, more respondents who affiliate with the PML-N (75%) express favorable views of Chaudhry than those who identify with the PPP (63%).

Army Chief of Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani receives favorable ratings from roughly six-in-ten (61%) Pakistanis. Few (14%) view General Kayani negatively, though about one-in-four (24%) do not have an opinion of him. While widely popular across both main political parties, more among PML-N supporters (72%) voice favorable views of Kayani than among those who identify with the ruling PPP (59%).

Imran Khan, a former world class Pakistani cricket player who now leads the small political party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, is viewed positively by about half (52%) of his countrymen; 24% express a negative view of him and the same percentage offers no opinion. More among the opposition PML-N (66%) than among the ruling PPP (51%) supporters voice favorable views of Khan.

Views of Groups and Institutions

Pakistanis overwhelmingly express positive views of their country’s military: 84% say it is having a good influence on the way things are going in Pakistan, essentially unchanged from last year’s 86%, but a significant increase from 68% in 2007.

Consistent with 2009, large majorities of Pakistanis say the media (76%) are having a good influence, while smaller majorities express the same view about religious leaders (62%) and the court system (55%).

However, the Pakistani police receive low marks from the public, and views toward the police have become more negative over the last year. Currently, 29% say the police are having a positive influence on the way things are going in the country, while 65% believe they are having a negative influence. In 2009, about four-in-ten (39%) said the police were having a positive impact and 55% characterized it as negative.

Just one-quarter of Pakistanis say the national government is having a good influence on the way things are going, while a large majority (71%) says it is having a bad influence. Pakistani sentiment about the national government has grown increasingly negative in the last decade. The percentage describing the government’s impact as positive has fallen from 72% in 2002 to 59% in 2007 and 40% in 2009, before declining again in this year’s survey.

Only 19% think President Zardari is having a good influence on the country, down from 27% last year. Fully 77% say his influence is negative, up from 68% in 2009.

Opposition to Iran’s nuclear weapons program is widespread, and many in Iran’s backyard express concern that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a serious threat to their nations. In nearly every country surveyed, those who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons say they would approve of tougher international economic sanctions to try to prevent Iran from developing such weapons. Opponents of Iran’s nuclear weapons program are less willing to consider military force as an option in dealing with the issue. Still, in 16 of 22 countries, among those who oppose a nuclear-armed Iran, more say they might back military action than reject that possibility.

Iran Image Largely Negative

More than eight-in-ten in Germany (86%) and France (81%) view Iran unfavorably, as do 73% in Spain; a somewhat smaller majority in Britain (58%) shares this opinion. Majorities in the Asian countries surveyed, with the exception of the largely Muslim countries of Pakistan and Indonesia, also express negative views of the Islamic Republic; three-quarters in Japan, 60% in China and 55% in both South Korea and India give Iran an unfavorable rating.

More than six-in-ten in Brazil (65%) and Poland (62%) express negative views of Iran, as does a slim 51%-majority in Argentina (only 13% have a favorable view and 36% do not offer an opinion). Views are more divided in Russia; a 45% plurality rates Iran unfavorably while 36% give it positive ratings.

Iran receives low marks in four of the predominantly Muslim countries surveyed. More than six-in-ten Egyptians (66%) and Jordanians (63%) have an unfavorable opinion of Iran; 60% in Lebanon and about the same share in Turkey (58%) also express negative views. Pakistanis and Indonesians, on the other hand, offer positive opinions. About seven-in-ten (72%) in Pakistan have a favorable view of Iran; just 9% have an unfavorable view. In Indonesia, 62% give Iran positive rating, while about a quarter (26%) express negative views. Nearly as many Nigerians rate Iran unfavorably (41%) as rate it favorably (44%).

In Nigeria and Lebanon, opinions of Iran are divided along religious and sectarian lines. Nigerian Muslims are about twice as likely to offer positive views (62%) as they are to offer negative views of Iran (29%). In contrast, the balance of opinion is unfavorable among Nigerian Christians – half give the Islamic Republic a negative rating and just 29% give it a positive review.

Opinions of Iran are even more negative among Christians in Lebanon; 83% have unfavorable views. Overall views are more divided among Muslims in that country (54% favorable and 46% unfavorable), but there are sharp differences in opinion between Lebanese Sunnis and Shia. More than eight-in-ten (83%) Sunni Muslims in Lebanon have a negative opinion of Iran, a largely Shia nation. In contrast, Lebanese Shia are nearly unanimous in their positive views of Iran; 95% give it a favorable rating.

