Reply
Thu 13 May, 2004 04:30 pm
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 13, 2004; Page A10
Four out of five Iraqis report holding a negative view of the U.S. occupation authority and of coalition forces, according to a new poll conducted for the occupation authority.
In the poll, 80 percent of the Iraqis questioned reported a lack of confidence in the Coalition Provisional Authority, and 82 percent said they disapprove of the U.S. and allied militaries in Iraq.
Although comparative numbers from previous polls are not available, "generally speaking, the trend is downward," said Donald Hamilton, a senior counselor to civilian administrator L. Paul Bremer. The occupation authority has been commissioning such surveys in Iraq since late last year, he said. This one was taken in Baghdad and several other Iraqi cities in late March and early April, shortly before the surge in anti-coalition violence and a few weeks before the detainee-abuse scandal became a major issue for the U.S. authorities in Iraq.
The new polling data, which have not been publicly released, are provoking concern among occupation authority officials and in Washington because they provide additional evidence that the U.S. effort in Iraq is not winning over Iraqi public opinion. The Bush administration and the U.S. military have said that the keys to the United States achieving its goals in Iraq are winning at least mild support from most Iraqis and creating Iraqi forces to provide security.
"How to . . . win the hearts and minds of the people [in Iraq] is one of the things that we really have to work at," Army Lt. Gen. Keith B. Alexander, head of Army intelligence, told the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier this week. "I mean, that is the key to solving not only that problem but the rest of the problems in the Middle East."
Hamilton, who said he oversees public opinion issues for Bremer, declined to provide the number of Iraqis surveyed or other methodological details but said in an e-mail that "polls here are generally reliable" and that the new findings were consistent with those of other polls. He referred other questions to occupation authority spokesman Daniel Senor, who did not respond to requests by telephone and e-mail for comment and for historical data.
The new data reflect the fact that "the occupation, and the occupation forces, are getting increasingly unpopular," said Jeffrey White, a former Middle Eastern affairs analyst for the Defense Intelligence Agency. In recent months, he said, "A lot of people, including me, have been getting very pessimistic."
Reflecting that trend, the proportion of Baghdad residents who reported worries about safety has steadily increased: In the new poll, 70 percent named security as the "most urgent issue" they faced, up from 50 percent in January, 60 percent in February and 65 percent a month later.
Overall, 63 percent of those polled said security was the most urgent issue facing Iraq. In addition to Baghdad, the poll was conducted in the northern city of Mosul and the southern cities of Basra, Nasiriyah and Karbala. Some questions also were asked in the troubled western town of Ramadi.
In the poll, which was taken just before the April uprising of the militia led by radical Shiite Muslim cleric Moqtada Sadr, a large proportion of Iraqis from the central and southern parts of the country said they backed him, with 45 percent of those in Baghdad saying they support him, and 67 percent in Basra.
Those numbers are striking because the U.S. military and the occupation authority have declared Sadr a public enemy whom they want to kill or capture. The Army has been maneuvering in central Iraq for weeks, occasionally fighting parts of his militia but avoiding a head-on clash in the holy city of Najaf. Yesterday, U.S. tanks and helicopters fought his militia in Karbala.
There were a few bright spots in the poll. The Iraqi police received a 79 percent positive rating, the best of the seven institutions about which questions were asked. The reformed Iraqi army was not far behind, with a 61 percent positive rating.
Those polled were broadly divided on who should appoint the interim government that is supposed to take over limited power from the occupation authority at the end of June. The largest group, 27 percent, said the Iraqi people should appoint the new leaders, while 23 percent said judges should. Only one-tenth of 1 percent said that the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council should name the government, which is supposed to run Iraq until elections are held next year. None said the occupation authority should.
Indicating a general skepticism of foreign involvement in their political future, 83 percent of those polled said that only Iraqis should be involved in supervising the 2005 elections.
The poll's findings appeared consistent with one taken about the same time in Iraq by USA Today, CNN and Gallup, which found that 57 percent of Iraqis wanted foreign troops to leave immediately.
Some senior Pentagon officials have a different view of the situation. "The truth is, the majority of the Iraqi people want democracy in Iraq to succeed and are positive about what the future holds, thanks in large part to the efforts of our servicemen and women," the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, said at a Senate hearing yesterday.
