Transatlantic Trends from citizenry and élites

Two reports were released earlier this month containing survey results of Europeans and Americans on transatlantic affairs. The first report, Transatlantic Trends from the German Marshall Fund of the United States, 'is an annual public opinion survey examining American and European attitudes toward the transatlantic relationship.' Here are some highlights:

Fifty-eight percent of Europeans viewed U.S. leadership in world affairs as “undesirable,” compared with 36% who saw it as “desirable.”

European attitudes toward Bush’s international policies remained critical (77% disapproval compared to 17% approval).

Forty-six percent of Europeans felt that transatlantic relations will stay the same following the U.S. presidential election in 2008 regardless of who is elected, compared with 35% who felt relations will improve and 6% who felt relations will get worse.

Though these numbers signify much less European confidence in US leadership than is desirable, European citizens could still be persuaded back into support of US policies if properly packaged (and sold by a different administration).

A second survey, by the University of Siena, Italy, looked also at the opinions of EU officials. The European Élites Survey 2007 found that 74% of Members of European Parliament and 77% of top EU officials 'felt strong US leadership to be desirable.' Over half of élites thought the swearing in of a new president will improve transatlantic relations.

The entirety of both reports are available online, and they contain many more interesting insights into the divisions and commonalities in American and European opinions.

Shifting the sands from Westminster.

Gordon Brown's government this month has continued to distinguish itself from the Blair years, with the release of a Parliamentary report that criticizes the UK's Middle East policy under Blair. This comes on the heels of rhetorical efforts aimed at losing the foreign policy baggage left by Blair, and includes several recommendations in line with our progressive efforts in the United States, including a more dialogue-oriented approach to Iran.

It was a disappointment when Blair failed to mount even cursory challenges President Bush before the invasion of Iraq. It appears that Brown's government will not be as complacent, perhaps even visioning itself as the example the American government should follow. The report states, 'We note that it has long been the policy of the Government to engage with Iran, and we are encouraged by signs that the US Administration is now accepting the wisdom of this approach.' Though Britain has never been substantially important militarily, its political weight has still been hefty. Maybe the loss of steadfast British support for American policies will be as important as Blair's early submissiveness.

While this report is not more than an outline of possible changes to British foreign policy, nor is directly from the Prime Minister, it seems indicative of a substantially different course is being shaped for the UK. Brown is expected to elaborate his foreign policy further in October, so more definite conclusions must wait until then.