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.

Most Brazilians express confidence in the foreign policy skills of President Lula – about eight-in-ten say he generally does the right thing in world affairs.  U.S. President Barack Obama also receives largely positive reviews. The other international leaders tested do not fare as well, especially Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who is widely unpopular.

Both the United States and China have generally positive images in Brazil.  Most Brazilians have favorable opinions of both countries and tend to consider them partners to Brazil.  However, ratings for the U.S. are slightly higher than those for China.

Brazil’s Role in International Affairs

Roughly one-quarter (24%) of Brazilians say their nation is already one of the most powerful in the world, while 53% think it will eventually be among the most powerful.  One-in-five say Brazil will never be one of the world’s leading powers.

Views on this issue are linked to views about Lula. Among those who believe the president is having a positive influence on the country, 26% say Brazil is already one of the most powerful nations, while just 12% of those who think Lula is having a negative impact feel this way.

Brazilians also have an upbeat view of how their country is perceived abroad.  Eight-in-ten believe people in other countries around the world generally like Brazil, while only 18% say Brazil is generally disliked.

Among the 22 countries included in the spring 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey, Brazilians are among the most likely to think their country is well-regarded by others around the globe.  By contrast, Americans are among the least likely to hold this view – just 35% think the U.S. enjoys international popularity.

While the poll did not examine global perceptions of Brazil, it did find that Brazil is quite popular in neighboring Argentina.  Roughly seven-in-ten Argentines (69%) have a favorable opinion of Brazil, up sharply from 2007, when 47% expressed a positive view.

Over this same time period, however, Mexicans have become less likely to give Brazil a favorable rating: 48% had a positive view in 2007, compared with 41% today.  The share of Mexicans who do not have an opinion of Brazil has grown from 24% in 2007 to 39% now.

Rating International Leaders

Overwhelmingly, Brazilians approve of how Lula handles foreign policy.  When asked how much confidence they have in Lula to do the right thing in world affairs, 78% say they have a lot or some confidence, while just 21% say they have not too much or no confidence.

Among the international leaders tested, Obama is the only figure to receive a positive rating from a majority of Brazilians: 56% say they think the U.S. president will do the right thing in world affairs.

On balance, the Brazilian public takes a negative view of the other four leaders included in the survey.  About three-in-ten (31%) express confidence in French President Nicolas Sarkozy, while 44% do not have confidence in him.  Only 24% voice confidence in German Chancellor Angela Merkel; 43% give her a negative rating.  Russian President

Dmitri Medvedev fares even worse: 17% think he will do the right thing in international affairs, while 51% disagree.

The leader receiving the most negative ratings, however, is Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.  Just 13% of Brazilians voice confidence in Chavez, while seven-in-ten have little or no confidence in the Venezuelan leader.

Chavez is also unpopular in the other Latin American nations surveyed.  Only 21% of Argentines have confidence in him, while 64% have little or no confidence.  And just 6% of Mexicans express confidence in him; 68% say they do not have confidence in Chavez.

Lula is considerably more popular than Chavez in Argentina, where 58% say the Brazilian leader will do the right thing in world affairs, up from 43% in 2007. About one-in-four (24%) Argentines lack confidence in Lula.  However, Mexican opinions are generally more negative: 17% express confidence in Lula, while 35% do not have confidence in the Brazilian president. Nearly half (48%) do not offer an opinion.

Views of the U.S. and China

America’s image is slightly more positive than China’s among Brazilians, although both of these major powers tend to receive favorable ratings.  About six-in-ten (62%) Brazilians have a positive opinion of the U.S., while just 29% express a negative view.  Roughly half (52%) give China a favorable rating, while 34% have an unfavorable opinion.

Young people tend to express more positive attitudes toward the U.S. and China than do older Brazilians.  Among those under 30, 71% have a positive opinion of the U.S., compared with 60% of 30-49 year-olds and 58% of those 50 and older.  Similarly, 59% of Brazilians under 30 rate China favorably, compared with 51% of 30-49 year-olds and 46% among people 50 and older.

Most Brazilians (56%) consider the U.S. a partner to their country, while only 11% regard it as an enemy.  Somewhat fewer see China as a partner (45%), although as is the case with the U.S., just 11% say China is an enemy.

