US Is "The Greatest Threat To Peace In The World Today," New Poll Finds

Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

It has happened again: yet another international poll finds that the US is viewed by peoples around the world to be the biggest threat to world peace.

But, to start, let’s summarize the first-ever poll that had been done on this, back in 2013, which was the only prior poll on this entire issue, and it was the best-performed such poll: «An end-of-the-year WIN/Gallup International survey found that people in 65 countries believe the United States is the greatest threat to world peace», as the N.Y. Post reported on 5 January 2014. 

On 30 December 2013, the BBC had reported of that poll: «This year, first [meaning here, ‘for’] the first time, Win/Gallup agreed to include three questions submitted by listeners to [BBC’s] Radio 4's Today programme». And, one of those three listener-asked questions was phrased there by the BBC, as having been «Which country is the biggest threat to peace?» The way that WIN/Gallup International itself had actually asked this open-ended question, to 67,806 respondents from 65 countries, was: «Which country do you think is the greatest threat to peace in the world today?» #1, 24% of respondents, worldwide, volunteered that the US was «the greatest threat». #2 (the second-most-frequently volunteered ‘greatest threat’) was Pakistan, volunteered by 8%. #3 was China, with 6%. #s 4-7 were a four-way tie, at 5% each, for: Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, and North Korea. #s 8-10 were a three-way tie, at 4% each, for: India, Iraq, and Japan. #11 was Syria, with 3%. #12 was Russia, with 2%. #s 13-20 were a seven-way tie, at 1% each, for: Australia, Germany, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, South Korea, and UK.

The way that W/G itself had phrased this matter, in their highly uninformative press release for their year-end survey (which included but barely mentioned this finding, in it — as though this particular finding in their annual year-end poll, hardly even deserved to be mentioned), was: «The US was the overwhelming choice (24% of respondents) for the country that represents the greatest threat to peace in the world today. This was followed by Pakistan (8%), China (6%), North Korea, Israel and Iran (5%). Respondents in Russia (54%), China (49%) and Bosnia (49%) were the most fearful of the US as a threat». That’s all there was of it — W/G never devoted a press-release to the stunning subject of this particular finding, and they even buried this finding when mentioning it in their year-end press-release.

I had hoped that they would repeat this excellent global survey question every year (so that a trendline could be shown, in the global answers over time), but the question was unfortunately never repeated.

However, now, on August 1st of 2017, Pew Research Center has issued results of their polling of 30 nations in which they had surveyed, first in 2013, and then again in 2017, posing a less-clear but similar question (vague perhaps because they were fearing a similar type of finding — embarrassing to their own country, the US), in which respondents had been asked «Do you think that the United States’ power and influence is a major threat, a minor threat, or not a threat to (survey country)?» and which also asked this same question but regarding «China,» and then again but regarding «Russia,» as a possible threat instead of «United States». (This wasn’t an open-ended question; only those three nations were named as possible responses.)

On page 3 of their 32-page pdf is shown that the «major threat» category was selected by 35% of respondents worldwide for «US power and influence», 31% worldwide selected that for «Russia’s power and influence,» and also 31% worldwide said it for «China’s power and influence». However, on pages 23 and 24 of the pdf is shown the 30 countries that had been surveyed in this poll, in both 2013 and 2017, and most of these 30 nations were US allies; only Venezuela clearly was not. None of the 30 countries was an ally of either Russia or China (the other two countries offered as possibly being «a major threat»). And, yet, nonetheless, more respondents among the 30 sampled countries saw the US as «a major threat», than saw either Russia or China that way.

Furthermore, the trend, in those 30 countries, throughout that four-year period, was generally in the direction of an increase in fear of the US — increase in fear of the country that had been overwhelmingly cited in 2013 by people in 65 countries in WIN/Gallup’s poll, as constituting, in 2013, «the greatest threat to peace in the world today».

Consequently: though WIN/Gallup never repeated its question, the evidence in this newly released poll, from Pew, clearly suggests that the percentage of people in the 65 nations that WIN/Gallup had polled in 2013 who saw the US as being «the greatest threat to peace in the world today» would be even higher today than it was in 2013, when 24% of respondents worldwide volunteered the US as being the world’s most frightening country.

Perhaps people around the world are noticing that, at least since 2001, the US is wrecking one country after another: Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine. Which is next? Maybe Iran? Maybe Russia? Maybe Venezuela? Who knows?

And this country has just increased its ‘defense’ spending, which already is three times China’s, and nine times higher than Russia’s. Do the owners of America’s military-industrial complex own the US government, and own the US ‘news’media, to permit this rabid military to control the government’s budget, in a ‘democracy’?


The_Juggernaut sickavme (not verified) Tue, 08/08/2017 - 03:52 Permalink

When's the last time there was peace? If it ever existed, it was before 1776 so find another excuse for your problems you chickenshit motherfuckers.

And lmfao @ "none of the countries were allies of Russia or China." No shit? Well what allies do they have aside from Syria, Iran, and North Korea? The only thing that sucks more than the US government is this stupid article.

In reply to by sickavme (not verified)

Caught_Fish GUS100CORRINA Tue, 08/08/2017 - 03:59 Permalink

I cannot believe Australia made the list.If war started tomorrow we would send our airforce but the pilots off sick.Bazza and Bruce took the navy boat out fishing, only problem is, they took two eskys of beer and we doubt they will be back before the footy on Saturday.The army will be along shortly, they are getting outfitted with the latest flipflops. 

In reply to by GUS100CORRINA

Give Me Some Truth LindseyNarrate… (not verified) Tue, 08/08/2017 - 09:32 Permalink

And:Bombs don't always kill just bad guys, poll results show.And:America produces and drops more bombs than all other nations combined, says pollAnd:America is not actually an "exceptional" nation, world citizens say in recent pollAnd:'Mind your own business' and 'the Golden Rule' still popular in many countries, but not U.S.A, says recent poll 

In reply to by LindseyNarrate… (not verified)

historian40 Tue, 08/08/2017 - 02:59 Permalink

I grew up as a "if they don't like it,turn them into a glass parking lot" Republican guy.  I am no longer deluded to that extent.  i acknowledge we are occupied territory and are not the "good guys".

Give Me Some Truth historian40 Tue, 08/08/2017 - 09:53 Permalink

Re: bomb them into a parking lot ...It is encouraging that a fair number of people make such confessions and have changed their thinking. Another poster's confession:I supported the first Gulf War and the second Iraq War ... for about four or five months. My thinking was that, "the terrorists are going to get us. The only way they won't get us is if we go into their countries, take over, and change them for the better. That way there will be no terrorists born or developed. There will be no terrorists to come get us!"Then I started paying attention to Ron Paul, and I thought some more about what America had really "accomplished" in Vietnam and I pivoted 180 degrees.BTW, there are still terrorists. A lot more now than then actually. But even these terrorists are not much of a threat to me in the Hinterlands. I'm much more likely to be killed by a police officer or a snake bite or my wife - accidently or otherwise - than a terrorist.  Finally, it's bizarre I had these illogical views. I always believed in "limited government" and thought that "central planning" only produces the opposite result of what planners say they intend. Given these beliefs, why did I think that wars and occupations in several far-away countries would limit or reduce the size of government? And why did I think that the neocon "central planners" in Washington would do a bang-up job "planning" the activities of nations that speak different languages, practice a different religion, and don't even like us?It still befuddles me that "small-government conservatives" enthusiastically support all of these "nation-building" wars.  

In reply to by historian40

Give Me Some Truth Jack Oliver Tue, 08/08/2017 - 09:51 Permalink

Re: People are waking up ...Faster please! I've become convinced that the main purpose of the MSM is to keep people from "waking up." Their job is to conceal any "truth" that might make more people "wake up." They also advance and try to reinforce lies that continue the Status Quo. So: We get the "Russia is Evil" stories ad nauseumThe economy is great storiesNorth Korea is going to launch nuclear weapons at us any day now storiesWe NEVER get:"Are the economic stats bogus?" stories"Are gold and silver markets riggged?" storiesEtc. Etc. Summing up: The stories that do run are largely BS. The stories that do NOT run do not run because they might cause more people to question the entire corrupt, fraud-based system. 

In reply to by Jack Oliver

fbazzrea Give Me Some Truth Tue, 08/08/2017 - 10:14 Permalink

according to the Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center, a 10% population holding a committed unshakeable belief represents the tipping point for rapid adoption by the entire population. anything less than 10% is ineffective in changing the nation's mindset. however, playing out numerous different scenarios in the process consistently indicated 10% as the tipping point.power on, ZHers

In reply to by Give Me Some Truth

Ms No Tue, 08/08/2017 - 03:06 Permalink

Gallup is saying it's all about the US and that Hillary will still win.It's not the US it's banking globalism.  It has already covered most of the planet and leaders from every corner of the globe are in on it now.  They likely will Germany us and then bring "New World Order" out to replace the evil US empire.  I am okay if that happens at this point because I don't want to live with a world full of Communist idiot slaves anyway.  Globalism controls quite a few nuclear powers. 

Rebelrebel7 (not verified) Ms No Tue, 08/08/2017 - 03:44 Permalink

That's why they are focussed on North Korea and Venezuela! They are two countries which rejected the IMF, WTO,  World Bank, BIS,  and do not have privately owned Central Banks! We know that  it has nothing to do with communism or socialism because of China and scandalnavia!

In reply to by Ms No

Rebelrebel7 (not verified) Tue, 08/08/2017 - 03:18 Permalink

Hilarious graphic Tyler! I read this this morning and wondered how I didn't notice It, a coffeeless brain is a dangerous mind! It was your graphic!

Give Me Some Truth Uncle Skid Tue, 08/08/2017 - 09:58 Permalink

Re: U.S. government is a "threat" to my liberty ...I feel you, but technically this statement is not 100 percent correct. A "threat" is something that could or might happen, but hasn't happened yet.Our government has been attacking our liberties for a long, long time. This is not hypothetical. This said, our government is definitely a threat to take even MORE of our liberties. Theoretically, I guess, we could stop them, not that we will. 

