Special to CNN

As Americans make their New Year’s resolutions, gazing into their crystal balls in anticipation of 2013, they are pessimistic about the economy, doubtful about Washington avoiding the fiscal cliff and worried about rising inequality and economic unfairness. Preoccupied with issues at home, they want to avoid getting dragged deeper into conflicts in the Middle East, but nonetheless are willing to take military action against Iran to halt Tehran’s nuclear weapons program.

Downbeat domestic attitudes coupled with reticence about international engagement poses challenges for a world that still may need a strong United States.

After a rise in optimism about the economy in the run up to the U.S. presidential election in November 2012, Americans’ economic outlook has turned more negative on the eve of the New Year. A quarter of the population says the economy will be worse off 12 months from now, up from just 8 percent in September – the highest level of U.S. pessimism since June 2011. Just 37 percent expect the economy to be better off in 2013, down from 43 percent in September.

Given the U.S. economy’s driving role in the global economy, such American pessimism does not bode well for Europe, now mired in recession, nor for China, just poised for a recovery.

Some Americans’ pessimism about 2013 may be driven by the fact that a plurality (49 percent) think that the United States will be unable to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff on January 1, 2013 because the Congress and the White House will fail to reach agreement on a debt reduction strategy. And they are no more optimistic about the long-term prospects of getting the country’s finances in order. Just 44 percent say the country will have made significant progress on the debt five years from now.

Another source of pessimism stems from rising concern about inequality and class conflict. Four-in-ten Americans now strongly believe that the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer, up from 28 percent in 2002. More than half think that the U.S. economic system favors the wealthy. And just over two-thirds think that there are conflicts between the rich and the poor, an increase of 21 percentage points since 2009.

In 2013, there may be legislation to narrow the rich-poor gap. Certainly, more than two-thirds of the public backs raising taxes on the top 2 percent of the income earners in the United States, a central issue in the fiscal cliff debate.

But there is no sense that the American people are on the verge of class conflict in 2013. Polls show they just want a better chance of achieving success themselves – they do not want redistributive government policies, they want ones that give everyone a fair shot at success, reflecting bedrock American belief in the individual’s ability to succeed through hard work.

Internationally, in 2013, Americans would like to stop the world and just get off. More than eight-in-ten think that Washington should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate on problems at home. Such isolationism has a long history in the United States. But it is on the rise, up 10 percentage points in just the last decade.

This aversion to engagement could have an impact next year on U.S. policies in the Middle East. Six-in-ten Americans want the Obama administration to be less involved in the region, especially in leadership changes, such as the possible change in Damascus. With regard to the war in Syria, a similar percentage say that the United States does not have a responsibility to do something about the fighting there, a sentiment in potential conflict with president Obama’s vow to intervene if the Syrian government moves to use chemical weapons in the conflict.

2013 will also be a fateful year for the U.S. presence in Afghanistan, as the White House and Pentagon work out the drawdown schedule for the American troops there. For most of the American public, this can’t happen quickly enough. Six-in-ten want the troops removed as soon as possible, up from just 40 percent in 2010.

The desire for disengagement is not evident, however, with regard to the public’s views about Iran. Americans see Tehran’s nuclear weapons program as the greatest international threat to the well-being of the United States. And more than half (56 percent) think that it is more important to take a firm stand with Iran than to avoid a military conflict. This resolve could get tested in the New Year.

A similar public willingness to support confrontation contrary to general isolationist sentiment can be expected in Washington’s relations with Beijing in 2013. Nearly half of Americans think that their government should get tougher on China and such sentiment is up nine percentage points in a year-and-a-half. The Obama administration has already brought more cases against China in the World Trade Organization than did the Bush administration. Americans would seem to support more of the same in 2013.

So the American public looks to 2013 with a mixture of economic pessimism, frustration with domestic economic inequities, isolationism and a touch of continued assertiveness. This is an inward-looking America, but one that can be provoked.

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

Special to YaleGlobal

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

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

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

Read the full commentary at YaleGlobal

Special to EuropeanVoice

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

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

Iran is the most immediate challenge to transatlantic solidarity.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But this is a partisan issue in the United States. There are wide partisan and ideological differences in priorities for dealing with Iran. Fully 84% of conservative Republicans favor taking a firm stand against Iran’s nuclear program. Fewer than half as many liberal Democrats (38%) agree. There also is a sizable age gap in these opinions. Just 44% of those younger than 30 favor taking a strong stand against Iran; clear majorities in older age categories support a firm stance. Yet Americans are evenly divided—with 45% saying Obama and 44% picking Romney—over who would do better job as president in dealing with Iran’s nuclear program.

