Special to CNN

As Pakistan prepares for national elections, the country’s public mood is exceedingly grim. Roughly nine-in-ten Pakistanis believe the country is on the wrong track, and about eight-in-ten say the economy is in poor shape.

Meanwhile, concerns about extremist groups have increased markedly. More than nine-in-ten Pakistanis describe terrorism as a very big problem, and about half now say the Taliban is a very serious threat to their country. For the first time since the Pew Research Center began polling on these issues, the Taliban is essentially considered as big a threat to Pakistan as longtime rival India.

While worries about the Taliban are growing, there is almost no desire to see the United States extend its fight against the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan. Two-in-three Pakistanis say it is a good thing that the U.S. plans to remove most of its troops from Afghanistan by 2014. At the same time, Washington’s use of drones to target extremists in Pakistan is widely unpopular.

Overall, America’s image remains extremely negative in Pakistan: Only 11% give the U.S. a favorable rating, and a similarly low number (10%) express confidence in President Barack Obama. Today, most Pakistanis (64%) see the U.S. as more of an enemy than partner, and the percentage of Pakistanis who think having better relations with the U.S. is important has declined in recent years. Meanwhile, fewer than one-in-ten Pakistanis say U.S. economic assistance is having a beneficial effect on their country.

Unsurprisingly, given the state of public opinion, incumbent President Asif Ali Zardari receives negative reviews: 83% express an unfavorable opinion of him. In contrast, two-thirds have a positive view of opposition leader, and former prime minister, Nawaz Sharif. Six-in-ten also have a positive opinion about former cricket star turned politician Imran Khan, although Khan’s ratings are down slightly from last year, when 70% rated him favorably.

These are among the major findings from a survey of Pakistan by the Pew Research Center. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 1,201 respondents from March 11 to March 31, 2013. The sample covers approximately 82% of the country’s adult population.¹ The survey also finds continuing support for the Pakistani military, which for decades has been an important player in the country’s politics. Roughly eight-in-ten (79%) think the military is having a positive influence on the nation.

Pakistanis Feel as Threatened by the Taliban as by India

As has been the case in recent years, extremist groups remain largely unpopular in Pakistan. Just 13% express a positive view of al Qaeda, and 11% say this about the Taliban. Lashkar-e-Taiba, a radical organization active in Kashmir, gets somewhat higher ratings – 24% have a positive opinion of this group, which has been widely blamed in the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks.

Compared with last year, the percentage who consider the Taliban a very serious threat to Pakistan has increased significantly – 49% now hold this view, up from 37%. This level of concern approaches the fears registered in a 2009 Pew Research poll. Then, with the Taliban in control of the Swat Valley, which is within 100 miles of the capital Islamabad, 57% rated the Taliban a very serious threat.

The level of concern about the Taliban matches the level of worry about neighboring India, with whom Pakistan has fought several major wars since the two countries emerged as independent nations more than six decades ago. Roughly half (52%) consider India a very serious threat.

Crime, Terrorism Are Top Problems

Pakistanis are concerned about a variety of national problems – especially crime and terrorism. Fully 95% describe crime as a very big problem, and 93% say the same about terrorism.

Illegal drugs, political corruption, the situation in Kashmir, pollution, access to clean water, and poor quality schools are considered very big problems by at least two-thirds of those polled.

U.S. Still Poorly Regarded

Negative sentiments about the U.S. remain pervasive in Pakistan. About seven-in-ten (72%) rate America unfavorably. Although negative views of President Obama are somewhat less common than they were two years ago after the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan by U.S. forces, 52% still lack confidence in the American leader.

Only 13% think U.S.-Pakistan relations have improved in recent years. About half (47%) say it is important for the relationship to improve, although this is less of a priority for Pakistanis today than it was a few years ago.

Most Pakistanis welcome the U.S. drawdown from Afghanistan. Two-thirds say it is a good thing that most American troops will be gone in 2014.

American drone attacks against extremist leaders are largely unpopular. Roughly two-in-three Pakistanis (68%) oppose U.S. drone strikes. Opinions are divided on whether the strikes are being conducted with (29%) or without (39%) the approval of the Pakistani government. Similarly, there is division over whether drone attacks may be necessary to defend Pakistan from extremist groups – a third agree with this position, while 40% disagree. When asked about the consequences of drone strikes in general, roughly three-in-four (74%) say they kill too many innocent people.

