[lbo-talk] new Gallup poll of Iraq

Doug Henwood dhenwood at panix.com
Wed Apr 28 13:53:48 PDT 2004


[I'm curious how the skeptics about the last poll will react to this one.]

April 28, 2004 Gallup Poll of Iraq: Liberated, Occupied or in Limbo?

by Richard Burkholder, International Bureau Chief

More than a year after the U.S.-led invasion -- and seven months after Gallup reported the results of the first scientific survey of opinion in Baghdad -- much has changed in Iraq.

Gallup, in partnership with CNN and USA Today, conducted 3,444 70-minute, in-home, in-person interviews with a nationally representative sample of Iraqis in 350 separate locations throughout the country in late March and early April 2004. The resulting data offer a wealth of insight on the current climate of opinion among Iraqis nationwide.

While 61% of all Iraqis believe that Saddam Hussein's ouster was "worth" any hardships they have personally suffered since the invasion, opinion is sharply divided on whether the country itself is better off. Forty-two percent believe the country is in a better situation than before the invasion (31% "somewhat better off," 11% "much better off"), but nearly as many (39%) hold a contrary assessment (24% "somewhat worse off," 15% "much worse off"). Similarly, the third of Iraqis (33%) who say the coalition invasion of Iraq has "done more good than harm" are offset by a larger proportion (46%) who say that thus far, the invasion has "done more harm than good."

[...]

Significant Support Voiced for Attacks on American Troops

While less than a third (29%) of all Iraqis say they feel attacks on U.S. forces are either somewhat (17%) or completely (13%) justifiable from a moral standpoint, an additional one in five Iraqis (22%) feel such attacks are "sometimes justified, sometimes not." Only a quarter of all Iraqis say they view attacks on U.S. forces as "completely" unjustified.

[...]

When Gallup polled a representative cross section of Baghdad's residents last summer, nearly two-thirds (64%) of Baghdad's residents told us they thought attacks on U.S. forces were either somewhat (22%) or completely (42%) morally unjustified. Seven months later, the proportion of Baghdadis willing to condemn such attacks has fallen to just half (33%) its previous level (somewhat unjustifiable: 19%, completely unjustifiable: 14%), with the proportion willing to offer a blanket condemnation falling by two-thirds.

[...]

U.S. Troops -- Liberators, a "Necessary Evil" or Neither?

Iraqis' attitudes toward foreign troops have also hardened considerably. When asked how they now view coalition forces, 71% of all Iraqis choose the description "mostly as occupiers" while 19% say "mostly as liberators"; another 8% volunteer that they view coalition troops as both occupiers and liberators. Within Iraq's 15 non-Kurdish governorates, just 7% say they view coalition forces mostly as liberators, while 81% view them primarily as an occupying force.

In contrast, when Iraqis are asked how they viewed coalition forces "at the time of the invasion last spring," sentiment is evenly divided. Forty-three percent say they initially viewed coalition forces as liberators, while an identical percentage say they viewed them as occupiers from the outset (9% saw them as playing both roles).

Perceptions of U.S. forces' conduct are negative, and appear to be hardening -- though just 6% of those interviewed say they (or members of their households) have had personal contact with American troops. Only about a third of Iraqis say they think U.S. forces have conducted themselves fairly (24%) or very (10%) well, while nearly 6 in 10 say fairly (29%) or very (29%) badly.

When Gallup asked this same question in Baghdad last year, positive appraisals of the conduct of U.S. forces (48% fairly well, 10% very well) were twice as common as negative ones (20% fairly badly, 9% very badly). Now that situation has been completely reversed: Baghdad's residents are currently eight times as likely to say that U.S. forces have conducted themselves fairly (44%) or very (37%) badly as to say they have acted fairly (9%) or very (less than 1%) well.

[...]

Nevertheless, ambivalence remains regarding the likely short-term effect of any prompt withdrawal of coalition forces.

While more than half (57%) say they think the U.S. and British forces ought to leave in the next few months, a slim majority (51%) also agree with the notion that recent attacks (against civilians) serve to "emphasize the need for the continued presence of coalition forces in Iraq." And despite their concern for what they regard as excessive civilian casualties during coalition clashes with insurgents, far more Iraqis say that "if the coalition left Iraq today" they would feel less safe (53%), than say they would feel more safe (28%). Not surprisingly in view of the recent spate bombing attacks, Iraqis widely believe the conditions for creating internal peace and stability have worsened (54%) rather than improved (25%) in recent months.

[...]



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list