A poll released yesterday found that U.S. public opinion on Iraq also is shifting. "For the first time, a majority of Americans -- 51 percent -- say the war is not going well," the Pew Research Center reported. That is double the percentage who said that in January. But the poll said 53 percent of Americans favor keeping troops there until a stable Iraqi government is established.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22403-2004May12.html
I have a solution for everyone. Clearly, the problem is control of information. Let's just pack up Fox, kit and kaboodle, and move them to Bagdhad. It's win/win.
hi Blatham- Sounds like a plan! Then can we pack up Bush and move him back to Crawford? Oh please, please, please????
"Torture and violence is all these ragheads understand."
God! What an ugly SOB! Bush just gets uglier with every passing day!
An 82% disapproval rating is simply staggering. I think it's high time the US/British invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq be called what it is -- a failure.
It's interesting to me that the neocons and their supporters don't understand this. I mean, are they really that dense?
Sorry for the rhetoric -- it's early still.
infowarrior wrote:It's interesting to me that the neocons and their supporters don't understand this. I mean, are they really that dense?
Sorry for the rhetoric -- it's early still.
info
I think there is a range of smart and dumb in that crowd. But overall, they are a well educated and sophisticated group. Which goes to show that ideology can make even the smartest of us pretty blind. Wolfowitz, for example, is a very bright guy. I happen to think he's also an elitist of a very dangerous sort. His conviction that his own ideas are better than others' ideas justify deceit and secrecy of operation. As others have observed, he more closely resembles a Marxist than he does a traditional conservative.
"Wolfowitz, for example, is a very bright guy. I happen to think he's also an elitist of a very dangerous sort." blatham
Wolfowitz is pure, unadulterated evil. I'm 6'2" and a solid 200lbs. and I'd cross the street to avoid him. He travels in a dark cloud.
I've never put all that much weight on IQ. I've seen too many with developmental disabilities with more true, untainted, compassion and love than many with IQs over 150.
Deecups, It's not only Iraqis who are distrustful of the American occupation. The majority in all Arab countries mistrust us. Bush accomplished this feat in less than four years.
cicerone imposter- Bush has managed to alienate the whole world against us in 4 years. A tall order when you stop and think most of the world was on our side following 9/11.
Deecups36 wrote:cicerone imposter- Bush has managed to alienate the whole world against us in 4 years. A tall order when you stop and think most of the world was on our side following 9/11.
The "whole" world? Don't think so. We maintain a large coalition of countries who are actively participating in our liberation of Iraq.
as for many of the rest...
They were on our side as long as we didn't interfere with their honeypot of a deal with the oil-for-food program.
They were on our side until we decided enough was enough. we drew a line in the sand and then carried through.
McG
CI's claim is inappropriately worded in the absolute, but it is far more accurate than it's negation.
There is, for example, not a single European country where the majority of citizens approved of either the war or of Bush. Likewise England, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and many more. Israel may be the only country at odds. This has nowhere improved.
And that was not the case post 9-11. The goodwill was turned to bad will.
And oil for food, or business dealings with Sadaam does not explain these sentiments.
blatham:
The world can smell a turkey -- a dead turkey, and his name is George Bush.
info
Six months is a long time. We ought not to write the obit yet. The dems down there will be up against a level of organization and dedication to getting out the vote that probably the world has never seen before. These guys are good, and extraordinarily well linked and tied together. Then, I think we can expect legal challenges (such as Florida...Baker yelling about the danger to democracy from all the delays caused by legal challenges when, at the time he said that, every one of the legal challenges he referred to had been made by his own side) across the boards, not to mention rather more sneaky tricks such as the other stuff that happened down there.
I'll just add, for anyone who has doubts about the effectiveness of these guys...look at how much has had to go wrong - and really wrong - for Bush's re-election to be in doubt.
blatham:
Chief among the "sneaky trick" that have many people worried is the DieBold electronic voting machines scheduled to be in 80% of voting places by November.
Because they produce no paper trail, there is no way to audit their results, meaning in a large, Democratic-leaning city like mine (Seattle) can with the DieBold machines, produce a result showing Bush taking 58% of the vote.
Of course, this would never happen, but this is the sneaky sort of crap the GOP relies on nowadays to win elections. The fact the owner of DieBold is a Bush supporter just adds more worry to an already worrisome situation.
info
fishin will get pissed at me for this, but yeah, I think it could go that bad.
hi blatham- Why are you concerned with fishin'? I'm not and neither should you be.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace