A survey has found that only a net positive eight per cent of people in nine non-western nations think the US treats their country with respect, while just over half say a world of multiple powers is a source of hope.
The Munich Security Conference said its exercise was designed to test growing cynicism about the West, particularly among middle powers who increasingly warn that the old order is being used to hold them back.
The US scored the lowest of four major powers in the measure of fair dealing, with its rating of positive just eight points higher than those answering negatively. Russia on this measure scored 13, China registered 22 and the Europeans 26.
Sixty-four per cent of all respondents felt violations of the rules and principles of the international order have recently been increasing. Asked for hope in a world where multiple powers hold sway, by implication not just a big four, a total of 51 per cent gave its backing.
MSC
The countries where the polling took place were lndia, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey and Brazil. There was some good news for the US and European nations, as 54 per cent of respondents believe democratic countries comply with global rules, while 26 per cent believe that of autocratic nations.
Overall, more people said the US did the most to ensure the international order benefits weaker or developing states, more than Europeans, China, Russia or any other.
Researchers said Washington and its partners face a dilemma in acknowledging the concerns of other countries but not becoming so self-critical that they play into the hands of their opponents.
“Western states have ramped up their discourse about the need to defend international rules, governments in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East appear to have become more outspoken about what they perceive as double standards,” the report said.
When asked to think about world politics, however, the respondents were more in favour of country-to-country links than international platforms. The question on whether their country should prioritise bilateral relations with other nations rather than invest in multilateral initiatives and international organisations was backed by 61 per cent.
On the eve of the annual United Nations General Assembly meetings there was some hope for those who support an international architecture of laws and organisations. When people’s views were sought on whose values and needs international rules represent, 72 per cent agreed they are the principles needed by most countries.
The poll was launched to test the limits of what the Munich Security Conference worries is revisionism designed to debase the international order since the end of the Cold War.
“Some governments accusing the transatlantic partners of double standards are not primarily concerned with the future of the rules-based international order; rather, they seek to eliminate international rules and principles,” it said.
Gaza outrage
Sophie Eisentraut, a researcher with the Munich Security Conference, said the West must address this landscape by being more consistent in how it backs up international law.
“I argue that front and centre should be efforts to reduce inconsistencies that touch upon the most sensitive areas of international law, especially those associated with the protection of civilians and basic human rights, the ones that are clearly part of the global outrage around the war in Gaza,” she said.
“The second suggestion is that western countries need to be more honest when their capacity to be consistent hits its limits, and that also includes abandoning their black-and-white depiction of rule-breaking autocracies on one side and rule-abiding democracies on the other.”
The responses to the survey paint a mixed picture of western standing in the world and the figures also show limited traction for the narrative promoted by the revisionist powers.
“While the West has a lot of homework to do, the data also suggests that the people polled at least do not subscribe to Russia's and China's narrative that universally applicable principles are only a western illusion, and it also suggests that the overall challenge is really one of better implementing, not of replacing existing international rules,” she said.
