Surveys Show Broad Support for U.N. Intervention in Darfur

Brookings panel discusses global public opinion poll results

By Aviva Altmann and Bruce Greenberg
Washington File Staff Writers

Washington – The results of two polls – one taken in the United States and the other in eight African countries -- show substantial public dissatisfaction with their governments' responses to the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, Sudan.  They also show differences in how the polled groups perceive how the crisis should be handled militarily with Africans primarily favoring United Nations intervention while Americans, although supporting U.N. intervention, also favored contributing U.S. and NATO forces to such an operation.

The public opinion surveys, released June 29, were conducted by two organizations: GlobeScan Incorporated, a global public opinion research forum with offices in Toronto, London and Washington; and PIPA (the Program on International Policy Attitudes), based at the University of Maryland, which collaborated with Knowledge Networks, a market research firm in Menlo Park, California.

Steven Kull, director of the Center on Policy Attitudes, characterized the poll taken in Africa as a “unique opportunity to have African data [on the Darfur crisis],” because there are no other polls in the United States surveying African opinion on this matter.

On a panel at the Brookings Institution, Kull was joined by fellow researchers Simon Jimenez and Lloyd Hetherington; by Leonard Robinson, president and chief executive officer of the African Society of the National Summit on Africa; and by John Prendergast, special adviser to the International Crisis Group.

In the survey on the Darfur question, which GlobeScan conducted with 10,809 Africans from eight countries (Angola, Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania and Zimbabwe), 65 percent said the U.N. Security Council “should have the right to authorize the use of military force to prevent severe human rights violations such as genocide.” 

They chose intervention by the United Nations over all other international entities, including the African Union.  Thirty percent favored U.N. forces to take part in an intervention, with only 22 percent supporting the African Union troops.  Only five percent endorsed the idea of unilateral intervention by developed countries.

According to executive vice president of GlobeScan, Lloyd Hetherington, this indicates that the United Nations has the highest level of government trust among Africans.

The study also showed that African awareness of the situation in Darfur is fairly low, said the authors, with only 36 percent indicating they had heard or read a "great deal or a fair amount" about the conflict in Darfur.

The poll conducted by PIPA with 812 respondents in the United States showed that 61 percent of those surveyed also felt the best solution for the crisis in Darfur is for the United Nations to “step in with military force to stop the violence in Darfur.”  While definitely supporting a multilateral approach, a majority of the Americans also favored contributing U.S. and NATO forces to such an operation.

Politically, Democrats and Republicans were almost equally in favor of intervention in Darfur.  Bipartisan support for sending U.N. troops to Darfur was strong -- 67 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of Democrats; as was support for contributing U.S. troops to the U.N. forces -- 57 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Democrats polled.

The wording that was used in the polling affected the results significantly.  In a study done by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations in 2004, participants were asked if they would favor sending U.S. troops “to stop a government from committing genocide,” which 75 percent favored.  Once the word “genocide” in reference to Darfur was removed, public support for intervention decreased by 6 points, indicating that if Americans believe that severe human-rights abuses are occurring, especially genocide, they are more willing to provide military support.

Robinson noted this reaction, “When you use the term ‘genocide,’ there is overwhelming support to do something [about it.]”  He likened the situation in Darfur to similar human crises of the recent past in Rwanda, Liberia and Somalia and attributed the American reluctance to act in both Rwanda and Darfur to what he called the “humiliation we experienced in Somalia.”

John Prendergast, a specialist in African affairs, suggested that the best solution to the problem in Darfur would be to send a high-ranking American diplomat to the peace discussions in Abuja, Nigeria, to re-invigorate the talks.  There is a need for diplomatic support for these military interventions, he said.