24 Feb Americans Hate the UN Slightly Less, Gallup Poll Says
24.02.10
|
19 Comments
The invaluable “Turtle Bay” Blog points me to this recent Gallup poll on the U.S. public’s view of the United Nations.
I’m a bit surprised the UN polls so badly (26 percent is pretty low). Then again, Americans are a tough lot. Congress rates even lower, and President Obama is heading in this direction. So the UN is actually doing quite well…
In the interest of accuracy: The last point on graph is 31% not 26%, and that number is also cited in the link.
I’m surprised you’re surprised, given the massive ignorance of the American public generally on many matters, especially those things not directly linked to their perception of what counts for everyday preoccupations and self-interest (given the jobs crisis and the current climate of socio-economic uncertainty brought about by the Great Recession, the narrow circumscription of the latter is in some measure justified).
Guess I’m one of the ‘massively ignorant public’ here. But I’m willing to learn. Could you cite a salient example of the “United Nations solving a problem it has had to face” recently?
Thanks to Patrick O’Donnell for the correction.
I agree with him that the poll result is perhaps not so surprising, given the pervasive pubic ignorance, especially about international affairs and indeed just about anything happening outside the boundaries of the US.
It’s interesting, though, to look over the whole graph from 1953 until now. It’s quite striking how often the UN’s approval rating with the American public has been above 50%. The decline since 2001 (52%) and 2002 (58%), when the UN orchestrated worldwide support for the US following 9/11 (for example, with numerous countries freezing the funds of suspect extremist groups) is presumably due to the hostility of the Bush administration to international institutions (especially the UN) and international law. They never missed an opportunity to disparage the UN, which is a very useful institution promoting peace and peaceful co-operation in the world, and providing humanitarian assistance in numerous developing countries. It’s imperfect, of course, but then so are most big organizations: Citicorp, GM, Toyota and the US government spring to mind as examples !!
Liz, The characterization of the UN as a “problem-solving” institution (as in the poll question) is misleading if only because it’s incomplete (Americans tend to see everything in terms of ‘problem-solving’). As it says in the Wikipedia entry on the UN, it is “an international organization whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and the achieving of world peace.” Now, on balance, I would I think the UN has made at least some progress on these fronts and I shudder to think what our world would be like had the UN never come into existence. Being on the Left in many respects (indeed, a Marxist in economics) I have plenty of criticisms of this or that action, etc. of its principal organs (e.g., Security Council) and can imagine any number of possible reforms, but these do not amount to cynicism or an ideological refusal to acknowledge the indispensable value of the UN. My views on the organization are more or less captured by Paul Kennedy’s book, The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations (2006), a book I would place in the larger context of… Read more »
Erratum: “Now, on balance, I think the UN….” (I need to sit closer to the monitor or get new glasses)
Liz: fair question. Here’s the answer: three detailed, specific and factual examples of the “United Nations solving a problem it has had to face” recently. I can easily supply more if you like.
1. Restoring order and democratic government (headed by Ellen Johnson Sirleaf) in Liberia, after an honest election supervised by the UN. This in a country previously ruled by a war criminal (Charles Taylor), where law and government had broken down, murder, torture and rape were commonplace, and the poverty was indescribable.
2. Getting a massive amount of food aid into Haiti, after the earthquake — right across the country, not just in Port au Prince, under the glare of media attention. The UN’s World Food Program (WFP) got far more in than any other agency. The UN also provided most of the transportation used by other groups to get food aid in.
3. Bringing to justice prominent war criminals guilty of mass murder in the former Yugoslavia, especially Bosnia (8,000 victims in one single instance), including the former Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic; Radovan Karajic, and many others. I recommend reading the record of the (scrupulously fair) trials — the evidence of the crimes are chilling reading: http://www.icty.org/
Thanks Michael: if I had seen your post before composing mine I would have refrained from posting.
Patrick: well, then I’m glad you didn’t see my post first, because your post was a very good contribution.
I am just a businessman (not at all particularly “left” in my views, by the way) who has had some contact with various UN agencies in various parts of the world over the years. I am sick of seeing the efforts of the decent, modestly-compensated UN staff who work hard (and often risk, and sometimes lose, their lives) for the public goals of peace and a decent life for people around the world being disparaged by the bigoted and ignorant far-right in the US. I’ve heard enough “Tea Party” lunacy on this and other subject to last be several lifetimes.