Also of Note:

• While most Pakistanis continue to say the economy is in bad shape, economic pessimism is declining. About three-in-ten (29%) expect the economy to worsen over the next 12 months, down from 60% in 2011.
• Solid majorities say religious leaders (69%), the media (68%) and the courts (58%) are having a positive influence on the country.
• However, evaluations of the police are quite different: Only 23% believe the police are having a good impact on the country.

Special to CNN

When U.S. President Barack Obama travels to Mexico this week, he will encounter a Mexican public that has far more positive attitudes about the United States than at any time in the last several years.

America’s image south of the border fell sharply in 2010, when Arizona passed a “show me your papers” law aimed at identifying, prosecuting and deporting immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally. But Mexican views have rebounded since then, and U.S. favorability ratings are now at their highest point since 2009. The prospects for U.S. immigration reform may be, at least in part, the source of renewed Mexican approval of their neighbor to the north.

A new Pew Research Center poll found that 66 percent of Mexicans have a favorable opinion of the U.S., up 10 percentage points from a year ago and up 22 points from May 2010, immediately following the enactment of Arizona’s immigration law. The last time America’s image was as strong among Mexicans was in 2009, when 69 percent said they had a favorable opinion.

Opinions of Obama, though more positive than in 2012, are still mixed – 49 percent express confidence in the American president, while 39 percent have little or no confidence in him, compared with a year ago, when 42 percent of Mexicans said they had confidence in Obama and 46 percent said they did not.

This boost in America’s image comes amidst rising expectations that Washington may soon reform U.S. immigration laws.

More than 11 million native-born Mexicans live in the U.S., including about 6 million who are in the country illegally – by far the largest segment of the undocumented population, according to estimates by the Pew Research Center. In June 2012, Obama authorized the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, giving more than one million undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children the chance to apply for temporary but renewable work permits and avoid deportation. It is estimated that 70 percent of those eligible for the program are from Mexico.

Obama carried the Latino vote by 71 percent to 27 percent in his 2012 reelection victory.  Since then, the president and a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators have been working on legislation that would remove the risk of deportation and open a pathway to citizenship for immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally. These legislative developments have been followed closely by the Spanish-language media.

But this resurgence in goodwill for America coexists with continued skepticism about Uncle Sam’s intentions and influence in Mexico. And Obama himself, although now more popular than a year ago, receives only lukewarm ratings there. The president’s trip, which is being billed by the White House as an “opportunity to reinforce the deep cultural, familial and economic ties that so many Americans share with Mexico and Central America,” is also a chance for Obama to improve his own image on several key issues regarding the U.S.-Mexico relationship.

One challenge will be to convince Mexicans that Washington sees them as a full partner. About half of Mexicans say their neighbor to the north takes Mexico’s interests into account; 45 percent say it does not. And while the vast majority of Mexicans generally sees the benefits of strong economic ties with the U.S., their opinions are more mixed about the impact America is currently having on Mexico’s economy, with 33 percent saying U.S. influence is positive and 28 percent saying it is negative.

Besides talks on economic ties and collaboration on immigration and border security, Obama is likely to hear from Mexico about the U.S. role in the country’s ongoing fight against drug traffickers. Currently, 56 percent of Mexicans blame both the U.S. and their own country for the drug violence in Mexico, while one-fifth say the U.S. alone bears most of the responsibility.

Mexicans welcome their neighbor’s cooperation in combating this serious problem, with about three-quarters saying they want U.S. help in training Mexican police and military to combat drug trafficking, and 55 more than half saying they approve of the U.S. providing money and weapons to their country’s police and military. But they draw the line at any American boots on the ground, with 59 percent rejecting the deployment of U.S. troops to their country to fight narco-traffickers.

