NEW YORK CITY -- Americans see a world of growing dangers, few solutions and little in U.S. foreign policy that seems to be working, according to the latest Public Agenda Confidence in U.S. Foreign Policy Index, released today by Public Agenda in cooperation with Foreign Affairs. The Foreign Policy Index tracks Americans' views on 25 overarching international issues.

With this edition of the Index, Public Agenda introduces the new Anxiety Indicator, which measures the public's overall comfort level with the country's current international position and policies. The Fall 2006 Anxiety Indicator stands at 130, well above the neutral point of 100 and suggests that a significant majority of the public is feeling anxious and insecure about the country's place in the world. The public is also quite worried about many specific aspects of the nation's foreign policy, and may be at or near a tipping point on issues like Iraq, dependence on foreign oil and protecting our borders from illegal immigration, among others.

This level of public anxiety, combined with Americans' disapproval of the nation's current course, is not something leaders can just dismiss, said Public Agenda Chairman Daniel Yankelovich. It's not just one event or one specific policy that is worrying peopleit's Iraq, it's the danger of a terrorist attack, it's energy dependence, it our diminished reputation around the world, it's the rise of violent Muslim extremism. People see the country in trouble on multiple fronts.

The Anxiety Indicator number is derived from calculations using results of five survey questions which will be asked consistently in future editions of the Foreign Policy Index. In this edition, the results of those questions are:

• 83 percent say they are worried about the way things are going for the United States in world affairs (35 percent worry a lot, with an additional 48 percent saying they worry somewhat.)
• 79 percent say the world is becoming more dangerous for the United States and the American people
• 69 percent say the United States is doing a fair or poor job in creating a more peaceful and prosperous world
• 64 percent say the rest of the world sees the United States negatively
• 58 percent say U.S. relations with the rest of the world are on the wrong track

The Indicator is plotted on a scale of 0 to 200, where 0 is the most secure and 200 the most anxious. A rating of 100 is neutral, a midpoint neither anxious nor confident. (see methodology in the full report for details on how the Anxiety Indicator is calculated, available online at: http://www.publicagenda.org/reports/public-agenda-confidence-us-foreign-policy-index-fall-2006.

America the Arrogant?

The public cares deeply about how our nation is perceived abroad87 percent believe it is a threat to U.S. national security when the rest of the world sees the United States in a negative light. While Americans still believe the United States is perceived around the world as free and democratic and as a country of opportunity for everyone (81% for both) the numbers of Americans who believe we are seen as arrogant (78%) are almost at the same level.

Current Strategies Not Working, Majorities Say

The public does not have confidence in the strategies our nation is currently pursuing to increase the county's security. Most Americans are skeptical of actively creating democracies as an important foreign policy goal. American attitudes toward democracy are clear and highly nuanced:

• A majority (52%) believes that democracies do reduce conflict and violence
• But an even larger majority (64%) believes that democracy can't be imposed and that countries have to be ready for it
• A mere 20% think that we can do a lot to create a democratic Iraq, or that actively creating democracies should be a very important goal for the United States (24%)

Strikingly few Americans give high grades for U.S. execution of most foreign policy goals. Fewer than 1 out of 3 Americans gives the United States a grade of A or B in:

Americans Want Energy Independence, and Its Not about Gas Prices

Despite a nationwide fall in gas prices, the public is increasingly troubled by the nation's dependence on foreign oil and views it as a threat to national security. The concern goes well beyond the personal toll high gas prices are exacting on families. Rather, people are recognizing the larger problems that result from U.S. energy dependence.

The public's evolving understanding of the world politics of oil can be seen in the responses to several questions in the Foreign Policy Index. Fifty-seven percent say that becoming less dependent on other countries for our supply of energy is a strategy that would enhance the nation's security a great deal, That's the same number who felt that way in January, when gas prices were higher. Of the 13 strategies we asked about, only improving the effectiveness of our intelligence operations (62%) was seen by more people as an effective strategy for improving national security.

Energy dependence is an area where Americans expect government action. An increasing number say it is realistic to expect the government to maintain a stable supply of oil at a reasonable price (up to 41% from 35%). While the majority doesn't hold the government accountable for price stability, it does expect the government to pursue an effective strategy to free the nation from the constraints of foreign energy dependence. Most (87%) say the government can do something or a lot to decrease the dependence on other countries for the supply of energy (51% say a lot). When it comes to holding the government accountable, energy dependence is higher than any other issue we asked about.