Views of Iran’s Leader

Publics in countries with a large Muslim population express mixed opinions about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Majorities in Egypt (72%), Jordan (66%), Lebanon (63%) and Turkey (60%) lack confidence in the Iranian president to do the right thing regarding world affairs. In Indonesia, however, many more say they have at least some confidence in Ahmadinejad than say they do not (50% vs. 28%). Views of the Iranian leader are also, on balance, positive in Pakistan – 35% express confidence in him, while 21% do not – but fully 45% in that country do not offer an opinion. And in Nigeria, respondents are evenly split – 35% offer a positive rating and the same number offer a negative rating of Iran’s president.

As is the case with opinions about Iran, views of its leader in Lebanon and Nigeria reflect religious and sectarian divides. In Lebanon, overwhelming majorities of Christians and Sunnis express little or no confidence in Ahmadinejad to do the right thing in world affairs (86% and 88%, respectively); in contrast, nearly all Shia Muslims (93%) say they have confidence in the Iranian president. Among Nigerians, about twice as many Christians lack confidence in Ahmadinejad as express confidence in him (42% vs. 20%). Nigerian Muslims, on the other hand, are about twice as likely to say they have confidence in Iran’s leader as they are to say they do not (51% vs. 25%).

Opposition to Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program

Majorities in nearly every country surveyed oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. At least nine-in-ten in Britain (90%), Germany (98%), France (95%) and Spain (94%) share this view. Opposition to Iran’s nuclear program is similarly strong in Japan (96%) and the United States (94%).

More than eight-in-ten in Poland (87%), South Korea (87%), Mexico (86%), Argentina (86%), Brazil (85%) and Russia (81%) also oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Smaller but substantial majorities in China (65%), Kenya (61%) and Nigeria (58%) express opposition to Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. Nigerian views are divided along religious lines. About three-quarters (74%) of Nigerian Christians oppose a nuclear-armed Iran, while just 17% support it; among Nigerian Muslims, however, more favor than oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program (48% vs. 41%).

Resistance to a nuclear-armed Iran is less pronounced in India. Nearly half (48%) of Indians oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program, while 33% favor it. In 2007, the last time this question was asked in India, about two-thirds (66%) in that country expressed opposition to a nuclear-armed Iran; 21% expressed support. In no other country have opinions of Iran’s nuclear weapons program changed so significantly.

Publics in almost all of the predominantly Muslim countries surveyed are opposed to Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, including at least six-in-ten in Egypt (66%), Lebanon (64%), Turkey (63%) and Indonesia (60%). A narrower majority in Jordan (53%) shares this view. Still, substantial minorities in these countries say they would favor a nuclear-armed Iran, including nearly four-in-ten (39%) Jordanians.

Of the 22 countries surveyed, only in Pakistan is there widespread support for Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. About six-in-ten Pakistanis (58%) favor and just 10% oppose Iran acquiring such weapons. Support for a nuclear-armed Iran is even stronger among Lebanon’s Shia population – 91% would favor it – but overwhelming majorities of Christians (88%) and Sunnis (88%) in that country would oppose it.

Does a Nuclear-Armed Iran Pose a Threat?

While there is clear opposition to Iran’s nuclear weapons program in many of the predominantly Muslim countries surveyed, opinions about whether such weapons would pose a direct threat to these countries are more mixed. Concerns are greatest in Lebanon, where 57%, including solid majorities of Christians (82%) and Sunni Muslims (76%), say Iran would pose a serious threat to their country if it acquired nuclear weapons. Lebanon’s Shia population offers a much different view, however; almost all (95%) say a nuclear-armed Iran would pose, at worst, a minor threat to their country.

Slim majorities in Indonesia (53%) and Egypt (52%) believe that Iran would pose a serious threat to their countries if it obtained nuclear weapons; about half (49%) of Turks share this concern. In contrast, nearly six-in-ten Jordanians (58%) and about the same percentage in Pakistan (56%) do not see a nuclear-armed Iran as a potential threat.

In Nigeria, where the population is split roughly evenly between Muslims and Christians, opinions about a potential threat from Iran vary along religious lines. Overall, 63% of Nigerians say that Iran would pose a serious threat to their country if it acquired nuclear weapons. There is clear concern among Nigerian Christians – 81% see Iran’s nuclear weapons program as a threat to their countries. Muslims are divided – 45% say Iran would pose a serious threat to Nigeria if it obtained nuclear weapons and about the same number (46%) say Iran would not pose much of a threat to their country.