Iran and Its Nuclear Program

Earlier this year, Lula and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Edrogan attempted to negotiate an agreement with Iran that would have averted international economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic.³ However, despite Lula’s diplomatic stance, the survey finds that Brazilians widely support the idea of tighter economic sanctions in order to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and many would also consider military action against Iran.

Overall, Iran has a negative image in Brazil.  Nearly two-thirds (65%) have an unfavorable opinion of Iran, while just 18% hold a favorable view.  Fully 85% of Brazilians oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons; only 5% support this idea.  Among those who oppose a nuclear-armed Iran, 65% say they would approve of tougher international sanctions; 31% would disapprove.

Moreover, a slim majority of those who oppose Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons are willing to consider a military option – 54% say Iran should be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons, even if that means taking military action.  One-in-three Brazilians who oppose a nuclear-armed Tehran say it is more important to avoid military conflict with Iran, even if that means it may develop nuclear weapons.

There also is broad agreement that air travel and tourism are likely to be casualties of the war on terrorism. Nearly all Americans and eight-in-ten of those from other nations say air travel will be harmed, while only somewhat fewer (90% U.S., 64% non-U.S.) say the same about tourism. Opinion leaders in Eastern Europe/Russia are notable for their lack of pessimism concerning tourism – just a third say tourism in their countries will be negatively affected.

Beyond that, the opinion leaders differ over what the war will mean for their countries. American opinion leaders are virtually unanimous in their view that personal freedoms and privacy will be curtailed as a result of the war, and solid majorities in Western Europe see the same for their countries (71% say personal freedom will be hurt, 66% privacy). This view is not as prevalent elsewhere – in Eastern Europe/Russia and Asia, no more than half believe personal liberties and privacy will be limited because of the struggle against terrorism.

On economic issues, opinion leaders in Asia are much more likely than those in other regions to say their nation’s exports and foreign investment will be undermined in the coming year by the fight against terrorism. While better than eight-in-ten respondents from Asia say those two areas will be hurt, fewer than half of those in other regions agree. A majority of the U.S. respondents (58%) believe exports will be unaffected while a 45% plurality says the same about foreign investment.

Population migration also is likely to be affected by the war on terrorism, according to opinion leaders, especially those in Latin America. Roughly seven-in-ten (71%) influentials in Latin America think migration will be negatively affected. American opinion leaders agree. Asked a different form of the question, fully 78% of U.S. influentials expect immigration to the United States to be hurt by the war.

Perhaps surprisingly, opinion leaders outside the United States do not see much of a backlash against American consumer goods or music and movies because of the war. In fact, majorities of non-U.S. respondents expect the sale of U.S. products and the popularity of American movies to be either boosted or unaffected by the conflict. American opinion leaders are far more likely to believe sales of U.S. consumer goods will be hurt (half expect that to occur), although they agree that the popularity of U.S. music and movies will be unaffected.

The opinion leaders are virtually unanimous in their view that use of the Internet will not be hurt by the current conflict. Respondents in the Middle East/conflict area are especially bullish on the Internet – 72% say use of the Internet will be helped as a result of the war. In Asia, a solid plurality (43%) believes that the use of the Internet will be helped. Elsewhere, most respondents expect that Internet use will be unaffected by the war on terrorism.

Westerners Willing to Sacrifice Freedoms

In addition to evaluating ways in which their nation’s economic and political life may be affected by the war, opinion leaders were asked their opinion of specific policies relating to personal liberty and immigration. American and Western European influentials – who are most likely to say they expect future terrorists attacks – are also among the most willing to sacrifice personal freedoms as part of the fight against terrorism.

Two-thirds of influentials in the United States and Western Europe say they are willing to accept less personal freedom. Opinion leaders from other nations express more reluctance about sacrificing freedom. In the Middle East/conflict area and Latin America, roughly half say they would be unwilling to accept less freedom, while about four-in-ten of those in Asia and Eastern Europe/Russia agree.

Opinion leaders have a similarly mixed view of tighter immigration curbs. Narrow majorities in the United States and Middle East/conflict area support such curbs in their countries. But two-thirds of Asian influentials oppose such restrictions, more than any other group.

New World Order?

Most opinion leaders in the United States and Western Europe think that one of the silver linings of the war on terrorism will be a lasting improvement in relations between the U.S., Russia and China. But respondents in other regions are far more skeptical, including a solid majority of those from Eastern Europe/Russia.

