Iraqi public opinion decidedly negative

There are a handful of interesting new polls out this morning, most of which show Americans’ thoroughly unsatisfied with the status quo when it comes to Iraq. Perhaps the most interesting new survey isn’t the one that gauges public opinion in the U.S., but rather, in Iraq.

Barely a quarter of Iraqis say their security has improved in the past six months, a negative assessment of the surge in U.S. forces that reflects worsening public attitudes across a range of measures, even as authorities report some progress curtailing violence.

Apart from a few scattered gains, a new national survey by ABC News, the BBC and the Japanese broadcaster NHK finds deepening dissatisfaction with conditions in Iraq, lower ratings for the national government and growing rejection of the U.S. role there.

More Iraqis say security in their local area has gotten worse in the last six months than say it’s gotten better, 31 percent to 24 percent, with the rest reporting no change. Far more, six in 10, say security in the country overall has worsened since the surge began, while just one in 10 sees improvement.

More directly assessing the surge itself — a measure that necessarily includes views of the United States, which are highly negative — 65 to 70 percent of Iraqis say it’s worsened rather than improved security, political stability and the pace of redevelopment alike.

Iraqis have been watching Bush’s latest policy play out up close, and they’re decidedly unimpressed. Indeed, the poll shows Iraqis discouraged about almost everything around them — safety, job opportunities, access to electricity and fuel, medical services, among other problems all surfaced in a survey that shows an extremely discouraged population.

Worse, whereas there was some optimism in other Iraqi polls last year that conditions might improve, now Iraqis do not have much hope left.

The big picture remains bleak. Six in 10 Iraqis say their own lives are going badly, and even more, 78 percent, say things are going badly for the country overall — up 13 points from last winter. Expectations have crumbled; just 23 percent see improvement for Iraq in the year ahead, down from 40 percent last winter and 69 percent in November 2005.

And what of Iraqis’ views of the U.S. mission? The ABC/BBC/NHK poll showed a population that apparently wants us to leave.

[N]early two-thirds of Iraqis now say it was wrong for the United States and its allies to have invaded Iraq — 63 percent, up from 52 percent six months ago and from 39 percent in the first Iraq poll by ABC, the BBC and NHK (and the German broadcaster ARD) in February 2004.

Even among Shiites, empowered by the overthrow of Saddam, 51 percent now say the invasion was wrong, up sharply from 29 percent in March. (Further deterioration may be ahead; among Shiites who still support the invasion, the number who call it “absolutely” right has fallen from 34 percent in March to 14 percent now.) Only among the largely autonomous Kurds does a majority still support the invasion, and even their support, 71 percent, is down by 12 points.

Seventy-nine percent of Iraqis oppose the presence of coalition forces in the country, essentially unchanged from last winter — including more than eight in 10 Shiites and nearly all Sunni Arabs. (Seven in 10 Kurds, by contrast, still support the presence of these forces.)

Similarly, 80 percent of Iraqis disapprove of the way U.S. and other coalition forces have performed in Iraq; the only change has been an increase in negative ratings of the U.S. performance among Kurds. And 86 percent of Iraqis express little or no confidence in U.S. and U.K. forces, similar to last winter and again up among Kurds.

Accusations of mistreatment continue: Forty-one percent of Iraqis in this poll (vs. 44 percent in March) report unnecessary violence against Iraqi citizens by U.S. or coalition forces. That peaks at 63 percent among Sunni Arabs, and 66 percent in Sunni-dominated Anbar.

This disapproval rises to an endorsement of violence: Fifty-seven percent of Iraqis now call attacks on coalition forces “acceptable,” up six points from last winter and more than three times its level (17 percent) in February 2004. Since March, acceptability of such attacks has risen by 15 points among Shiites (from 35 percent to 50 percent), while remaining near-unanimous among Sunnis (93 percent).

Specifically on the question of U.S. withdrawal, there’s still apparently some trepidation about what might happen after we’re gone, but a plurality of 47% now say the United States and other coalition forces should leave Iraq immediately. That number has risen from 26% in November 2005 and 35% last winter. It is also the first time support for our withdrawal has reached a plurality of Iraqis. ABC’s report added:

Desire for the United States to “leave now” is highest in Anbar, still deeply anti-American despite any accommodation its leaders have made with the U.S. military.

We’re in a country that does not support our efforts. Something else for policy makers to consider moving forward.

If you break it, you own it. If you also destroy the store, the street and the town, though…….

  • Somehow I don’t think the “they hate America” BS is going to work for the wingnuts this time. It’s so much easier to throw at the “leftie blogs”.

    The Iraqis must really really hate Americans by now, and who knows what they’ll do with all that hatred, but I hope they focus it on the guys who destroyed their country so they could appease their blood lust (and AIPAC’s) and get a nifty set of bases to control the region with.