The drug war, immigration and the economic relationship between the U.S. and Mexico are among the items bound to be on the agenda when Obama visits Mexico this week, and Mexican opinion regarding U.S. involvement on these issues has shifted in a somewhat more positive direction in recent years. The question now is whether the two countries can build on the promise fostered by the proposed immigration policy and cement some of the progress that appears to have been made.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Views on Immigration

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

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

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

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

Fewer See Progress on Drug War

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

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

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

Mixed Ratings for Peña Nieto on Key Issues

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

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

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

Special to CNN

What a difference a generation makes! Japan’s decision to join negotiations to create a Trans-Pacific Partnership with the United States and other Pacific nations reflects, in part, the sea change in public opinion that has transformed U.S.-Japan relations. A quarter of a century ago, ties between Washington and Tokyo were characterized by public distrust and animosity. Today, there is support for deeper integration of the two economies through greater trade. The upcoming TPP negotiations will be contentious. But the political context in which these talks will take place is far more supportive than ever before.

In the last few decades, despite periodic trade tensions, Americans have generally held a favorable overall opinion of Japan. In 1990, near the high point of  the Washington-Tokyo battles over trade in autos, rice and other goods, almost two-thirds of Americans nonetheless thought well of Japan, according to a survey by the Times Mirror Corporation. By 2009, 67 percent of Americans still felt favorably disposed toward Japan, according to the Pew Research Center.

But trade relations have long been a neuralgic irritant in bilateral relations. In 1989, 63 percent of Americans believed Japan practiced unfair trade, while a little more than half wanted to increase tariffs on products imported from Japan. In 1995, 61 percent of the American public approved of President Bill Clinton’s decision to impose import duties on imports of luxury Japanese cars.

But U.S. sentiment has shifted dramatically. According to a 2010 survey, three-in-five Americans now want to increase trade with Japan, compared with 58 percent who would like to deepen commercial ties with the European Union and only 45 percent who want to boost trade with China.

So why the change? One reason may be that China has replaced Japan as America’s principal trade competitor, both in fact and in the minds of the American people. In 1990, Japan accounted for 40.7 percent of the U.S. merchandise trade deficit. China made up just 10.3 percent. By 2012, Japan accounted for only 10.5 percent of the U.S. global imbalance. China was responsible for 43.3 percent.

It is little wonder then that today, four-in-ten Americans see China as the world’s leading economic power and thus the principal challenger to American economic preeminence. And according to a recent Pew Research survey, 49 percent of Americans want to be tough with Beijing on economic matters. By comparison, just 6 percent cite Japan as an economic powerhouse today, compared with almost half who thought Tokyo was the top dog in 1990.

The Japanese, for their part, have seen a markedly improved view of the United States. In 1993, only 37 percent of the public thought relations between Japan and the U.S. were good, according to a Yomiuri Shimbun survey. By 2002, almost three quarters had a favorable view of America, according to a Pew Research Center survey.

Japanese attitudes toward trade with the United State have also improved. In 1994, a United States Information Agency survey found that a plurality (40 percent) of Japanese thought that U.S. policies and actions were harmful to the Japanese economy. And more than half said Washington made it difficult to sell Japanese products in the American market. Today, 48 percent of Japanese think their country should participate in TPP, which is effectively a free trade agreement with the United States, according to a November 2012 Asahi Shimbun survey.

A more positive bilateral public disposition is no assurance of success for the TPP negotiations. Washington will want openings of the Japanese rice and auto markets that Tokyo will resist. As the talks become more acrimonious, public opinion on both sides of the Pacific could sour. But clearly these negotiations begin in a public opinion environment that is far more favorable than that which existed a generation ago. That, in itself, is notable.

Criticized by some for being insufficiently pro-Israel during his first term, and dogged by relatively low ratings in Israel during his first term, President Obama travels there this week for meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and to deliver a major address in Jerusalem. The Obama administration can only hope this speech is more warmly received among Israelis than his last high-profile address in the region at Cairo University in June 2009.

The Cairo speech was the most prominent piece of the newly-elected president’s outreach to the Muslim world. Following years of rampant anti-Americanism during George W. Bush’s tenure, Obama set out to transform America’s image in predominantly Muslim nations, many of which are vital to U.S. interests. At the time, polling found that the speech led to at least some improvement in perceptions of the U.S. among Palestinians, albeit temporary. However, it had the opposite effect in Israel.

