Bully Losing Popularity Contest

[Joe R. Golowka]

08/14/2002 - Updated 02:16 AM ET
Global warmth for U.S. after 9/11 turns to frost

By Ellen Hale, USA TODAY

OXFORD, England - On a packed train out of London recently to this historic college town, a young American woman struck up a conversation with her seatmate, a nattily dressed older British man. They chatted amiably about Oxford until she worked up the courage to ask what was weighing on her mind:

Why," she blurted out, "does everybody hate us?"

The man paused - but didn't disagree - before proceeding to enumerate the reasons, from U.S.
foreign policies to the seeping influence of American popular culture.

In the shock wave that followed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, many Americans found themselves asking why so many people in Muslim countries hate the United States. But the anti-American sentiment has turned into a contagion that is spreading across the globe and infecting even the United States' most important allies.

In virulent prose, newspapers criticize the United States. Politicians ferociously attack its foreign policies, especially the Bush administration's plans to attack Iraq. And regular citizens launch into tirades with American friends and visitors.

Here in Britain, the United States' staunchest friend, snide remarks and downright animosity greet many Americans these days. It's not just religious radicals and terrorists who resent the United States anymore.

"Now, it's everyone," says Allyson Stewart-Allen, a consultant from California who has lived in London 15 years and heads International Marketing Partners, which advises European companies on how to do business with Americans. The sea change in attitude toward the United States, she says, has "profoundly" altered her advice to clients:

She now must counsel them to resist "taking digs" at her countrymen.

What happened, many Americans are wondering, to that wave of sympathy and stockpile of global
goodwill they encountered after Sept. 11?

"It was squandered," says Meghnad Desai, director of the Institute for Global Governance at the London School of Economics and Political Science and a member of the House of Lords.

"America dissipated the goodwill out of its arrogance and incompetence. A lot of people who would never ever have considered themselves anti-American are now very distressed with the United States," he says.

Desai and others blame what seems to be a wave of new U.S. policies that they regard as selfish and unilateral, stretching back to President Bush's refusal last year to support the international treaty on global warming.

Many are enraged by Bush's support for steel tariffs and farm subsidies, his refusal to involve the United States in the new international criminal court and what is widely regarded abroad as one-sided support for Israel and its prime minister, Ariel Sharon.

The rash of corporate malfeasance and blanket arrest of terrorism suspects after Sept. 11 further fuels critics, who say the United States preaches democracy, human rights and free enterprise - but doesn't practice them.

In a recent article in Policy Review magazine, Robert Kagan, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, says the divide between the United States and Europe is getting wider than ever as the continents go their different ways - one operating on a foreign policy based on unilateralism and coercion, the other on diplomacy and persuasion.

Europeans, he says, have "come to view the United States simply as a rogue colossus, in many respects a bigger threat to (their) pacific ideals than Iraq or Iran."

The differences, he says, are deep and likely to endure.

"Why do people attack Americans?" asks Tiny Waslandek, a social worker in Amsterdam, Netherlands. "Because they have a big, big mouth and they mind everybody's business."

Bush's plan to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is stoking anti-American hostility to bonfire levels. In Germany earlier this month, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder launched his re-election campaign by denouncing what he derisively called Bush's proposed military "adventures" in Iraq. In England, the new head of the Anglican Church and other leading bishops circulated a petition proclaiming that any attack would be illegal and immoral.

"My sense is that much of the rampant anti-Americanism we see now is very much linked to a war with Iraq and the Israel-Palestine issue," says Mary Kaldor, a London-based scholar on international relations.

In the popular Straw Poll BBC radio show July 26, Kaldor debated with Washington Post reporter T. R. Reid whether "American power is the power of the good." She argued that the U.S. role as the sole superpower was a danger to the rest of the world.

At the end of the program, 70% of the studio audience said it agreed with her.

Anti-Americanism is nothing new. Surveys a decade ago in Britain showed that one in four people here are what pollster Robert Worcester, a transplanted Kansan who runs the Market Opinion Research Institute, calls "culturally anti-American."

(According to a survey taken in 1989, one in five said they found American accents irritating.)

To some degree, the resentment against the United States is inevitable now that it's the only remaining superpower. Even so, Desai, who says that he is "very, very pro-America" and that people forget the United States saved Europe from itself twice in the past century, notes that America has been on top for a long time. "So what is happening now is not the inevitable result of being No. 1."