The Fertile Crescent Harvests Bounty of Doubts

Events in the Middle East have given the public many reasons to worryand based on multiple results from the extensive survey, it is clear that majorities of Americans are dissatisfied with how things are going. While the public's worries remained steady on several fronts and even decreased slightly in a few areas, there were notable increases in concern on issues linked to relations with the Muslim world and terrorism.

The number of those who worry a lot that there may be growing hatred of the United States in Muslim countries has increased by 8 percentage points since January (from 34 to 42%). Those who worry a lot about the rise of Islamic extremism around the world has increased by 7 percentage points (from 31 to 38%). And about the same number (37%) worry a lot that the actions in the Mideast are aiding the recruitment of terrorists. (Significantly, this was before the controversy over the National Intelligence Estimate concluding that the Iraq war has increased terrorist recruiting.)

Global Development: Does Helping Out Make Us Safer?

Americans like the idea of humanitarian work, but they don't seem sold on it as a security strategy or as a moral obligation for a wealthy nation. Development issues directly related to health and disaster relief get the strongest support, with clear majorities considering them very important to U.S. policy. For example, strong majorities consider cooperating with other countries on problems like the environment or control of diseases (73%); helping other countries when they are struck by natural disasters (71%); and assisting countries in developing clean water supplies (69%) as very important goals.

Broader development goals not directly related to physical well-being get less support, such as improving the treatment of women in other countries (60%) and helping people in poor countries to get an education (54%). Helping poor countries move out of poverty was ranked very important by just under half, 46 percent, which was nonetheless a 6 point increase from January (40%).

But few said development goals would strengthen the nation's security a great deal. For example, minorities said the United States would strengthen national security by providing health care in countries where contagious diseases are a threat (42%), creating policies that support equal rights and better educational opportunities for women in Muslim countries (32%), building large projects such as roads, dams, and hospitals in developing countries (28%) and doing more to help Muslim countries develop economically (20%).

Calculating the Anxiety Indicator and Recognizing Tipping Points

Public Agenda's study probes much deeper than typical polls, examining core strategies and beliefs about America's role in the world and how much the public holds the government accountable on specific issues. Supported with funding from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Ford Foundation, the index covers more than 25 different issues through more than 110 different survey questions and is to be issued biannually. Public Agenda's foreign policy survey has been fielded three times, first in June 2005, again in January 2006 and most recently September 2006.

In addition to the Anxiety Indicator, the Confidence in U.S. Foreign Policy Index also identifies specific issues where public opinion may be reaching a tipping point, where attitudes have reached such a high level of concern that political leaders ignore it at their peril. Public Agenda's considers a concern to be at a tipping point when surveys show a substantial majority of the public is seriously concerned about a problem and believes the government has the power to address it.

Recognizing the tipping point is like knowing at what temperature liquid turns to steamwe know intuitively that the temperature is rising, but accurately gauging the variables allows us to better understand how close we are to boiling over. This reading of the Foreign Policy Anxiety Indicator tells me that the Administration better have their pot holders handy, Public Agenda President Ruth A. Wooden said.

Sampling Methodology

Public Agenda regularly interviews a nation-wide random sample of adult Americans to track the changing state of mind of average Americans toward foreign policy what worries people most, where they support or resist present foreign policy, what their priorities are, and what foreign policy initiatives make sense to them. This third iteration of the study was based on interviews with a national random sample of 1,001 adults over the age of 18 between September 5 and September 18, 2006. It covered over 25 different issues in more than 110 different survey questions. The margin of error for the overall sample is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. Full survey results can be found at www.publicagenda.org or www.confidenceinforeignpolicy.org.

Public Agenda is a nonprofit organization dedicated to nonpartisan public policy research. Founded in 1975 by former U.S. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance and Daniel Yankelovich, the social scientist and author, Public Agenda is well respected for its influential public opinion surveys and balanced citizen education materials. Its mission is to inject the public's voice into crucial policy debates. Public Agenda seeks to inform leaders about the public's views and to engage citizens in discussing complex policy issues.