Support for Economic Sanctions

In 19 of 22 countries, majorities of those who oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program say they would approve of tougher international economic sanctions on Iran to try to prevent it from developing such weapons. Support for tighter economic sanctions is especially prevalent in the U.S. (85% approve), but an overwhelming percentage of those who are opposed to a nuclear-armed Iran in the Western European countries surveyed also share this view. At least three-quarters in Spain (79%), Germany (77%), Britain (78%) and France (76%) endorse economic sanctions.

Two-thirds of Russians who would not like to see Iran acquire nuclear weapons say they would favor tougher sanctions against the Islamic Republic, as do 72% in Poland. Support for stricter economic sanctions is also widespread in Kenya (65% approve) and Nigeria (78%) among those who oppose Iran’s nuclear program. Nigerian Christians are more likely than Muslims in that country to approve of tougher sanctions, but majorities in both groups share this view (83% and 69%, respectively).

In Latin America, majorities of those who oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program in the three countries surveyed approve of the use of tougher economic sanctions. About seven-in-ten (71%) Mexicans express that opinion, as do 65% of Brazilians and 57% of Argentines.

Support for tighter economic sanctions against Iran is also evident among those who oppose a nuclear-armed Tehran in most of the predominantly Muslim countries surveyed. About seven-in-ten (72%) Egyptians approve of tougher economic sanctions; the same percentage in Lebanon shares this view, including 82% of Christians and 65% of Sunni Muslims (the number of Shia Muslims who were asked this question is too small to analyze because support for Iran’s nuclear weapons program among that group is nearly universal). Six-in-ten Indonesians and a slightly higher percentage of Jordanians (66%) who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons are in favor of tougher economic sanctions to try to prevent it from happening.

Turks who oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program are divided on the issue of tougher international economic sanctions – 44% favor them as a way to try to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons, while 40% oppose them. Among the small minority of Pakistanis who oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program, few support increased economic sanctions on Iran; just 19% of those who oppose a nuclear-armed Iran favor the use of tougher sanctions, while 62% oppose it.

Opinions are somewhat more mixed across the Asian countries surveyed. About three-quarters (76%) of South Koreans who oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program would like to see tougher economic sanctions; 66% in Japan say the same. In China, 58% of those who oppose a nuclear-armed Iran approve of increased sanctions; about one-third (32%) disapprove. And Indians are nearly evenly split – 46% favor tougher economic sanctions to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and just slightly more (49%) oppose it.

Mixed Views of Military Option

While support for military action against Iran is less widespread than support for tougher economic sanctions, majorities or pluralities of those who oppose a nuclear-armed Iran in 16 of 22 countries surveyed are willing to consider using military force to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Only in five countries do more among those who oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program say that avoiding a military conflict with Iran, even if it means it may develop these weapons, should be the priority.

Americans are among the most supportive of a military option to deal with Iran; 66% of those who oppose a nuclear-armed Iran would consider the use of force. Only in Nigeria is there more support for this view (71%).

Western Europeans who oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program express more mixed views regarding what should be the priority in dealing with the Islamic Republic. Close to six-in-ten (59%) in France would consider the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, but a sizeable minority (41%) rejects this option.

About half in Germany (51%), Spain (50%) and Britain (48%) would support military efforts against Iran in order to stop its nuclear weapons program, but more than one-third in these countries (39%, 34% and 37%, respectively) say it is more important to avoid a military conflict with Iran, even if it results in a nuclear-armed Tehran.

Majorities of those who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons in Egypt (55%) and Jordan (53%) and pluralities in Lebanon (44%) and Indonesia (39%) express support for the use of military force in order to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. In Turkey, however, more say that avoiding a military conflict with Iran should be the priority; nearly four-in-ten (37%) take that position, while 29% would consider the use of military force against Iran.

Of the few Pakistanis who say they do not want to see a nuclear-armed Iran, about a third (34%) say avoiding a military conflict with Iran should be the priority; fewer (21%) say it is more important to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, even if it means taking military action.

Most Japanese (55%) who oppose Iran’s nuclear weapons program say the priority should be to avoid a military conflict; 34% are willing to consider the use of military force. In China, 43% reject taking military action to deal with Iran, while 35% say preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is more important, even if military action is needed.

India is the only country surveyed where there is greater support for the use of military force than for tougher economic sanctions to try to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons among those who oppose Iran obtaining such weapons. Just over half (52%) of Indians who would not like to see a nuclear-armed Tehran say it is more important to stop it from acquiring nuclear weapons, even if it means taking military action; 39% say avoiding a military conflict with Iran is more important.