(Desai and many other Europeans give Washington credit for dismantling the hard-line Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which harbored Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda terrorist network).

In recent months, polls have shown a less-than subtle change in attitudes toward Americans, U.S. foreign policy and, in particular, the president from Texas. British newspapers reported Thursday that secret polls commissioned by Prime Minister Tony Blair revealed "spectacular unpopularity" for Bush among voters here.

In April, the German news magazine Der Spiegel reported that less than half (48%) of Germans consider the United States a guarantor of peace in the world, compared with 62% who did in 1993. Nearly half - 47% - rated Americans as aggressive rather than peaceful (34%). And 44% called them superficial.

Meanwhile, in an April poll for the Council on Foreign Relations, based in Washington, Europeans proved highly critical of Bush and what they label his unilateral approach to foreign policy: 85% of Germans, 80% of French, 73% of Britons and 68% of Italians said they believed that the United States is acting in its own interest in the war on terrorism.

Philadelphia transplant Susan Steele, head of Forum management company in London, has noticed that many Europeans have started using the phrase "that's American," which is shorthand, Steele says, for "not taking anyone else into consideration."

"People here were truly shocked and horrified by Sept. 11," says Marjorie Thompson, an American who runs the consulting group C3I in London. "But since then, they've come to believe that the United States is using that as an excuse for a unilateral foreign policy, and they're starting to make sweeping anti-American comments."

Even British pop star George Michael and tennis pro Martina Navratilova have taken swings at the United States. Last month, Michael declared he was "definitely not anti-American" after receiving criticisms for his new single, Shoot the Dog, which lampooned the relationship
between Bush and Blair.

In June, Navratilova, a Czech native who became a U.S. citizen 20 years ago, had to defend herself after writing an article for a German newspaper in which she said that the United States now "oppressed opinion" and that decisions there were based "solely on how much money will come out of it."

That the United States is suffering an image problem abroad has become obvious at home. Two weeks ago, the White House announced it would create a permanent Office of Global Communications to enhance America's image around the world. At the same time, the House of Representatives approved spending $225 million on cultural and information programs abroad,
mostly targeting Muslim countries, to correct what Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., called a "cacophony of hate and misinformation" about the United States.

Meanwhile, the Council on Foreign Relations simultaneously issued a biting report warning the Bush administration that it urgently needs to upgrade its efforts at public diplomacy to counteract the country's "shaky" image abroad.

It called for a range of actions, from increased spending on polling of foreign public opinion and more training of foreign service officers to giving journalists from other countries access to top U.S. government officials.

The consequences of neglecting such public diplomacy are "ominous," warns Peter Peterson, chairman of the council and of The Blackstone Group, a New York private investment bank. He says bin Laden has "gleefully exploited" the United States' poor public image.

"Around the world, from Western Europe to the Far East, many see the United States as arrogant, hypocritical, self-absorbed, self-indulgent and contemptuous of others," Peterson says. "This is not a Muslim country issue. It has metastasized to the rest of the world and includes some of our closest European allies."

New Yorker Julia Magnet, a journalist who just moved to London, found that out when she decided to throw a Fourth of July party for British friends. Between grilled sausages and chocolate cake, her friends launched an attack on Bush and the United States. They called Bush a "homicidal maniac" and "stupid" and the United States the "world's biggest terrorist."

Magnet, 22, was forgiving, and she labeled their assault "uninformed" and "ignorant."

Nevertheless, she was surprised by the venom in their words.

"What I hear from people all the time now is that we're going to go to war with just about everyone and we don't need a coalition to do it," Magnet says.

"It's obvious they are very, very disturbed by the power America now has."

Contributing: Steven Komarow in Berlin and The Netherlands.

[Urban Ranger]

I don't think people hate the US as a country. They hate the hypocrisy, the rude meddlings, and the lack of responsibility wielding all that might.

[Darkness' Edge]

Someone points out the obvious.

Isolationism and nationalism at the expense of the greater world may seem fine in times of peace, but there comes a time, like now, when America needs to go beyond it's own borders, and finds that it's screw-everyone-else-for-our-own-benefit policies haven't gone down well, even here, where we are America's second-strongest ally behind Britain.