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

Independents and Republicans are much more supportive of getting tougher with China than they were a year and a half ago. Nearly half of independents (47%) now say it is more important to get tougher with China on economic issues, up from just 30% in March 2011. The percentage of Republicans favoring a tougher stance has increased by 11 points (from 54% to 65%) over this period. There has been less change in opinions among Democrats, and more continue to prioritize building stronger economic relations with China (53%) over getting tough with China (39%).

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

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

Globally, perceptions of Chinese power have increased in recent years, and in nine of the 21 nations surveyed, majorities or pluralities now believe that China is the world’s leading economic power. The Chinese, however, still tend to see the U.S. as the global economic powerhouse.

How China Views Major Powers

Chinese attitudes toward Russia are on balance positive, with 48% expressing a positive and 38% a negative view. In contrast, perceptions of the U.S. and the United Nations are roughly divided, with 43% holding a favorable opinion of each. And only about a third see the European Union (33%) and Pakistan (31%) positively. Chinese perceptions of these foreign nations and institutions have mostly held steady since last year.

The Chinese express even dimmer views toward their neighbor to the south, India. Roughly a quarter (23%) have a favorable opinion of India, while 62% offer a negative opinion.

Similarly, Iran receives largely negative ratings, with only 21% expressing a favorable view of the Islamic Republic, a decline of eight percentage points since 2011.

Fewer See Cooperation with U.S., India

While a 39%-plurality of Chinese see their country’s relationship with the U.S. as one of cooperation, this is down sharply from 2010, when nearly seven-in-ten (68%) held this view. Meanwhile, about a quarter (26%) say the relationship with the U.S. is one of hostility, up from 8% two years ago.

Similarly, 39% in China view their relationship with India as one of cooperation, down significantly since 2010, when 53% saw the relationship positively.

Views toward China’s longtime regional rival, Japan, are even dimmer, with a 41%-plurality saying that relations between China and Japan are hostile, and only three-in-ten describing them as cooperative.

China’s relationship with Pakistan is much brighter, with nearly half of Chinese (49%) seeing the relationship as one of cooperation and only 10% describing it as one of hostility.

China and India

There is further evidence that Sino-Indian relations have cooled in recent years – increasingly, the Chinese public is wary of India’s economic growth. Currently, only 44% of Chinese say that their southern neighbor’s expanding economy is positive for China, down from six-in-ten in 2010. Meanwhile, those saying India’s growing economy is a bad thing has almost doubled over the same period.

Indian views towards China are even more negative. Only 23% of Indians describe their country’s relationship with China as one of cooperation and only 24% think China’s growing economy is a good thing for India. (For more on Indian views toward China and other nations see “Deepening Economic Doubts in India,” released on September 10, 2012).

Views of the U.S. and American Soft Power

The Chinese have lukewarm feelings toward the United States, President Obama, and the state of the relationship between the two powers. Only around four-in ten (43%) have a favorable view of the U.S, 38% express confidence in Obama to do the right thing regarding world affairs and just 39% see the relationship between the countries as one of cooperation. These ratings are all down sharply since 2010. (For more on Chinese and global attitudes toward the U.S., see “Global Opinion of Obama Slips, International Policies Faulted,” released June 13, 2012).

While overall ratings for the U.S. are mixed in China, certain aspects of America’s image are positive. Among the measures of American soft power tested, people in China most admire U.S. science and technology. Nearly three-in-four (73%) say they admire U.S. technological and scientific advances. However, this is down seven percentage points since 2007, when eight-in-ten Chinese said the same.

About half (52%) also favor American ideas about democracy and 43% like U.S.-style business, although views of the American business model have deteriorated somewhat since 2007. And while a 43%-plurality say it is a good thing that American customs and ideas are spreading to China, the Chinese are evenly divided on whether they like American music, movies, and television.

Across these various measures of U.S. soft power, there is one constant: richer, younger, more educated, and urban Chinese all express a more positive view of these aspects of America’s image. And this also holds true for overall ratings of the U.S.

China’s Image in the World

Perceptions of China’s economic power continue to grow in much of the world, especially in Europe. However, nearly half of Chinese (48%) say the U.S. is the world’s leading economic power, while just 29% name their own country as the global leader. These results are similar to 2008, when the question was first asked. However, in 2009, following the successful 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics and the financial crisis in the West, the Chinese were evenly divided, with 41% choosing both the U.S. and China as the world’s economic leader. Since then, perceptions have drifted back to pre-economic crisis levels.

In terms of overall image, in nine of 20 countries surveyed in 2012, majorities or pluralities give China positive ratings. Opinions are largely negative in six nations, while views are essentially divided in five countries.

China receives positive ratings in most of the predominantly Muslim nations surveyed and is well-liked by roughly six-in-ten Russians. Indian views are on balance negative, although fully 45% do not offer an opinion. Meanwhile, since 2011, China’s ratings are down in the U.S., Western Europe, and Japan. (For more, see “Global Opinion of Obama Slips, International Policies Faulted,” released June 13, 2012).

But Indians, especially those who live in urban areas, are far from neutral in their views. They feel closer to the United States than to China. And they are worried about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.

U.S., Obama Well-Regarded

A majority of Indians living in cities have a favorable view of the United States (58%), a positive opinion of Americans (57%) and confidence in President Barack Obama (60%).

Such confidence in Obama is one likely reason a majority of city-dwelling Indians (57%) back his international policies, approve his handling of global economic problems and say relations with the U.S. have improved in recent years.

A majority of urban Indians (56%) would also like to see President Obama re-elected. Among those who say they are closely following the election, a 71%-majority wants Obama to have four more years. The American president’s support in Indian cities is roughly comparable among men and women and people of all ages. His backing is slightly stronger among urbanites with a college education or a higher income.

Among the foreign leaders asked about in the survey, Obama is clearly the most admired. Far fewer have confidence in Russian President Vladimir Putin (35%), Chinese leader Hu Jintao (22%) and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (20%). The low ratings of Merkel and Hu, at least, are likely tied to the fact that about half are unfamiliar with either leader.

Indians in cities are also generally supportive of the exercise of U.S. power, both hard and soft. They broadly favor (73%) American-led efforts to fight terrorism and a plurality (48%) backs U.S. drone strikes targeting extremists in countries such as Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Most (69%) also admire U.S. scientific and technological advances, with college-educated, urban Indians being particular fans. A majority (56%) likes American ways of doing business. And a plurality of Indians in urban areas (48%) admire U.S. ideas about democracy. Nevertheless, roughly half (52%) think it is bad that American ideas and customs are spreading in India and a 55%-majority of Indian city dwellers dislike American music, movies and TV.

Support for all things American is lower in rural India, in part because of the large percentage of the population that voices no opinion.

Negative Views of China

Facing a growing commercial rivalry, border tensions and concern about China’s intentions in the Indian Ocean, urban Indians tend to take a dim view of their relationship with their fellow emerging market and northern neighbor, China. By a 44%-to-33% margin, more say they have an unfavorable view of China; 23% venture no opinion. And while 40% see Delhi’s relationship with Beijing as one of hostility, only 28% see the relationship as one of cooperation and 21% don’t know.

About half (53%) of Indians living in cities think China’s growing economy is a bad thing for India, and only 26% think it is a good thing. Nearly six-in-ten urban Indians (58%) who think Chinese commercial success is a bad thing for India also characterize the bilateral relationship as a hostile one.

Indians also take a more skeptical view of China’s role in the international arena. Only 20% of urban residents think China is the world’s leading economic power. By comparison, across the other 20 nations surveyed by the Pew Research Center this year, a median of 42% see China as the global economic hegemon.

Iran and Its Nuclear Program

India has long-standing cultural and economic ties with Iran, to the west of Pakistan. At least 10% of India’s roughly 160 million Muslim citizens are Shia, the predominant Muslim sect in Iran.⁸ Nevertheless, only 28% of urban Indians have a favorable view of Iran, and about half (52%) of city dwellers oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.

Of those urban Indians who oppose Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, about six-in-ten (62%) approve of tougher economic sanctions to try to curb Iran’s efforts to become a nuclear weapons state. And nearly seven-in-ten (69%) urbanites who oppose Iran acquiring a nuclear arsenal say it is more important to prevent this possibility than to avoid a military conflict. Nationwide, among those who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, 56% approve of tougher sanctions and 53% say it is more important to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons than to avoid a military conflict with the Iranian regime.

Asians’ Views of India

India is not just looking at the world, the world is looking at India. Among the Asian nations where the question was asked, favorable opinion of India is highest in Japan (70%). This is the most positive Japanese assessment since the Pew Research Center began asking the question in 2006 and is up 11 percentage points since 2011. In contrast, only 23% of Chinese see India in a favorable light, down 10 points since 2006. And only 22% of Pakistanis are favorably disposed toward India. Pakistani appraisal of India is up eight percentage points since 2011, but down 11 points since 2006.

More than a year after the first stirrings of the Arab Spring, there continues to be a strong desire for democracy in Arab and other predominantly Muslim nations. Solid majorities in Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia and Jordan believe democracy is the best form of government, as do a plurality of Pakistanis.

Indeed, these publics do not just support the general notion of democracy – they also embrace specific features of a democratic system, such as competitive elections and free speech.

A substantial number in key Muslim countries want a large role for Islam in political life. However, there are significant differences over the degree to which the legal system should be based on Islam.

The United States is not seen as promoting democracy in the Middle East. In newly democratic Tunisia, only about three-in-ten believe the American response to the political upheaval in their country has had a positive impact.

Despite the tumult and uncertainty of the last year, views about democracy are mostly unchanged since 2011, although support has declined somewhat in Jordan. Enthusiasm for democracy tends to be generally less intense in Jordan and in Pakistan. It is consistently strong in Lebanon and Turkey.