Michael,
It’s nice to learn a bit about your background and I’m glad you’re expressing your views in a forum such as this.
I too have “heard enough ‘Tea Party’ lunacy on this and other subjects to last me several lifetimes.” Alas, it seems such lunacy is having a disproportionate (i.e., undeserving) influence on (at least the rhetoric of) the Republican Party
By the way, Patrick, I agree that Paul Kennedy’s book “The Parliament of Man”, which I have read, is very good. It does however have two major failings, I find. I don’t know the O’Connell book but will now make a point of reading it. The two weaknesses I see in Paul Kennedy’s book both arise, I think, mainly from its being too New York-centric (that’s New York as in the UN headquarters in New York), but perhaps also from his professional leanings as an historian and not, say, a scientist, businessman or lawyer. The two weaknesses are: 1. Although Kennedy of course does write about the UN Specialized Agencies (almost wholly headquartered elsewhere than New York), he doesn’t really have a full sense of how their work is woven into everyday life in many different industries and public services across the world. Admittedly, it’s not easy to paint that picture, because so much of it is so, well, specialized !! For example, how many people know that they are able to direct-dial telephones anywhere in the world, even on ships at sea, by dialing a simple country code, because of agreements on worldwide numbering and network interconnection negotiated and… Read more »
Wow, that was fast! Thanks!
MD, I’ll cede your first and second examples (I don’t actually know enough to argue), but do disagree on the third. Over three years of failed negotiated approaches did not bring Milosevic to the bargaining table any more than the UN safehaven of Sbrenica kept anyone safe. Ultimately, what ended the conflict in the space of a few months was a relentless air campaign by NATO which allowed the Bosniak/Croat Federation to regain a sufficient amount of territory to agree to a cease-fire. I think the UN does perform well in consensual or negotiated approaches to conflict resolution, but generally quite poorly when such approaches prove ineffective.
About the Tea Party “movement” — I am glad we agree on that. The thing gives me the creeps. It’s not just hideously misguided — it’s highly toxic. I’m something of a serious amateur student of history, and all smells nastily like Germany in 1933 to me.
Liz: You see how motivated I am by this excellent debate. I assure you my first two examples are sound — I know the facts very well, and I’ll be happy to provide extensive sourcing if you ask. About my third example: of course it was not the UN that brought “Milosevic to the negotiating table”: it was NATO bombing of Serbia that did so, just as you say. The UN’s generally conciliatory approach had not worked on Milosevic and his mass-murderers (conciliatory approaches often don’t work on mass-murderers), and sometimes the consequences were dire indeed. I do not claim the UN is perfect, or cannot be improved –as this episode shows, it needs a lot of improvement, especially in the peace-and-security area, as distinct from the humanitarian area, where it generally does an excellent job as I have often seen for myself “in the field”. Nevertheless, what I say in my third example is true: it was the UN (specifically the International Criminal Tribuna for the Former Yugoslavia), notably the remarkable and brilliantly successful efforts of its first two chief prosecutors, which got Milosevic and the others arrested and brought to trial, and in most cases convicted in overwhelming evidence, in… Read more »
Oh –I should name the two prosecutors, because their work achievements deserves wider recognition: Louise Arbour, a Canadian judge seconded to the UN; and Carla del Ponte, a Swiss prosecutor who first made her name (while she was Switzerland’s chief prosecutor) by successfully working with Italian prosecutor Giovanni Falcone to put several leading Italian mafiosi — notably Salvatore Riina — behind bars.
Sorry for the glitch…..that should read “I should name the two prosecutors, because their achievements deserve wider recognition..”
Michael,
For the record, I would agree with your criticisms of Kennedy’s book. In fact, I think he could have made a much stronger argument in several respects, but given the paucity of recent works on the subject along these lines as well as the prevailing ethos of our current political climate, I was simply grateful for any positive case whatsoever being made.
On the plausibility of the similarity to or analogy with German fascism, please see here (and subsequent discussion at Mirror of Justice) and here.
[…] recently found that just 31% of Americans think the UN “is doing a good job… in trying to solve the […]
[…] is a slight improvement over last year’s numbers but still low. Over at Opinio Juris, there is a debate on whether these low approval numbers reflect the ignorance of Americans about what the UN actually […]
Patrick,
I think we’re agreed about Kennedy’s book in all respects
Thanks for the links about “Tea Party-Ism”, “Glen Back-aim” and their (strong) resemblance to German fascism of the 1930s.