[Sikander]

There is a long dull thread below with the same article in it's opening post. Are you just feeling lucky?

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I don't think people hate the US as a country. They hate the hypocrisy, the rude meddlings, and the lack of responsibility wielding all that might.

every country is hipocritical, if not more so. Rude meddelings? We rarely get involved in places that arent for our own security or in places that ask for our aid. You think we would be in the Israeli-Palistinian if they hadnt asked us for mediation? Our whole business over there is just causing us problems, yet we continue to do it because we feel our help is needed. Lack of responsiblity wielding our might? I dont know quite how you mean this 'lack of responsibility'.

Kman

[CyberGnu]

Sadly, most europeans forget that there ARE good americans too. Like the 51% who voted for Gore...

[TheStinger]

i have to say that an awful lot of americans make stupid hurtful comments about the UK and the people who live there. Its what people do.

The reaction to america is actually a natural one to somoene or something perceived as being too powerful/succesful.

BTW Europeans moan about everybody.

[Kramerman]

screw-everyone-else-for-our-own-benefit policies haven't gone down well, even here, where we are America's second-strongest ally behind Britain.

Well, we dont really sacrifice ourselves for the good of the world, no. We do, being a sovereign nation, have to look out for our own interests. There are many foreign policies that screw a few at our benefit, there are a few that screw alot for our benefit, but there are also many that only help others at our own expense. Just about every other modern country has also had similar policies (if not more malevolent ones), but, "the biggest tree always catches the most wind," I suppose.

[Skanky Burns]

Knew I had seen this before.

Here

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Sadly, most europeans forget that there ARE good americans too. Like the 51% who voted for Gore...

I dunno, Americans were kinda between a rock and a hard place during that election - and everbody knows voting for a third party is just throwing your vote away.

[Darkness' Edge]

Originally posted by Kramerman


every country is hipocritical, if not more so. Rude meddelings? We rarely get involved in places that arent for our own security or in places that ask for our aid. You think we would be in the Israeli-Palistinian if they hadnt asked us for mediation? Our whole business over there is just causing us problems, yet we continue to do it because we feel our help is needed. Lack of responsiblity wielding our might? I dont know quite how you mean this 'lack of responsibility'.

Kman

Their intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only because it's in their interest. The Gulf war was fought for the same reason. This doesn't mean I don't agree with their intervention - they just were in it for selfish instead of humanitarian reasons.

The day America stands up for Western Saharan and West Papuan independence is the day I'll believe they're honestly interested in human rights.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Kramerman


every country is hipocritical, if not more so. Rude meddelings? We rarely get involved in places that arent for our own security or in places that ask for our aid. You think we would be in the Israeli-Palistinian if they hadnt asked us for mediation? Our whole business over there is just causing us problems, yet we continue to do it because we feel our help is needed. Lack of responsiblity wielding our might? I dont know quite how you mean this 'lack of responsibility'.

Kman

Same mind numbing justifications had been attempted at least a decade ago. Anything new?

[Kramerman]

The gulf war was definately in the US interest. The Israeli-Pal is not. You may say it is because we need to solve hostilities in the region if we wish to galvanize support for an Iraqi invasion, but we have been in that mess long before that was an issue. Not just the Israeli-Pal hostilities either. How was the Jimmy Carter peace accord between Israel and Anwar Saddat of Egypt in our self interest? We mediated and peace was found. Many things we do are for both humanitarian and in our interest, because by doing humanitarian stuff we are helping our own interests at the same time. Is there something wrong with this? The Marshal Plan after WWII would be a good example of this. By rebuilding Europe we were helping to build a post-war market for our economy. Both Europe and the US prospered as a result. Same goes for Japan and our reconstruction of them after the war.

Kman

EDIT: When refering to Europe, i meant western Europe, of course

[Darkness' Edge]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Sadly, most europeans forget that there ARE good americans too. Like the 51% who voted for Gore...

Pfft. Gore just doesn't screw the rest of the world quite as much as Bush. He's not THAT much better.

Originally posted by TheStinger The reaction to america is actually a natural one to somoene or something perceived as being too powerful/succesful.

Bull****. The foreign attitude to America is a direct response to the isolationalist, over-nationalist, and in many cases, evil, policies of the American governments.