    This guy and his pals, for instance…

    From the wayback machine (april 2002)…

    WHY IRAQ?
    …I’ve long been an admirer of, if not a full-fledged subscriber to, what I call the “Ledeen Doctrine.” I’m not sure my friend Michael Ledeen will thank me for ascribing authorship to him and he may have only been semi-serious when he crafted it, but here is the bedrock tenet of the Ledeen Doctrine in more or less his own words: “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.” That’s at least how I remember Michael phrasing it at a speech at the American Enterprise Institute about a decade ago (Ledeen is one of the most entertaining public speakers I’ve ever heard, by the way)…

    – Jonah “Doughy Pantload” Goldberg

  • Remember, this is a president who isn’t swayed by polls, and who is so convinced that he knows what is best for Iraqis that even if the entire population, at the same time, shouted “GET OUT!” Bush would not hear them. He’s not hearing us, for crying out loud – he’s like the Simpson’s dog, Santa’s Little Helper, who hears “blah-blah-blah-di-blah” whenever he hears human voices.

    Some day, historians will look back at the 8 years of the Bush reign and determine that it was so excruciatingly long and wreaked so much havoc both at home and abroad, that it really ought to be measured in dog years. I, for one, think each year of the Bush presidency has felt like 7, making us only about 10 years away from the end of this horror.

  • What’s the matter, Iraqis? Tired of the totalitarian police state imposed on you by a foreign occupier? Tough shiite! You’re nothing but cut-n-runners, defeatists, surrenderers, & turr’ists! Stay the course, Iraqis, or you’ll follow us home and then we’ll have to fight you over here.

  • Another way of stating the Leeden Doctrine is that we need to “kick somebody’s ass” every now and then. Right, Mr. President?

    We’re trying to establish a democracy in Iraq, or so we’re told. Why would we care about what the Iraqis think? What do they know about democracy?

  • Why on earth would we care what the Iraqis think? What do they know? Surely Field Marshall Betrayus has a clearer picture of the “vision thing” involved here. He’s already proven that he’s “strong” by managing to find some wisps of oxygen deep in Dear Leader’s ass. Plus, he’s got a guaranteed power position with American corporations (maybe the Carlyle Group?) upon retirement. Can’t argue with success like that.

  • Enough with the Ledeen Doctrine. How about Ledeen’s Codicil: “Every ten hourss or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little neocon and throw their ass against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”

    The bummer about Iraq polls is that all the dead aren’t asked what they thought. Perhaps all the occupants of the Baghdad morgue can be recognized as responding that things are going badly and that security is not improving. It would make the polls more accurate.

  • I was going to take some time To address the failure of local religious and otherwise leaders to put a sizable dent in a problem that has ballooned to monstrous proportions recently. Undoubtedly you’ve probably caught the faint sulfur dioxide olfactory aura of this pressing problem whilst engaged in fighting off sleep in the midst of the latest television assault on our collective senses – the evening “news”. Yes the city fathers and the archbishop have gotten the panties in a twist over a plague that threatens the very loose and thin fabric which barely contains the dregs of civilized discourse and real stopping power. And it’s getting worse. Recently a well renowned Republican figure was forced to confront his own frailty of human nature, as he was forced by public pressure to directly atone for his grave and disgusting social faux pax.

    From the New York Times, August 19th: “Although you’re probably still a-buzz after the successful passing of legislation I sponsored requiring mandatory ass-gaskets for all public facilities, my accomplishment is, I suspect, somewhat blemished by troubling thoughts and barely audible curses spat in my general direction, the result of a possible qualm I no doubt supplanted in the minds of my constituents with concrete affect concerning events of a delicate nature that occurred the other day whilst on a short break from the rigors and late summer heat of D.C.. I feel an apology is owed or at least a feasible clarification is appropriate, as well as a rapid rapprochement in case feelings were damaged or one’s sense of decency and the parameters of good taste were breached beyond repair. For the record and in front of all that is holy and righteous, what I mean to suggest in the spirit of humor was not meant in any way to imply that I consider the use of my local municipal public swimming pool as my personal urinal or bed pan. Nor should it be misunderstood by implication that municipal swimming pools also often contains a deodorizing urinal cake (strawberry scented, no less) contained within a plastic mesh guard container, designed to prevent solid objects such as cigarette butts, small photographs of George Bush or Dick Cheney, Juicyfruit gum, or various grades of used paper from being flushed and possibly causing a plumbing stoppage. As much of a gargantuan misinterpretation as this could possibly be taken, it does not take very much imagination to deduce that a reasonable person of average intelligence could extrapolate this false impression to a ridiculous heights of absurdity where they would consider any public recreation facility a small building or other structure, in which such toilets are contained for medical purposes, or to use where access to washroom facilities are not possible, such as in small aircraft or some of the more popular low-end massage parlors. Please humbly accept my act of contrition in case the aforementioned misapprehension in fact has come to mind, and let me know if there’s anything I can do to clear the air of this malfeasance. And for the record, I use the proper facilities, and no, I don’t urinate on toilet seats or in the milk cartons. Oddly enough, some radical feminists, or otherwise persons not possessing a penis, have condemned the practice of men standing to urinate as sexist and politically incorrect, not to mention the fact that they always miss no matter what they say to the contrary. Some universities in Germany have removed urinals after protests by feminists and pencil-dick Rockabilly homosexuals. In Germany, toilet ghosts have been sold for public places and homes because standing while urinating is now viewed by many as too sexist. If a man raises the seat of a regular toilet to urinate, the “toilet ghost” , in a voice that imitates former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, enunciates the phrase ‘Hey, stand peeing is not allowed here and you will be punished with fines, so if you don’t want any trouble, you’d best sit down’. But I digress. I do not pee in pools”

  • Comments are closed.