The
Plummeting of U.S. Standing in the World
By Paul
R. Pillar
July 07,
2017 "Information
Clearing House"
-
The Pew Research
Center released last week the results of
one of its periodic surveys of global views of
the United States and its leadership and
policies. More than 40,000 people were polled in
37 countries across six continents between
February and May. The most salient finding is a
dramatic drop in confidence in the United States
and, more specifically, in the current U.S.
leadership.
When asked about “confidence in
the U.S. president to do the right thing in
world affairs,” 22 percent of those surveyed
expressed confidence in Donald Trump and 74
percent expressed no confidence. This is a huge
reversal from the last time the same question
was asked about Barack Obama late in his
presidency, in which 64 percent expressed
confidence and 23 percent no confidence.
The rapidity as well as the
magnitude of the change is striking. Trump’s
numbers approach those of George W. Bush near
the end of his presidency, but in Bush’s case
those depths were reached only after a long
decline during his two terms. Trump has managed
to bum people out around the world during his
first four months in office.
In only two of the 37 countries
surveyed was there an increase in confidence in
the U.S. president since that last poll taken
during Obama’s presidency. One is Israel, with a
modest rise from 49 to 56 percent, although the
latter figure is still slightly below the
average for all five Pew polls taken during
Obama’s tenure. A bigger rise is in Russia,
where the figure of 53 percent having confidence
in Trump is higher than any of the results in
Russia for either Bush or Obama. These results
are not surprising in view of the deference
Trump has shown to the governments of those two
countries. The Pew survey did not include any
Gulf Arab countries, but if it had there perhaps
would also have been a rise in the numbers, for
the same reason, in Saudi Arabia.
The
overall results are not surprising either, in
view of the many other indications of foreign
popular sentiment toward Trump and his
administration, as well as similar expressions
from foreign leaders. The latter have included,
for example, statements from the chancellor
of Germany and
the Canadian
foreign ministerreflecting
a lack of confidence in Trump’s leadership.
Although not surprising, the importance of the
poll results for the success or failure of U.S.
foreign policy and the advance or decline of
U.S. interests is insufficiently appreciated
within the United States. The problems are not
limited to the chemistry between leaders that
seems to get the most press attention at summit
meetings, or to Trump’s boorish
behavior, which
has become a fixture at such meetings. Nor are
they limited to the broader perceptions of Trump
personally, as striking as those perceptions
are. As documented by the Pew survey, there is
less confidence in Trump to do the right thing
than in Xi Jinping of China or Vladimir Putin of
Russia. The three adjectives that respondents
most attached to Trump were “arrogant,”
“intolerant,” and “dangerous.”
The Pew results suggest broader
difficulties by showing that the standing of the
United States itself has fallen with the advent
of Trump. Compared with the last such poll
during Obama’s presidency, favorable views of
the United States dropped from 64 to 49 percent
and unfavorable views rose from 26 to 39
percent.
The Trumpian slogan of “America
first” tends to disguise the larger implications
of such results. Set aside for the moment the
falsity of that slogan, given that
subcontracting segments of foreign policy to the
Israelis or Saudis (or glossing over whatever
Russia may be up to) is not putting America
first. The slogan, and the set of attitudes
underlying it, implies a nonchalance about
foreign attitudes and a belief that Americans
need not care what foreigners think. That belief
misses much of how foreign attitudes and
perceptions, which influence foreign government
policies, can affect, for good or for ill, U.S.
objectives.
Successful foreign policy
involves getting other states to act in ways
that advance or protect the interests of one’s
own state. To the extent that the people and
policymakers in those other states have
“confidence in the U.S. president to do the
right thing in world affairs,” they are more
likely to act in the way the U.S. president
would like them to act. Lacking such confidence,
they are that much less likely to act in
accordance with U.S. wishes. This principle
applies regardless of the content of U.S. policy
and grand strategy. It is the reason the plunge
in this kind of confidence from late Obama to
early Trump is important.
The survey results also provide
perspective on criticisms and standards applied
to previous administrations. Criticisms of Obama
about supposedly surrendering U.S. leadership
look especially strange now, considering what
has come after him.
Paul R.
Pillar is Nonresident Senior Fellow at the
Center for Security Studies at Georgetown
University and Nonresident Senior Fellow in
Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution. He
is a contributing editor to The
National Interest, where he writes a
blog.
http://nationalinterest.org
The
views expressed in this article are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of Information Clearing House.