While democratic rights and institutions are popular, they are clearly not the only priorities in the six Muslim majority nations surveyed. In particular, the economy is a top concern. And if they had to choose, most Jordanians, Tunisians and Pakistanis would rather have a strong economy than a good democracy. Turks and Lebanese, on the other hand, would prefer democracy. Egyptians are divided.

There is also a strong desire for Islam to play a major role in the public life of these nations, and most want Islam to have at least some influence on their country’s laws. Majorities in Pakistan, Jordan and Egypt believe laws should strictly follow the teachings of the Quran, while most Tunisians and a 44%-plurality of Turks want laws to be influenced by the values and principles of Islam, but not strictly follow the Quran.

About four-in-ten Lebanese say laws should not be influenced at all by the teachings of the Quran, although on this issue – as on many issues – views vary sharply along religious and sectarian lines. While 63% of Lebanese Christians and 38% of Sunni Muslims say laws should not be guided by the Quran, just 13% of Shia Muslims agree.

Just as opinions about religion and politics vary across these six nations, so do views about gender equality. Majorities in all six believe women should have equal rights as men, and more than eight-in-ten hold this view in Lebanon and Turkey. However, in Egypt – where the role of women in society has been a heavily debated issue throughout the post-Mubarak transition period – a slimmer 58%-majority favors equal rights, while 36% oppose the idea. Only 53% of Egyptian men endorse equal rights.

Moreover, while many support the general principle of gender equality, there is less enthusiasm for gender parity in politics, economics, and family life. For instance, many believe men make better political leaders, that men should have more of a right to a job than women when jobs are scarce, and that families should help choose a woman’s husband.

These are among the key findings from a survey by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, conducted in six predominantly Muslim nations March 19 to April 20.¹ The poll, which is part of the broader 21-nation spring 2012 Global Attitudes survey, found considerable optimism – at least among Arab publics – about the prospects for democracy in the region. Solid majorities in Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan and Lebanon said the 2011 popular uprising would lead to more democracy in the Middle East. Turks and Pakistanis, on the other hand, were less hopeful.

This report includes a special section on Tunisian public opinion (see Part II). In the nation where the Arab Spring began, large majorities say they are dissatisfied with the country’s direction and its economic situation. While Tunisians embrace their country’s nascent democracy, they are divided over whether things in their country have actually gotten better since long-running dictator President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali was forced from office. Still, most are hopeful about Tunisia’s future and optimistic that the economy will improve in the next 12 months. And despite the dissatisfaction with current conditions, the ruling Islamist party Ennahda receives positive marks from 65% of Tunisians.

Both Democracy and Economy Are Priorities

Majorities in five of the six nations polled (and a plurality of Pakistanis) believe democracy is the best form of government. Moreover, there is a strong desire in these nations for specific democratic rights and institutions, such as competitive multi-party elections and freedom of speech.

Other goals are also clearly important. Many say political stability is a crucial priority, and even more prioritize economic prosperity. When respondents are asked which is more important, a good democracy or a strong economy, Turkey and Lebanon are the only countries where more than half choose democracy. Egyptians are divided, while most Tunisians, Pakistanis and Jordanians prioritize the economy.

Overall, views about the economic situation in these countries are grim, although Turkey is a notable exception. Nearly six-in-ten Turks (57%) say their country’s economy is in good shape, but at least seven-in-ten in Pakistan, Lebanon, Tunisia, Egypt and Jordan offer negative assessments.

A Major Role for Islam in Public Life

In five of six nations, solid majorities say Islam is already playing a large role in the country’s political life. In newly democratic Tunisia, where the Islamist party Ennahda won the largest share of votes in the recent parliamentary elections, fully 84% think Islam has a major role.

Similarly, in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood has won both parliamentary and presidential elections, 66% hold this view, up from 47% two years ago.

The view that Islam plays a large role in political life has also become more prevalent in Pakistan over the last two years. Meanwhile, more than six-in-ten in Turkey and Lebanon believe Islam is a major part of political life in their countries. This view is especially pervasive among Lebanese Christians – 75% think Islam has a major role.

The clear exception on this issue is Jordan. Only 31% of Jordanians believe Islam currently plays a large part in their nation’s political life, while 63% say it has a small role. Among the majority of Jordanians who say Islam is playing a small role, 80% say it is a bad thing that Islam has only a minor part in the country’s politics.

Support for Gender Equality – but Not in All Circumstances

While majorities in all six countries support the principle of gender equality, there are significant differences between men and women on this issue. The most striking gender gap is in Jordan, where 82% of women but just 44% of men say women should have the same rights as men.

