Iraqi Public Opinion about Iraq: Wishing for a Poll Question

Now that the security situation has improved so much in Iraq, I am keeping a sharp eye out for the next poll of the Iraqi people. The media used to conduct such polls on regular basis in their righteous zeal to instruct the world public about the evils of the illegal American invasion and subsequent incompetent occupation. Initially, such polls included a question that I always considered to be the most important one of all because, once the answer was understood, the nature of the debate changed. The answer given to this question never made any sense to opponents of the invasion, and media stories about these polls invariably focused on the answers to other questions (such as whether Iraqis enjoyed seeing attacks on American forces). The question of most interest to me was always this one:

Compared to the time before the war in spring 2003, are things overall in your life much better now, somewhat better, about the same, somewhat worse, or much worse?

I like this question because many believe that we should be apologizing to the Iraqi people for what we have done to their country (a point that was often made on Air America, for example -- back when I could get that show). So far as I know, the last time the question was asked was in a BBC poll conducted in March of 2007. Let me remind you of how things were going back then:


As you can see, the security situation was still close to the worst it ever was. Here is how the Iraqi people answered that question, even then:


In March of 2007, 43% thought life was better (14% much better + 29% somewhat better), whereas 36% thought that life was worse (8% much worse + 28% somewhat worse). In other words, even when violence was at its worst, more Iraqis indicated that life was better under those conditions that it was under Saddam Hussein. Can you imagine how the Iraqi people would answer that question if it were put to them today, now that violence has decreased to unthinkably low levels? Now that Sunnis have joined Shiites in working to maintain security in Iraq? Imagine for a moment that Iraqis would overwhelmingly report that life is better now than when the country was held in the iron grip of a genocidal dictator. Further imagine that being the top story in the news one day. Finally, imagine a poll of the American people. Pollsters like to ask Americans this question:


The fact that most Americans believe that the invasion of Iraq was wrong makes sense to me given that it is only in recent weeks that they have begun to appreciate that we have won the war over there. In addition, I feel sure that Americans are unaware of the fact that Iraqis declared themselves to be better off with their new democracy than they were under the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein even when sectarian violence was spiraling out of control. In addition, Americans don't really appreciate the decisive role played by al Qaeda in Iraq, and they certainly do not appreciate the fact that al Qaeda's anti-Shiite suicide bombing campaign and their ignominious defeat in Iraq has cost them dearly in the eyes of Muslims the world over, as this Pew Global Attitudes survey reveals:



Things have gotten even worse for al Qaeda since that time, so the next poll may show even less confidence in Osama bin laden as a result of his failed effort in Iraq.

I can't help but wonder how many Americans would say that the invasion was the wrong thing to do even though (a) we won the war, (b) al Qaeda's worldwide reputation has been destroyed as a result of its failed efforts against us in Iraq, (c) violence in Iraq has now dropped to very low levels (not much different from the level of violence seen in, say, Mexico), and (d) a huge majority of Iraqis say that their lives are better now compared to when they were ruled by a genocidal dictator (which is what I assume they'd say if asked now). If they understood all this, would Americans really say, no, better to have the genocidal dictator still in control in Iraq and al Qaeda still glorified throughout the Muslim world. Perhaps they would, but I'd like to know.

Some will undoubtedly think along these lines: "oh sure, al Qaeda destroyed its worldwide reputation, but what about America's reputation? It has been destroyed as well."

No it hasn't. Even France (like Germany before it and Italy after it) has elected a pro-American leader. Moreover, the welfare of America is not dependent on people saying how much they like America in opinion polls. Also, such polls will undoubtedly improve now that we have elected Barack Obama ("problem" fixed, simple as that). That improvement in world opinion will make people around the world feel better (which is good) but will do nothing tangible for America, just as their negative opinion was inconsequential (and our negative opinion of the French, for example, was equally inconsequential for them). By contrast, al Qaeda depends on the good will of Muslims around the world for its very survival. They lost that good will in Iraq. Now they've lost it in most Muslim nations. As a result, they are spending most of their time fighting Pakistani security forces and dodging missiles fired from Predator drones in the badlands of Pakistan. And the tribes of Pakistan are beginning to turn on them as well.

In any case, when another poll of the Iraqi people was taken in September of 2007, here is how the story was presented by the BBC:

US surge has failed - Iraqi poll

About 70% of Iraqis believe security has deteriorated in the area covered by the US military "surge" of the past six months, an opinion poll suggests.
The survey for the BBC, ABC News and NHK of more than 2,000 people across Iraq also suggests that nearly 60% see attacks on US-led forces as justified.

This rises to 93% among Sunni Muslims compared with 50% for Shia.

The findings come as the top US commander in Iraq, Gen David Petraeus, prepares to address Congress.

That is, the surge has failed, so you can ignore anything that General Petraeus says that might indicate otherwise. At about the same time, a similar message was being sent by Moveon.org, who referred to Petraeus as "General Betray Us" because of the ostensible lies he was about to tell Congress regarding the apparent success off the troop surge.

Missing from this poll was question #2 from the poll conducted 6 months earlier in March of 2007 (i.e., the one that asked about how life in Iraq is now compared to the time before the invasion). The question was missing again in the poll they conducted in March of 2008. Thus, I expect the question to be missing in polls conducted from here on out, and that's really too bad. It would be worth having direct evidence that the Iraqi people overwhelmingly consider themselves to be better off now than they were under the iron grip of a genocidal madman.

UPDATE: Speaking of al Qaeda's declining fortunes:

CIA head says bin Laden isolated, fighting to survive

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence agencies believe Osama bin Laden is isolated from al Qaeda and spending much of his energy merely surviving, the head of the CIA said on Thursday.

CIA Director Michael Hayden said hunting down bin Laden remains his agency's priority.

"He is putting a lot of energy into his own survival -- a lot of energy into his own security," Hayden said in a speech at the Atlantic Council in Washington.

"In fact, he appears to be largely isolated from the day-to-day operations of the organization he nominally heads," he said.

In recent weeks, there have been several U.S. missile strikes by unmanned drones around the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

During the recent presidential campaign, Barack Obama claimed that al Qaeda was stronger than ever. Americans (like most of the mainstream media reporters who educate them) are so informed that they actually believed his preposterous assertion.