Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/10116
Browse
9 results
Search Results
Item Russians Positive on China’s Foreign Policy, Economic Model, Negative on U.S. Policies, Bush: But Russians Give American Democracy High Marks Americans Like Their System, Not Their President Russians Like Their President, But Not Their System(2006-05-30) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)A new study of Russian and American public opinion finds that the Russian public has broadly positive views of China, potentially seeing China as a more promising partner in international affairs than the United States. While Russians admire the U.S. economic system and democracy, most have negative views of U.S. foreign policy and President Bush.Item WPO Poll Analysis: American Evangelicals are Divided on International Policy: Decreasing Support for Bush Administration Positions Mirrors that of Nation(2006-10-02) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)Evangelical Christians are far from united on foreign policy, an analysis of recent polls by WorldPublicOpinion.org shows, and their support for the war in Iraq has fallen dramatically. Republicans have come to rely on the support of “value voters” who can be counted on to choose candidates based on their opposition to abortion or gay marriage. But this year, with Democratic candidates focusing on international issues in an attempt to turn the election into a referendum on the Iraq war, the unhappiness of many evangelical or born-again Christians with the Bush administration’s handling of foreign affairs could prove crucial.Item Seven in Ten Americans Favor Congressional Candidates Who Will Pursue a Major Change in Foreign Policy: U.S. Public Wants Less Emphasis on Military Force, More on Working Through U.N. A Majority Supports Direct Talks with North Korea and Iran(2006-10-19) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)Going into the November midterm elections, seven in ten Americans say they prefer Congressional candidates who will pursue a new approach to U.S. foreign policy. A new nationwide survey finds a large and growing majority of Americans is dissatisfied with the position of the United States in the world. Most Americans believe that U.S. policies are increasing the threat of terrorist attack and decreasing goodwill toward the United States.Item Americans Favor More U.S. Action in Darfur: Support U.S. Enforcement of No-Fly Zone and Sending NATO Troops(2006-03-23) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA); Stephens, AngelaThe crisis in Sudan’s western Darfur region, which began in 2003, has largely been pushed off the international news pages by escalating violence in Iraq and tension over Iran’s nuclear program. Yet despite Americans’ weariness of the Iraq war, a new poll by Zogby International finds strong support for greater efforts to stop the killing—what many, including the Bush administration, call a genocide—in Darfur.Item Americans Assess US International Strategy(2006-12-07) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)The dramatic Republican loss of the House and Senate has been widely interpreted as a critique of the Bush administration’s international strategy, leading to the departure of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and UN Ambassador John Bolton. However elections are a blunt instrument, raising questions about what Americans do not like about US international strategy. Is it simply that Americans are frustrated about the situation in Iraq, or do Americans differ with other aspects of US strategy? What international problems would they emphasize? Which policies would they change? The Bush administration came into office with an apparent determination to be less constrained than previous administrations when it comes to using military force. Do Americans believe that there has been a change in the world’s perception of US readiness to use military power? If so, do they think this has helped or hurt US security? What do Americans think has been the effect of the United States’ invasion of Iraq? In 2003, PIPA found a large majority assumed that the war in Iraq decreased the likelihood that Iran and other problem countries would try to acquire weapons of mass destruction. What do they think now? How do Americans feel about how the United States is dealing with Iran? The Iranian government claims to be enriching uranium solely for its nuclear energy program, while others in the international community, including the United States and the United Nations Security Council, suspect that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons. The Bush administration has resisted entering into talks with Iran until it first stops enriching uranium. Do Americans believe this is the best approach? Do Americans think that threats of air strikes will dissuade Iran from enriching uranium? Do they see air strikes as a viable military option? Do Americans think that the United States should be willing to negotiate a compromise with Iran? How do Americans feel about how the United States is dealing with Iraq? The Iraq Study Group has released its report calling for engaging Iran and Syria, holding an international conference and gradually drawing down US forces. Is American public opinion in line with these proposals? How do Americans feel about how the United States is dealing with North Korea? Do Americans feel that the United States should be willing to offer security guarantees or provide aid if North Korea gives up its nuclear weapons? To address these and other questions WorldPublicOpinion.org conducted a poll with a nationwide sample of 1,326 Americans, Nov. 21-29. It was developed in conjunction with the conference, “Leveraging U.S. Strength in an Uncertain World”, to be held by the Stanley Foundation Dec. 7 at the Ronald Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, D.C. The poll was designed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland. It has a margin of error +/-2.7-3.9 %, depending on whether the question was asked to the whole sample or a half sample, and was fielded by Knowledge Networks, using its nationwide panel, which is randomly selected from the entire adult population and subsequently provided internet access. For more information about this methodology, go to www.knowledgenetworks.com/ganp.Item Americans on Opportunities for Bipartisan Consensus: Bipartisan Public Consensus Offers Direction for US Foreign Policy in Second Bush Term(2005-01-18) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)Despite several years of highly polarized debate and a bruising electoral battle, a new study reveals a striking amount of bipartisan consensus—among the public and foreign policy opinion leaders—that offers surprisingly clear direction for US foreign policy in the second Bush administration. Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) of the University of Maryland comments, “Since many factors influenced the outcome of the election, the question stands: What is the public’s mandate in the specific area of US foreign policy?”Item U.S. Public Perceptions of Foreign Policy Positions of Presidential Candidates: Bush Supporters Misread Many of His Foreign Policy Positions(2004-09-24) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)As the nation prepares to watch the presidential candidates debate foreign policy issues, a new PIPA-Knowledge Networks poll finds that Americans who plan to vote for President Bush have many incorrect assumptions about his foreign policy positions. Kerry supporters, on the other hand, are largely accurate in their assessments. The uncommitted also tend to misperceive Bush’s positions, though to a smaller extent than Bush supporters, and to perceive Kerry’s positions correctly.Item Hall of Mirrors: Perceptions and Misperceptions in the US Congressional Foreign Policy Process: On Many Foreign Policy Issues US Leaders and Public Agree, But Congress Votes to the Contrary(2004-10-01) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)A new joint study of the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR) and the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland finds that the American public and American leaders—including senior Congressional staffers, administration officials, and leaders in business, labor, media and other areas— agree on many key foreign policy issues, but that Congress frequently votes contrary to this consensus.Item Latin American Publics are Skeptical About US—But Not About Democracy(2007-03-07) Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)President Bush’s effort to show Latin Americans that “you have a friend in the United States of America,” may be a hard sell during his five-nation tour of the region: A majority of Latin Americans view the United States unfavorably, recent multinational surveys show, and most disapprove of the Bush administration’s foreign policies.