Moreover, while there is majority support for the idea of gender equality, this does not necessarily apply to specific aspects of public and private life. For instance, at least half in Tunisia, Pakistan, Turkey and Jordan say men make better political leaders. When it comes to economics, most say women should be able to work outside the home, but most also believe that when jobs are scarce, jobs for men should be the first priority. And in the personal realm, many of those surveyed believe a woman’s family should help choose her husband, rather than the woman herself – indeed, in Pakistan and Jordan this is the majority view.

Limited Support for Extremist Groups

Extremist groups are largely rejected in predominantly Muslim nations, although significant numbers do express support for radical groups in several countries. For instance, while there is no country in which a majority holds a favorable opinion of the Palestinian organization Hamas, it receives considerable support in Tunisia, Jordan and Egypt.

The militant Lebanese Shia group Hezbollah receives its highest overall ratings in Tunisia, where nearly half express a positive opinion. Sizable minorities in both Jordan and Egypt also have a favorable view, but Hezbollah’s image has been declining in both countries in recent years. In its home country, views about Hezbollah are sharply divided along sectarian lines: 94% of Shia, 33% of Christians, and 5% of Sunnis give the group favorable marks.

Across all six nations, less than 20% have a positive opinion about al Qaeda or the Taliban. In Turkey and Lebanon, support for these groups is in the single digits. However, fully 19% of Egyptians rate these extremist organizations favorably.

Turkey and Erdogan Popular

Turkey, which has significantly increased its diplomatic profile in recent years, particularly in the Middle East, is held in high regard in the predominantly Muslim nations surveyed. Solid majorities in all six nations express a favorable opinion of Turkey. Moreover, its leader, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of the moderate Islamist party AKP, also receives largely positive reviews.

Most of those surveyed believe Turkey favors democracy in the Middle East, including roughly three-in-four in the newly democratic nations of Egypt and Tunisia. Fewer say this about Saudi Arabia, although more than half in Egypt, Jordan and Pakistan think the oil-rich kingdom does support democracy in the region.

Yet, relatively few believe the United States wants democracy in the Middle East, including just 37% in Egypt, a major recipient of American democracy promotion funds in recent years. Exceedingly few think Israel favors democracy in the Middle East – just 10% or less in all six nations hold this view.

Tunisians Unhappy With State of Country, but Still Hopeful

Nearly eight-in-ten Tunisians (78%) are dissatisfied with the way things are going in their country and a similar number (83%) describe current economic conditions as bad. And the country is split over whether it is better off now that Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali is no long in power.

However, Tunisians show few signs of wanting a return to autocracy. A majority says a democratic government is preferable, even if that means some risk of instability, and large majorities deem rights and institutions such as a fair judiciary, honest elections, and free speech very important.

And while they are glum about current conditions, they are hopeful about the future. Two-thirds (66%) are optimistic about Tunisia’s future, and 75% think the country’s economy will improve in the next 12 months.

The ruling Ennahda party gets largely positive reviews – 65% have a favorable opinion of the Islamist organization, which was banned from politics during the Ben Ali era. Two Ennahda leaders, party co-founder Rached Ghannouchi and current Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali, are viewed favorably by about two-in-three Tunisians.

The U.S. receives mixed reviews in Tunisia. Overall, 45% have a favorable and 45% an unfavorable view of the U.S. However, President Barack Obama gets mostly poor marks – 57% say they have little or no confidence that Obama will do the right thing in world affairs. And there is no consensus among Tunisians about how the U.S. has handled the political changes taking place in their country – 31% believe the American response has had a positive effect, 27% say it has been negative, and 25% volunteer that the U.S. has had no impact.

Also of Note

• While few in Tunisia and Egypt describe the current economy as good, there is optimism about the future – 75% of Tunisians and 50% of Egyptians believe the economy will improve in the next 12 months.
• On balance, opinions about Iran are negative, although Pakistan is a clear exception – 76% of Pakistanis have a favorable view of Iran, and 47% rate President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad positively.
• Syrian President Bashar al-Assad generally receives very negative ratings across the nations included in the survey (For more on views about Syria and President Bashar al-Assad, see “Widespread Condemnation for Assad in Neighboring Countries,” released June 21, 2012).

Turkey and Saudi Arabia are seen as supporting the spread of democracy in the region, while the U.S. and Israel are widely viewed as opposing it.

Majorities in all six predominantly Muslim nations have a favorable view of Turkey and most are also positive toward Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Saudi King Abdullah and his nation also receive high marks in many countries, though Turks and Tunisians are much less positive toward the monarchy. There is widespread disapproval of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Gloomy Economic Conditions

Less than a third in Pakistan, Lebanon, Tunisia, Egypt and Jordan say their current economic situation is good. Turkey is the only country where a majority thinks the economy is doing well.

In Egypt, Jordan and Pakistan, economic assessments today are more negative than they were in 2007, before the global economic crisis. For example, in Pakistan, 59% said the economy was doing well in 2007, compared with just 9% now. The Lebanese, meanwhile, have consistently said their economy is doing poorly over the past five years.