Kramerman repeated the usual American babble about American interests coming first. Unfortunately, when this is at the expense of the rest of the world, you're not likely to become very popular. And at times like the present, where America needs it's allies, they pay for this attitude.

The Australian government, despite being a massive Bush supporter, is coming under a LOT of pressure to reduce it's support for Bush and his war on terror, and Bush's government generally. America can only thank their own policies for this, and the mirroring of this around the world.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Darkness' Edge






Bull****. The foreign attitude to America is a direct response to the isolationalist, over-nationalist, and in many cases, evil, policies of the American governments.

Bullshit back- You may disagree with some or all of americas policies but to describe them as evil is nonsense. Yes some people get hurt or killed as a result but taht does not make them evil.

What would you do with a country with nuclera/biological capability who had sworn to destroy yours

[Kramerman]

Bull****. The foreign attitude to America is a direct response to the isolationalist, over-nationalist, and in many cases, evil, policies of the American governments.

oh my god.
*burys head in hands in frustration*
what type of ignrant speak is this? Over-nationalist? The US has almost as much internal dissint as it does foreign. And this is good, it keeps us on our toes. If it werent for this diisent we would probably still be sluggin it out in the jungles of Veitnam...

Isolationist? We are leading the world into Globalization (yet all we get is fire from that... ), our economic policies are based on world participation, let alone our well known interventionist foreign policy.

Evil?
wtf. The US is a democracy run by people too. We arent like a giant conspiracy trying to take over the world. We are only trying to maintain our success, and therefor maintain our modest standard of living. Tell me what country you are from, and lets see if we cannot dig up any mistakes your country has made. Everyone makes mistakes, and if you are as active as the US, then they are just that more likely to happen.

[Kramerman]

I have ahd a great idea for a thread... Thank you very much for this conversation.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by TheStinger


Bullshit back- You may disagree with some or all of americas policies but to describe them as evil is nonsense. Yes some people get hurt or killed as a result but taht does not make them evil.

What would you do with a country with nuclera/biological capability who had sworn to destroy yours

For further reading, please check here: http://www.markfiore.com/animation/corrections.html

(Uh oh...I think this thread is about to be spammed. if it wasn't already spam to begin with )

[Joe R. Golowka]

I did not realize this had already been posted. If I had I wouldn't have post this, sorry. If the moderater wants to merge this with the other thread or something that's fine by me.

[DinoDoc]

I'd prefer that this thread remain open. People actually seem to be talking about the actual topic here.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Darkness' Edge
Bull****. The foreign attitude to America is a direct response to the isolationalist,

Do you even know what the word isolationist means? If so, can you explain to me how it could possibly be applied to current American foreign policy?

over-nationalist, and in many cases, evil, policies

Explain?

[Shi Huangdi]

"Bull****. The foreign attitude to America is a direct response to the isolationalist, over-nationalist, and in many cases, evil, policies of the American governments."

U.S. Policy isolationist!? Someone doesn't know what they are talking about.

"Unfortunately, when this is at the expense of the rest of the world, you're not likely to become very popular."

All states act in their own interest. Why is it Australia then gets involved in Timor- but not Western Sahara? Australia is a rich state that could do more to promote human rights if it wanted. Same with the EU. But I fail to see how removing Saddam is against the world's interest.

As for popularity, I seriously doubt any of what is described in the article is going to seriously hinder U.S. foreign policy. We are still capable of doing alot of stuff on our own.

[Eroberer]

Heh, the rest of the world is just jealous. And I think that every individual in each foreign nation is scared that we're coming after them next, and they're also blinded by our doings to notice their own government's misdoings, and they're retarded and eat babies. Individuals from other nations should shut up, or they will be next.

God, I hate other countries. They are so misinformed and judgemental.

[Eroberer]

Oh, I just noticed that this was written by USA Today, which always blows everything out of proportion. First of all, they overrated the subject material here, since I can tell you as fact that no one here cares. Also, I bet maybe five people told this author that other countries hate us, which was clearly good enough for her to take some quotes out of context and write a story about it.

[Joe R. Golowka]

US foreign policy isn't isolationist, that's absurd. How can the US be isolationist when it's got bases in zillions of other countries and beats the **** out of some small country on the other side of the globe every couple of years. US foreign policy is Imperialist, not isolationist. Isolationism would be an improvement.

