48. Memorandum From the Director of the United States Information Agency
(Reinhardt) to Secretary of
State Vance1
SUBJECT
- Public Opinion on the Human Rights Issue
You might be interested in the attached briefing note reporting on public
opinion on the human rights issue, drawn from a recent USIA-commissioned poll in Great Britain,
France, Germany, Canada and Japan.
I should note that to be suitable for a general opinion survey, the questions
were kept simple, and did not explore the ramifications of the issue in
relation to other foreign policy questions. Therefore it is not possible to
interpret the results as a full endorsement, in public opinion, of the way
President Carter has handled this
issue. But we found strong support for the general principle of speaking out
on human rights.
[Page 133]
Attachment
Briefing Note Prepared in the Office of Research,
United States Information Agency2
Washington, April 29, 1977
FOREIGN PUBLIC OPINION ON U.S. ADVOCACY OF HUMAN RIGHTS
In mid-April, a majority in Germany (63%) and roughly half of the general
public in four other major industrial democracies were aware of
“statements by the U.S. in the past few months criticizing violations of
human rights by the U.S.S.R. and other countries.”
Contrary to the misgivings expressed by some Western leaders and
commentators about the risks of injecting a “moral challenge” into
foreign policy, the President’s statements on human rights have struck a
responsive chord among the more informed public. Among those aware of
the U.S. position, majorities believed pronouncements on human rights to
be “a good idea.”
Approval of U.S. Statements on Human Rights
| Britain |
France |
Germany |
Canada |
Japan |
| 65% |
68% |
79% |
69% |
55% |
Only in Britain did an appreciable proportion (30%) disapprove.
Similar large majorities of the more informed in the Western
democracies—ranging from 61% in Canada to 78% in Germany—thought
outspoken advocacy of human rights by “other Western leaders” would also
be a good thing. In Japan, the level of those expressing an opinion was
characteristically much lower, but the margin of approval for other
leaders speaking out on the issue was better than two-to-one (36% vs.
15%).