Turkey is the only predominantly Muslim country surveyed in both 2007 and 2012 where reviews of the economy have recovered from the economic crisis. Positive ratings today are 36 percentage points higher than the low of 21% in 2008.

The economic outlook over the next 12 months is more mixed. Pluralities or majorities in Tunisia, Egypt and Turkey believe the economy will improve. However, less than a third of Jordanians, Pakistanis and Lebanese say the same.

Respondents’ views about their country’s overall future are also divided, and appear to be related to expectations about the domestic economy. In the countries that are optimistic about their economic future – Tunisia, Egypt and Turkey – more than half are hopeful about the nation in general. In Pakistan, Jordan and Lebanon – where expectations about the economy are low – pluralities or majorities are pessimistic about the country’s future.

Optimism About Democracy

Solid majorities in the Arab nations surveyed believe the 2011 popular uprisings will lead to more democracy in the Middle East, including nearly three-quarters in Egypt and seven-in-ten in Tunisia. Roughly two-thirds in Jordan and Lebanon agree.

Attitudes are more divided in Turkey and Pakistan. In Turkey, about a third (34%) believes the Arab Spring will result in the spread of democracy in the region, while a similar percentage (37%) is doubtful and 29% express no opinion. In Pakistan, almost equal percentages say there will (21%) and will not (20%) be more democracy, though most say they do not know (59%).

Most See Turkey as Supportive of Democracy

Respondents generally see Turkey and Saudi Arabia, but not the U.S. or Israel, as proponents of democracy in the Middle East. Roughly six-in-ten or more in Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan and Turkey believe the Turkish government is supportive of democracy in the region. Pakistani opinion is also, on balance, positive.

Roughly two-thirds in Egypt and Jordan say the Saudi Arabian government favors democracy in the Middle East. About half (52%) of Pakistanis also hold this view. However, fewer than a third of Tunisians (31%) and Turks (18%) agree.

Opinion is decidedly more negative about the U.S. and Israel. Majorities or pluralities in Jordan, Turkey, Tunisia and Egypt believe the American government opposes democracy in the region. Broad majorities across nearly all the countries surveyed say the same about the Israeli government. Attitudes in Pakistan are, on balance, negative about both the U.S. and Israel, though many express no opinion (41% and 55%, respectively).

In Lebanon, opinions as to whether Turkey, Saudi Arabia or the U.S. favors democracy in the Middle East vary considerably by religious affiliation. More than eight-in-ten Shia Muslims in Lebanon believe each of these governments oppose democracy. Majorities of Sunni Muslims and Christians, meanwhile, see Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the U.S. in a positive light. When it comes to Israel, however, at least seven-in-ten across all three religious groups believe the Israeli government opposes the spread of democracy in the Middle East.

Turkey and Saudi Arabia Viewed Favorably

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Saudi King Abdullah, and their nations, are more popular than either Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Seven-in-ten across the countries surveyed are favorable toward Turkey and about two-thirds (65%) have a positive view of its prime minister. The one exception is Pakistan, where the public is, on balance, positive toward Erdogan – 31% favorable and 11% unfavorable – but most (58%) are unfamiliar with him.

While in office, Erdogan has made a concerted effort to reach out to his regional neighbors and it appears his efforts are paying off. Since 2002, favorable ratings of Turkey have increased by 39 percentage points in Jordan and 29 points in Lebanon. Since 2011, ratings have also increased in Pakistan (+14) and Egypt (+6).

Opinion of Saudi Arabia is somewhat more mixed, though many are favorable. Egyptians, Jordanians and Pakistanis are overwhelmingly positive toward the country, and majorities in these countries also give Abdullah warm reviews.

Turkey and Tunisia, however, are decidedly negative toward Saudi Arabia and its ruler, with four-in-ten or fewer giving either the nation or the leader favorable ratings. The Lebanese are split: majorities of Sunnis (70%) – who constitute the dominant branch of Islam in Saudi Arabia – have a positive view of that country while 95% of Shia are unfavorable. Nearly two-thirds of Christians (64%) are positive.

Iran is much less popular across the six countries. Roughly four-in-ten or fewer in Tunisia, Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt and Jordan give Iran and its leader, Ahmadinejad, favorable reviews. Only in Pakistan is a majority favorable toward Iran, and almost half of Pakistanis are also positive toward Ahmadinejad.

Although attitudes about Iran are generally negative in Lebanon, large differences emerge between religious groups. Lebanese Shia Muslims (91%) are overwhelmingly favorable while Sunnis (95% negative) and Christians (68% negative) are unfavorable. Shia account for the overwhelming majority of Iran’s Muslims.

The Arab League, which played a major role in responding to the violence in Libya, receives mixed reviews. Majorities in Jordan, Egypt and Pakistan are favorable toward the organization. The Lebanese, Tunisians and Turks, however, are generally unfavorable.