Israelis gave both Obama and the U.S. lower ratings following the president’s Cairo speech than they did before.  Fully 76% of Israelis had a favorable view of the U.S. prior to the address, compared with 63% afterward, according to a May-June 2009 Pew Research Center poll. Six-in-ten Israelis expressed confidence in Obama to do the right thing in world affairs before Cairo; just 49% held this view following the speech.

Two years earlier, 57% of Israelis had voiced confidence in Bush’s leadership. Among the 25 publics surveyed by Pew Research in 2009, Israel was the only one in which Obama’s ratings were not more positive than Bush’s during his final two years in office.

The 2009 poll also found signs that the Cairo speech was more favorably received in the Palestinian territories.  Most notably, the percentage of Palestinians saying they believed Obama would consider their interests when making foreign policy decisions rose from 27% pre-speech to 39% post-speech. Overall ratings for the U.S. and Obama also improved, but only marginally (+5 percentage points, a difference that is not statistically significant).

Recent polling shows that some Israelis continue to have misgivings about Obama. An October 2012 Jerusalem Post survey found that 28% of Israeli Jews described Obama as more pro-Palestinian, while just 18% saw him as more pro-Israel (40% said he is neutral). The administration obviously hopes to improve the president’s image in Israel with this visit and the Jerusalem speech.

However, in many ways the years since the Cairo address highlight the limits of speechmaking. Despite the favorable reaction among some Muslims to Obama’s 2009 rhetoric, four years later America’s image remains largely negative in many strategically important Muslim nations. In Egypt, ratings for the U.S. are lower today (19% favorable in the 2012 poll) than in spring 2009 (27%). Meanwhile, just 15% of Turks gave the U.S. positive marks in 2012. And in Jordan, where Obama will also visit this week, it was just 12%.

Special to CNN

For decades, Hollywood has been a big part of brand America, and U.S. movies continue to break box office records around the world. Over the past year, blockbusters like The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises have earned over half a billion dollars outside the United States. And this weekend, according to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, viewers in more than 225 countries will tune into the Oscars.

Surveys consistently show that movies – and more broadly, American popular culture – are a strong suit of U.S. soft power. And, while studio executives spend considerably more time thinking about box office returns than public diplomacy, Tinseltown is actually pretty effective at nudging America’s international image in a positive direction. (Certainly, with anti-Americanism still strong in the Middle East and among some other nations, brand America needs all the help it can get).

American culture is especially attractive in Europe. The continent may have a long tradition of intellectuals deriding U.S. culture, but average Europeans embrace it. A 2012 Pew Research Center poll found solid majorities in all eight European Union nations surveyed saying they like American movies, music, and television, including 72 percent in France, home to the Cannes Film Festival, Jean-Luc Godard, and (until recently) Gérard Depardieu. As is the case with nearly all things American, U.S. pop culture is more popular among Europeans in the Obama era than it was during George W. Bush’s presidency, although even during the Bush years, when European anti-Americanism was surging, most still had a favorable opinion of American entertainment. And it’s not just Europe – about seven-in-ten of those surveyed in Japan, Brazil, and Mexico, for example, say they enjoy U.S. movies, music, and television.

In nearly all countries included in the survey, America’s pop culture is especially attractive to young people. For instance, a stunning 94 percent of Germans under age 30 like it, while just 47 percent of those 50 and older agreed. Huge age gaps are also found in Russia, France, Britain and elsewhere.

In many nations, there is also an education gap. In China, where a growing middle class increasingly has yuan to spend on entertainment, 74 percent of people with a college degree enjoy American pop culture, compared with less than half of those with less education.

It’s true that Hollywood isn’t popular everywhere. In particular, it has limited appeal in some predominantly Muslim nations. Among 20 countries surveyed by Pew Research, the only four where majorities said they do not like American movies, music, and TV were Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, and Jordan. Views about culture are intertwined with other aspects of America’s image, and in countries like these, widespread opposition to U.S. policies and deep distrust of American motives continues to drive strong anti-American sentiments.

But the Muslim world is not monolithic, and attitudes toward American culture vary among Muslim populations. Six-in-ten Lebanese Sunni Muslims express a positive opinion, as do almost half of the country’s Shia Muslims – a fairly impressive number, given the fact that, when asked about their overall opinion of the U.S., only 7 percent of Lebanese Shia offer a positive response. Meanwhile, about eight-in-ten Lebanese Christians like American pop culture.