Nearly two-thirds of opinion leaders in America (63%) and Western Europe (65%) expect closer relations between the United States, Russia and China to endure. Respondents from Eastern Europe/Russia disagree – 57% say closer ties among the three nations will be only temporary. By slightly larger margins, opinion leaders in Asia and the Middle East/conflict area also say they doubt that the newly improved relations will last.

A similar gap exists on the question of whether democratic institutions in nations undergoing the transition to democracy will be helped or harmed by the war on terrorism. Most American opinion leaders (55%) say democratic institutions in those countries will be helped, and by about two-to-one (43%-22%), respondents in Western Europe agree. But 64% of opinion leaders in Eastern Europe/Russia believe that democratic institutions in emerging democracies will be hurt, not helped, by the struggle against terrorism.

Few See Broader Conflict

Opinion leaders in both the West and Islamic countries reject the notion that the Sept. 11 attacks will trigger a major cultural clash pitting the West against Islam. Indeed, there is a confluence of opinion among respondents in the United States, Western Europe and Islamic countries that the conflict will be limited to a struggle between the West and the al Qaeda group – better than half in all three regions take this view.

Respondents in the Middle East/conflict area are somewhat more likely to envision a broader conflict (41% see broader clash, 54% limited conflict). And interestingly, opinion leaders in Eastern Europe/Russia are split on this point; as many see a major conflict between the West and Islam (40%) as believe it will be limited to al Qaeda.

In the conflict with Osama bin Laden’s group, most opinion leaders – with the notable exception of those in the United States – feel it is unlikely that their country will become a target of al Qaeda terrorism. Fully 85% of Americans say new attacks by al Qaeda against their country are likely; only about one-in-four of those elsewhere believe their country will become targets. Only among Western Europeans (47% of whom say an attack on their nation is likely) is there much concern about an al Qaeda attack.

Of the small number outside the United States who say an attack by al Qaeda is likely, nearly all think that allying with the U.S. is the best way to avoid such an attack. Even among those in the Middle East/conflict area, fewer than one-in-ten say that creating distance with the United States would be an effective means of avoiding future al Qaeda attacks.

U.S. Seen as Acting Unilaterally – Again

The wide gap between American opinion leaders and those from other nations over the U.S. image is mirrored in the dramatically different perceptions of whether the United States is taking heed of the interests of coalition partners in the fight against terrorism. Seven-in-ten American opinion leaders say the United States is taking into account allied interests. On average, six-in-ten of those in other nations disagree, saying the U.S. is acting mainly on its own interests.

What is striking is the uniformity of that view across regions. Roughly as many opinion leaders in Western Europe (66%) – where there is considerable support for U.S. military action – as in the Middle East/conflict area (71%) believe the United States is acting mostly in its own interests in battling terrorism.

The view among elites in Western Europe that the United States is mostly going it alone shows that, at least in this respect, opinions apparently have changed little as a result of Sept. 11. Before the attacks, better than seven-in-ten members of the public in four Western European nations said that the Bush administration based foreign policy decisions entirely on U.S. interests rather than taking European interests into account (see “Bush Unpopular in Europe, Seen As Unilateralist,” Aug. 15).

Differences Over Israel

Substantial majorities of opinion leaders in every region except Eastern Europe/Russia believe the United States has been too supportive of Israel. American influentials, on balance, disagree: 45% say that U.S. backing for Israel has not been excessive, while 35% say that it has.

Opinion leaders in the Middle East/conflict area, not surprisingly, are nearly unanimous in their view that the United States has been too supportive of Israel. Yet that opinion is widely shared in Latin America and Asia as well, where roughly eight-in-ten believe U.S. backing has been excessive. The only significant dissent comes from Eastern Europe/Russia, where opinion is split – 40% say U.S. has provided too much support for Israel, while 47% disagree.

There is broad agreement that U.S. pressure on Israel to create a Palestinian state would reduce terrorism. Most American opinion leaders (67%) subscribe to this view, as do those in other regions, especially the Middle East/conflict area (90%).

Mid-East Leaders See Risk Worth It

Many opinion leaders, especially those in Asia and Eastern Europe/Russia, say the war on terrorism is not worth the risk it poses to the governments of Muslim states aligned with the United States against terrorism. But influentials in Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Turkey do not share this view (this question was not asked in Egypt).

In fact, by a 74%-23% margin, influentials in this region say the military action is worth the risk it poses to governments of Islamic nations. Only among U.S. opinion leaders is this view more prevalent (85% agree).