Most give Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who has led a brutal crackdown on protestors in his country, negative ratings. More than seven-in-ten in Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia and Turkey hold unfavorable views.

In Lebanon, a majority is negative toward Assad, though a substantial minority is positive. Support for Assad is nearly universal (96%) among Shia Muslims in Lebanon, while just 8% of Sunnis and 34% of Christians are favorable.

In Pakistan, attitudes are, on balance, positive, though most are unfamiliar with him (64%). (For more on views about Syria and President Bashar al-Assad, see “Widespread Condemnation for Assad in Neighboring Countries,” released June 21, 2012).

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.

As has been the case since he took office, opinions of how Obama handles specific international policies lag overall confidence in the U.S. president. In particular, Obama receives low marks for his handling of the situation in Afghanistan, Iran, and the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Assessments of the way Obama has dealt with the recent calls for political change in the Middle East and global economic problems are somewhat more positive.

It is of note that Obama gets better grades for dealing with the global economy in most nations surveyed than he does in the U.S. And the American president has managed to create a consensus between Israelis and Palestinians. Solid majorities among both publics disapprove of how he is dealing with their conflict.

Confidence in Obama

President Obama receives some of his most positive ratings in Western Europe. Nearly nine-in-ten (88%) Germans say they have at least some confidence in the U.S. president to do the right thing in world affairs, as do 84% in France, 75% in Britain and 67% in Spain. By comparison, 61% of Americans have confidence in Obama.

Majorities also express confidence in Obama in Kenya (86%), Japan (81%), Lithuania (68%), Brazil (63%), Indonesia (62%) and Poland (52%). Pluralities in India (48%) and China (44%) share this view.

Opinions of Obama are more mixed in Israel, as well as in Russia and Ukraine. About half (49%) of Israelis have at least some confidence in Obama when it comes to world affairs and about the same percentage (51%) has little or no confidence in the U.S. president. In Russia, about four-in-ten (41%) express confidence in Obama, while 43% do not. Among Ukrainians, 37% give Obama positive ratings, while slightly more (42%) say they have little or no confidence.

With the exception of Indonesians, publics in predominantly Muslim countries give Obama decidedly negative ratings. Just 8% in Pakistan, 12% in Turkey and 14% in the Palestinian territories have confidence in the American president to do the right thing in international affairs; 28% in Jordan and 35% in Egypt share this view. Opinions of Obama are somewhat more positive in Lebanon, where 43% express at least some confidence, but a majority (57%) in that country say they have little or no confidence in him. (For a more detailed analysis of views of Obama in predominantly Muslim countries, see “Arab Spring Fails to Improve U.S. Image,” released May 17, 2011.)

Mexicans also give Obama negative ratings; 38% have confidence in him when it comes to world affairs, while 54% say they have little or no confidence in the U.S. president. In 2010, Mexicans were evenly split, with 43% expressing confidence in Obama and the same percentage saying they lacked confidence in him.

Ratings of Obama have also declined since 2010 in Turkey (11 points percentage points), Britain (9 points), Kenya (9 points), Poland (8 points), China (8 points), Indonesia (5 points), and the U.S. (4 points); in the Palestinian territories and Israel, confidence in

Obama has dropped 9 and 7 percentage points, respectively, since 2009, when Palestinians and Israelis were last included in the Pew Global Attitudes survey

In contrast, more Brazilians and Japanese express confidence in Obama than did so a year ago. Confidence in Obama is up 7 percentage points in Brazil, a country the American president visited in March 2011. In Japan, where U.S. efforts to assist with the impact of the March earthquake and tsunami have been widely recognized, confidence in Obama is up 5 points.

Obama’s Handling of Middle East Protests and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Obama receives relatively positive ratings for his handling of the recent calls for political change in countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain and Libya.² Majorities or pluralities in 10 of the 23 countries surveyed approve of the way Obama has dealt with the uprisings, including about seven-in-ten in France (70%) and Germany (69%) and at least six-in-ten in Kenya (64%) and Spain (63%).

Views of Obama’s handling of the recent protests in the Middle East are most negative in the Muslim countries surveyed, where majorities or pluralities are critical of his performance. Still, many in these countries approve of the way Obama has handled the uprisings. This is especially the case in Egypt and Lebanon; 45% of Egyptians and 41% of Lebanese approve of Obama’s handling of calls for political change, while 52% in each country disapprove.

In contrast, Obama receives some of his most negative ratings for his handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Only in Kenya do more than half (51%) approve of Obama’s performance on this issue.

In Spain and France, majorities disapprove of Obama’s performance on this issue (58% and 54%, respectively), as does a plurality (42%) in Britain. Germans are nearly evenly divided; 45% approve and 42% disapprove of his handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Disapproval of Obama’s performance has increased since last year in France, Spain, and Britain; 47%, 45% and 34%, respectively, gave the American president low marks for his handling of the conflict in 2010.