Of course, even in countries where the U.S. and its entertainment exports are generally popular, many still voice reservations about the reach of American culture. Japan was the only nation among the 20 polled where a majority (58 percent) said it is good that American customs and ideas are spreading to their country. In contrast, less than a third in Britain, France, Spain, Germany, the Czech Republic, and Greece described the spread of U.S. ideas and customs as a good thing. In Egypt, Jordan, Turkey and Pakistan the numbers were even lower.

The reality is that resistance to American culture often goes hand in hand with a strong attraction to it. French sheep farmer José Bové may have become a hero to the anti-globalization movement by famously helping ransack a McDonald’s in 1999, but it hasn’t stopped the proliferation of golden arches in Europe or elsewhere. Similarly, the international demand for American films is growing, and Hollywood’s profits are increasingly driven by the foreign box office.

All this means that when the red carpet is rolled out on Sunday, concerns about the ubiquity of American culture won’t stop millions across the globe from tuning in to see who wins Best Picture.

Special to Reuters

The long-discussed free trade agreement between the United States and the European Union was formally endorsed by President Barack Obama in his State of the Union address to Congress. Obama asserted that “trade that is fair and free across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.” A prominent presidential endorsement will not prevent a long and disputatious negotiation, but a trade pact could yield potentially huge economic rewards — and also provoke serious political opposition on both sides.

A U.S.-EU trade and investment agreement has been talked about for two decades but never actively pursued. On both sides of the Atlantic, there has been fear that any such deal between the world’s two largest economies would disadvantage poorer nations. A U.S.-EU accord was deemed less desirable because greater economic benefits could be gained from a global trade agreement involving more countries. Trade experts worried that it would undermine the legitimacy of the World Trade Organization. Moreover, based on past bitter disputes over frozen chickens, bananas, genetically modified organisms and other food and agricultural products, a U.S.-European Union agreement was deemed too politically fraught and difficult.

Now, with Europe in recession, the United States unemployment rate stubbornly high and both regions groaning under public indebtedness, Brussels and Washington are looking for ways to stimulate jobs and growth without spending money. Liberalization of trade and investment is seen as one way to do that.

In addition, in the wake of the failed Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations, a U.S.-EU deal is thought to pose little immediate threat to the WTO because there is no comprehensive global trade deal in the offing any time soon. Moreover, the rising competitive challenge from China has increased the incentive for both Europe and America to develop common technical and regulatory standards for a $30 trillion transatlantic market to ensure that Western-style capitalism, not Chinese state capitalism, remains the global norm.

Publics on both sides of the Atlantic appear to be receptive to the idea.

The virulent European anti-Americanism of the last decade — owing to European opposition to the Iraq war and the policies of U.S. President George W. Bush — is ancient history. More than two-thirds (69 percent) of the French had a favorable view of the United States in 2012, compared with 42 percent in 2008, the last year of the Bush administration, according to Pew Research Center surveys. Fifty-two percent of Germans held a positive opinion of America, compared with 31 percent four years earlier. And 58 percent of the Spanish were favorably disposed toward the United States, much greater than the 33 percent who held such views in 2008.

There has been a similar, if less robust, rebound in American response to the European Union. In 2012, half the country had a favorable view of the EU, compared with only 39 percent at the nadir in 2004.

Moreover, contrary to the widespread assumption that protectionist sentiments are rising in the wake of the Great Recession, 58 percent of Americans say they support increased trade with the EU. The same feeling exists across the Atlantic. Three-quarters of the Italians, nearly two-thirds of the British (65 percent) and more than half of the French (58 percent) and Germans (57 percent) believe in deepening trade and investment ties between the European Union and the United States; 63 percent of Americans agree, according to a 2007 German Marshall Fund survey.

There is also strong support for one of the thorniest challenges that lie ahead: harmonization or mutual recognition of national regulations on goods and services, everything from food standards to insurance. Overwhelmingly Italians (87 percent), British (84 percent), French (82 percent), Americans (76 percent) and Germans (71 percent) support such efforts, according to the Marshall Fund survey.