Resentment towards the US has little to do with jealous and more to do with being tired of being bossed around by the #1 superpower. And Shi, "everyone else does it too" is no defense - if everyone was a mass murderer that wouldn't make the biggest mass murderer an ethical person. If anything that just provides another reason to abolish nation-states.

"God, I hate other countries. They are so misinformed and judgemental."

Your'e such a hypocrit.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Sadly, most europeans forget that there ARE good americans too. Like the 51% who voted for Gore...

Here in America we like to call those people idiots.

[Joe R. Golowka]

LOL.

[Ned]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Sadly, most europeans forget that there ARE good americans too. Like the 51% who voted for Gore...

Gore has supported Bush's foreign policy save for Kyoto.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Eroberer
Heh, the rest of the world is just jealous. And I think that every individual in each foreign nation is scared that we're coming after them next, and they're also blinded by our doings to notice their own government's misdoings, and they're retarded and eat babies. Individuals from other nations should shut up, or they will be next.

God, I hate other countries. They are so misinformed and judgemental.

Eroberer, for the longest time, America's foreign policy centered on the USSR. We were protecting Europe, Japan, and SK. We fought in Vietnam primarily because we viewed the conflict as an "USSR" issue.

Since the fall of the USSR, we have largely been adrift, not really understanding our roll in the world. Desert Storm was a success, but largely unnecessary from US strategic point of view. Had Saddam taken over Kuwait permanently, nothing would have changed in the US. Our supply of oil would not have gone down since Saddam would glady have sold Kuwaiti oil it to us just as he historically had sold us Iraqi oil. Rather we fought Saddam for others - for Kuwait, for our ally Saudi Arabia and for our ally Israel.

We intervened in the Sudan to help the starving kids, in Bosnia after the failure of the Euro's at Sebrenicia, in Kosovo to help the brutalized Albanians. We did these things at the request of others with very little strategic benefit to the United States.

Suddenly, on 9/11 the world changed for America. We realized that terrorism was a serious threat - a very serious threat. We united as a people, Republican and Democrat alike, on our resolve to fight terror and to defend ourselves. No president, Republican or Democrat, would have done anything differently.

The fact that we are going to defend ourselves regardless of what others think is what is new. Heretofore, we acted selflessly to help others. Today, our own ass is in the meat grinder and we really don't care if others are not going to help. We will defend ourselves.

To paint this as a Bush problem is to simply ignore how united this country is. Even on the Israel-Palestinian issue, the Democrats are far more pro-Israel than Bush.

To the rest of the world, understand this: We are under attack and we will defend ourselves. We will no longer tolerate terrorist regimes who threaten America.

Saddam will go.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Ned


Eroberer, for the longest time, America's foreign policy centered on the USSR. We were protecting Europe, Japan, and SK. We fought in Vietnam primarily because we viewed the conflict as an "USSR" issue.

Since the fall of the USSR, we have largely been adrift, not really understanding our roll in the world. Desert Storm was a success, but largely unnecessary from US strategic point of view. Had Saddam taken over Kuwait permanently, nothing would have changed in the US. Our supply of oil would not have gone down since Saddam would glady have sold Kuwaiti oil it to us just as he historically had sold us Iraqi oil. Rather we fought Saddam for others - for Kuwait, for our ally Saudi Arabia and for our ally Israel.

We intervened in the Sudan to help the starving kids, in Bosnia after the failure of the Euro's at Sebrenicia, in Kosovo to help the brutalized Albanians. We did these things at the request of others with very little strategic benefit to the United States.

Suddenly, on 9/11 the world changed for America. We realized that terrorism was a serious threat - a very serious threat. We united as a people, Republican and Democrat alike, on our resolve to fight terror and to defend ourselves. No president, Republican or Democrat, would have done anything differently.

The fact that we are going to defend ourselves regardless of what others think is what is new. Heretofore, we acted selflessly to help others. Today, our own ass is in the meat grinder and we really don't care if others are not going to help. We will defend ourselves.

To paint this as a Bush problem is to simply ignore how united this country is. Even on the Israel-Palestinian issue, the Democrats are far more pro-Israel than Bush.

To the rest of the world, understand this: We are under attack and we will defend ourselves. We will no longer tolerate terrorist regimes who threaten America.

Saddam will go.

well said.