Palestinians are more critical than Israelis, but majorities among both publics (84% and 64%, respectively) disapprove of the way Obama is dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Elsewhere in the Middle East, at least eight-in-ten in Lebanon (85%), Jordan (82%) and Egypt (82%) disapprove of Obama’s handling of this issue.

Criticism of Iran and Afghanistan Policies

Opinions of the way Obama is dealing with Iran are largely negative across the world. France, Germany and Kenya are the only countries surveyed where a clear majority or plurality approves of Obama’s handling of Iran (53%, 48% and 44%, respectively).

In the Middle Eastern countries surveyed, majorities are critical of Obama’s handling of Iran. This is especially the case in the Palestinian territories and Jordan, where 80% and 77%, respectively, disapprove; 68% in Egypt and Turkey, 61% in Israel and 55% in Lebanon share this view.

Majorities in the other two predominantly Muslim countries surveyed, Indonesia and

Pakistan, also disapprove of the way Obama is dealing with Iran (56% and 52%, respectively). Six-in-ten in Russia, 56% in Mexico and 52% in China share this view, as do about half in Ukraine (49%) and Brazil (48%); just 11% of Ukrainians and 31% of Brazilians approve of Obama’s performance on Iran.

In the U.S., as well as in Spain, Britain, Japan and Poland, views of Obama’s handling of Iran are more mixed. For example, 41% of Americans approve and 45% disapprove of the president’s performance. In Spain, 45% approve and 43% disapprove of the way Obama is dealing with Iran; the same percentage of Poles approves as disapproves (35%).

Approval of Obama’s handling of Iran has declined over the past year in 7 of 18 countries for which trends are available. This is particularly the case in Kenya, Indonesia, Poland, and Russia, where the percentage approving of the president’s performance on this issue is down by double digits (14 percentage points in Kenya and Poland, 13 points in Indonesia and 11 points in Russia).

When asked about Obama’s handling of the situation in Afghanistan, only in Kenya does a majority (57%) give the president high marks.³ Opinions are mixed in the U.S and Western Europe; the same number of Americans approves as disapproves of Obama’s handling of Afghanistan (45% each), and the French (50% approve and 49% disapprove), Germans (49% and 46%) and Spanish (46% and 44%) are also nearly evenly divided. In Britain, somewhat more approve (44%) than disapprove (39%) of the way Obama is dealing with the situation in Afghanistan.

As is the case with other key policies in the Muslim world, views of Obama’s handling of Afghanistan are especially negative in predominantly Muslim countries. Nearly nine-in-ten (87%) Jordanians and at least three-quarters in the Palestinian territories (81%) and Egypt (76%) disapprove of the way Obama is dealing with the situation in Afghanistan; 71% in Lebanon and 70% in Turkey, as well as narrower majorities in Indonesia (56%) and Pakistan (55%) express similar views.

Mostly Good Grades on Global Economy

Majorities or pluralities in 12 of 23 countries surveyed approve of the way the U.S. president is dealing with global economic problems. Kenyans are particularly supportive; nearly eight-in-ten (78%) approve of Obama’s handling of the world economy.

In Western Europe, Germans express the most support for Obama’s handling of economic problems; about two-thirds (68%) approve of the president’s performance. Nearly six-in-ten (59%) in France and narrower majorities in Britain and Spain (52% each) share this view.

By comparison, four-in-ten Americans approve and about half (49%) disapprove of the way Obama is dealing with global economic problems.

Six-in-ten Lithuanians offer support for Obama’s handling of global economic problems. About half (48%) in Poland and 39% in Ukraine approve of the way the U.S. president is dealing with this issue; about a quarter in each country (26% and 25%, respectively) disapprove. In contrast, more in Russia disapprove (36%) than approve (32%) of Obama’s performance.

For the most part, publics in the predominantly Muslim countries surveyed are critical of the way Obama is dealing with the world economy. At least seven-in-ten in Jordan (76%) and Egypt (73%) disapprove of Obama’s performance, as do 66% in the Palestinian territories, 62% in Turkey, 53% in Lebanon and 51% in Pakistan. Only in Indonesia does a majority (65%) approve of Obama’s handling of global economic problems; 26% of Indonesians disapprove.

Views of Obama’s performance on the global economy are mixed in Israel, Mexico and China. In Israel, 44% approve and 43% disapprove of the way Obama is handling this issue. About four-in-ten (41%) Mexicans give Obama high marks for his handling of global economic problems, while about the same number (42%) are critical of the president. And in China, 35% approve and 38% disapprove. In contrast, 69% in Japan and 62% in Brazil approve of the way Obama is dealing with economic problems, as do 36% in India; 13% of Indians disapprove and 51% do not offer an opinion.