European backing may reflect a half century of experience aligning regulations while building the European Union. American enthusiasm may reflect a lack of appreciation of just how arduous that can be.

The removal of all remaining tariffs on goods traded between Europe and the United States, traditionally the core of any trade and investment agreement, has strong, if slightly less enthusiastic support, on both sides of the Atlantic. Fully 70 percent of the British and Italians, 65 percent of the Poles and 54 percent of the Germans back such an effort, according to the GMF survey. Roughly half of the French (50 percent) and Americans (48 percent) agree.

Despite this seeming goodwill, negotiating a deal in the current political environment will not be easy. Publics and their elected leaders are domestically preoccupied. In some nations, protectionism and nationalism seem to be on the rise.

Once actual trade and investment negotiations finally get under way, the bargaining is likely to be challenging. If history is any guide, inevitable frictions will erode public support as adversely affected interests complain, while those that stand to benefit are less vocal. So the ultimate public verdict on a U.S.-EU trade and investment agreement has yet to be rendered.

But on the eve of such negotiations, both Americans and Europeans seem disposed to try.

Special to CNN

U.S. President Barack Obama’s second inaugural address is now history. It has been labeled “progressive,” “partisan,” “one of the best ever” and “pedestrian.” Whatever the positive or negative take on its content, the speech was largely about America’s domestic concerns. The limited internationalism highlighted in the speech lacks significant support from the American people, especially those who got him reelected.

The economy, jobs and the budget deficit dominate public concerns in the United States, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey. More than eight-in-ten Americans think Washington should pay less attention to problems overseas and more attention to issues at home. And such isolationist sentiment has increased 10 percentage points in the last decade.

People outside the United States looking to Obama’s speech as some kind of signal of Washington’s foreign policy posture over the next four years should appreciate that Obama’s rhetoric may have reflected his aspirations but not necessarily the priorities or the will of the American people.

An inaugural address is generally reserved for statements of broad principles and themes. It is not the venue for detailed policy proposals, either foreign or domestic. These will come, if anywhere, in the president’s State of the Union speech February 12.

Nevertheless, it is notable that Iran, China and the Israeli-Palestinian troubles – all looming international challenges for the United States – were never mentioned by the president.

Afghanistan – America’s longest running war ever – was referenced obliquely: “a decade of war is now ending.” This scripted applause line reflected the fact that 60 percent of Americans want the United States out of that war-torn nation as soon as possible.

President Obama did promise: “We will respond to the threat of climate change.” This is music to many ears outside the United States. In 2009, foreigners had high hopes that the newly elected president would take steps on climate change: 81 percent of French, 76 percent of Germans and 59 percent of Japanese expected Obama to take action. But by 2012, only 27 percent of French, 23 percent of Germans and 22 percent of Japanese thought he had.

But before they get their hopes up again, people outside the United States need to realize that only 28 percent of Americans say dealing with global warming should be a top priority for president Obama and Congress this year. That includes just 38 percent of the president’s own party and just 32 percent of people under the age of 30 and 29 percent of women, both groups whose support helped win Obama his second term.

The president also raised expectations for those who one day hope to emigrate to the United States: “Our journey is not complete until we find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as a land of opportunity.”

But the recent political debate within the United States has largely been about what to do with those who are already in the country illegally. And even then, only 39 percent of Americans say dealing with the issue of illegal immigration is a top priority. Even among Hispanics, a key Obama constituency, just 31 percent make this issue a top priority.

On broader geo-strategic issues, President Obama promised that: “America will remain the anchor of strong alliances in every corner of the globe. And we will renew those institutions that extend our capacity to manage crisis abroad.”

But only 41 percent of Americans say strengthening the military is a top priority. And that includes just under a third of the president’s own party members and only 29 percent of those under the age of 30, the future American electorate.

Moreover, Americans show relatively low support for NATO, America’s oldest and arguably most important alliance. Just 51 percent of Americans have a favorable view of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, compared with 70 percent of Poles, about two-thirds of French and Germans, and 62 percent of Britons who hold it in high regard.

The U.S. president’s inaugural address is a speech heard and read around the world, and is interpreted as a sign of America’s intentions going forward. To separate lofty ambitions from more practical realities, it needs to be interpreted in the context of U.S. public opinion.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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