In reply to by Uncle Skid

AurorusBorealus Tue, 08/08/2017 - 03:27 Permalink

Apparently, they did not poll South Americans.  I can tell you that approximately 90% of the population of South America views the U.S. as the greatest threat to global peace.  This is not a "scientific" survey, merely an informal one, but I am certain that the number is close to 90%.

historian40 Tue, 08/08/2017 - 04:01 Permalink

Who keeps attacking other nations, with no support of international law,l let alone our own "Law of the Land"?  I'm worried as a Texan, let alone someone from another nation.

LyLo Give Me Some Truth Tue, 08/08/2017 - 10:23 Permalink

We can't stop them from paying people to put on blue jeans and act like they are the voice of the public in front of the cameras.  Most blue collar types are too busy working to advocate vocally for/against any wars, so let's not fool ourselves that it is they doing the vocal advocacy.Take notice that the last time those advocating loudly for war won any national elections was 2004.  Look, we all know what Obama actually did, but Romney was loudly calling for larger and nastier wars while Obama pretended the whole campaign--with the help of a complicit media--that all the wars were basically finished and our bases in Iraq were the equivalent of Okinawa in the ME.  It's pretty much what fucked Hillary Clinton: it's hard to pretend to be an anti-war liberal when you personally helped start two ongoing foreign entanglements, and her completely ignoring the issue while Trump played up the 'peace w/ Russia/Syra' stance pushed any mild supporters she may have had into Trump/3rd party votes.Just wanted to point out that as far as the American people go, we're actually pretty much peaceniks/isolationists at this point.  There's some rumbling over ISIS, and retarded old people seem to want to depose Assad because CNN said so, but that's about it. TLDR:  Honestly I've never in my life witnessed such disgust by society at large with foreign involvement of all stripes.  This is being born out in the polls in blue collar states, even if the paid protesters getting lots of coverage don't agree.

In reply to by Give Me Some Truth

OliverAnd Tue, 08/08/2017 - 04:32 Permalink

NO!  The greatest threat to peace in the world yesterday, today and tomorrow is North Korea, China, Turkey and Iran.  The Chinese have created North Korea and any attack of North Korea may involve China to come to their rescue.  Iran and Turkey have been aiding each other trying to fulfill the Muslim Brotherhood's dream of creating a Caliphate with the latest military weapons, including nuclear bombs to invade and promote their version of Islam to nations even where their populations already practice Islam; imagine what they will do to nations where their populations do not practice Islam...  and all this instability is being promoted by Russia directly or indirectly by aiding and selling weapons to Turks, Iranians, Chinese and through China, North Korea as well.

LyLo rybo1 Tue, 08/08/2017 - 10:49 Permalink

Ugh, night crew leftovers.1.  We aren't a democracy--we are a Constitutional Republic.  The federal government is, in fact, supposed to guarantee every state has a Republican form of government.  The Federalist Papers argue that this is done through admittance to the US and approval of the state's constitution, but I say that we've basically burned the Federalist Papers as a source for legislative intent at this point, so fuck it: let's enforce the shit out of this. 2.  Democracy does, in fact, exist.  It was defined a really, really long time ago, and has been practiced as a form of government for thousands of years.  No need to make a mockery of it, as it is does a perfectly good job itself whenever in practice.  If you are curious how, the process was laid out a few years back by Plato in a book called The Repulic. Sorry, but my God the night crew here is cancer. 

In reply to by rybo1

spag Tue, 08/08/2017 - 04:43 Permalink

fuck me with a large pole.... isis is a major threat? seriously, if you give everyone of those mop heads a large sword and free reign to cut off as many heads they want, how many would they get through? a few million? climate change if its real is enough to kill billions. the deep state has won. war is peace, trump is clinton

Give Me Some Truth spag Tue, 08/08/2017 - 10:58 Permalink

Can anyone give me one example of "climate change" killing ONE person, much less millions or billions?You can't use tornadoes or hurricanes. As some may or may not know, these actually existed before "climate change" was "discovered," and anyway they have gone down in number. Same for droughts and floods. I also don't know of any nation or city that has been flooded by oceans yet. I have yet to read the headline: "Hundreds killed by climate change in Panama City Beach, Florida as sea-levels rise four inches - water seeps into lobby of Holiday Inn ..."If anything, "climate change" has saved lives - 'Tis a fact and stat that shan't be mentioned, but the world has actually had FEWER major hurricanes and tornadoes. Growing seasons - which feed people and prevent starvation - are longer now. If we have had fewer prolonged cold spells (which is debatable), this would have kept more people from freezing to death, fewer people would die from car accidents caused by icy roads, and fewer people would have slipped on icy sidewalks, etc.  But, yes, "climate change" is the new and government-approved "Boogie Man" of our day.  The government does have to have its scary monsters and hypothetical "crisis" to protect the masses from (and increase their level of control and power and confiscation of other people's money).

In reply to by spag