Follow us on social

google cta
Poll: Middle income Global South really likes China

Poll: Middle income Global South really likes China

Not so much among high-earners in other parts of Asia

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Middle-income countries of the Global South hold significantly more favorable views of China and its influence than those held by high-income countries of North America, Europe, and Northeast Asia, according to newly released findings of a poll of 34 countries released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center.

The survey, the latest in an annual series by the Pew Global Attitudes project, found that a median of 56% of respondents in 17 middle-income nations across Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and Asia held an overall “positive” view of China.

That contrasted sharply with a median of 24% of respondents in 18 high-income countries (including the United States) who shared that assessment. The only exception in the high-income group was Singapore, where 67% of respondents said their view of China was “positive.”

The survey also found a sharp divide in views of China’s influence on global peace and security between respondents in India, Japan and South Korea on the one hand and respondents in six smaller countries of South and Southeast Asia. Solid majorities in the latter group agreed that Beijing contributed “a great deal” or “a fair amount” to peace and security, while large majorities in the former group rated Beijing’s contribution as “not too much” or “not at all.”

The poll, which interviewed more than 44,000 respondents across 34 countries, excluding the United States, between January and May, is the latest in an annual series dating back more than two decades. In addition to Singapore, India, Japan, and South Korea, the countries surveyed in the Asia-Pacific region included Australia, Bangladesh, Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Thailand.

In Europe, representative samples of respondents were polled in France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, Spain, and the UK. In the Americas, the poll covered Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Canada, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru, while in sub-Saharan Africa, it surveyed opinion in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa. Respondents in Israel, Tunisia, and Turkey were also interviewed.

The latest release found that the United States enjoys more favorable views than China, both in high-income countries where a median of 53% view the U.S. as “positive” and in middle-income countries where a median of 61% of respondents said they held a “positive” view.

In Malaysia, Singapore, Tunisia and Turkey, more people held a positive view of China than the U.S., while views were roughly evenly split among respondents in Bangladesh, Greece, Nigeria, Peru, South Africa, Sri Lanka, and Thailand.

One key finding of the latest survey makes clear that the perception of China’s global economic influence is now well established. In 10 of the 13 countries where respondents were asked both in 2019 and in 2024 about the impact of China on their own country’s economy, a significantly larger share said China has a “great deal of impact” than said so five years ago.

As to the nature of that impact, however, a median of 47% of respondents said in middle-income countries that it was “positive,” while 29% assessed it as “negative.” In the 18 high-income countries (including the U.S.), on the other hand, a median of 28% described China’s economic influence as positive, while 57% said they viewed it as “negative.” U.S. respondents were the most negative.

Of the countries whose respondents were also asked to assess China’s economic impact on their country in 2019, Pew found that views have generally become more negative, notably in Argentina, Brazil, Israel, Japan, South Korean, and Tunisia.

Asked about their views on the conduct of Chinese companies in their countries, respondents in middle-income countries were mostly positive. A median of 7 % of respondents in nine such countries said they held generally positive views about these companies’ effect on the local economy, while a 63% median said the companies worked to protect the environment; and a 57% median said they treated local workers fairly.

At least two out of every three respondents in Thailand, Kenya, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka gave Chinese companies positive marks (“very” or “somewhat well”) in all three areas, while respondents in Nigeria, the Philippines, and South Africa were more reserved. While around half of Ghanaian and Indian respondents said the companies’ operations were generally good for the economy, they were more critical about the companies’ environmental practices and how they treated local workers.

Among the 10 Asian-Pacific countries surveyed, majorities or pluralities of respondents expressed concern about territorial disputes between China and its neighbors.

Respondents in the Philippines, where tensions with China over the Spratley Islands have, if anything, increased since the poll was completed, 91% of respondents said they were either “very” (65%) or “somewhat” (25%) concerned about Manila’s conflict with Beijing.

Nearly nine of ten respondents in South Korea and Japan also expressed concern – 57% in each country said they were “very concerned.” Four out of 10 respondents in Australia and three of four respondents in Malaysia also expressed concern – 36% in each said they were “very concerned.” Seven of ten respondents in India, which also has a territorial dispute with China in the Himalayas, expressed concern – 44% said they were “very concerned.”

By contrast, 61% of Thai respondents said they were “not concerned,” while pluralities in Singapore and Bangladesh said they were “somewhat concerned.”


Chinatown Street Market during Chinese New Year in Singapore. (Derek Teo/Shutterstock)

google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Trump MBS
Top image credit: President Donald Trump participates in a coffee ceremony with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman Al Saud at the Royal Court Palace in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Tuesday, May 13, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump courts Saudi at the risk of US, Middle East security

Middle East

As Washington prepares for a visit this week to the White House by Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman (MBS), reports indicate that it could be the occasion for the announcement of a U.S.-Saudi security pact, along the lines of a recent security commitment announced by President Trump for Saudi Arabia’s one-time regional rival, Qatar.

The Qatar agreement commits the United States to take “all lawful and appropriate measures — including diplomatic, economic, and, if necessary, military — to defend the interests of the United States and of the State of Qatar and to restore peace and stability.”

keep readingShow less
Trump and Putin on phone
Top photo credit: Donald Trump (White House photo) and Vladimir Putin (Office of the Russian Federation President)
US-Russia talks

A Trump offer that Putin cannot refuse

Europe

Along Ukraine’s eastern frontline, the question is not if Russia will gain full control of Pokrovsk, a key location on Ukraine’s “fortress belt,” but when.

The city’s collapse will be a strategic loss for Ukraine and a tactical win for Russia, but it won’t bring an end to the war closer. This is because none of the key stakeholders is ready to stop fighting. Worse, the coming months could be the war’s most dangerous, with desperation creeping into Kyiv’s upper ranks and nuclear saber-rattling from the United States and Russia on the rise.

keep readingShow less
ideon Sa'ar
Top image credit: 02.07.2025, Tallinn. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar met his Estonian counterpart Margus Tsahkna (Eesti 200) in Tallinn. Photo: Martin Pedaja/Postimee via REUTERS CONNECT

Baltics' big bear hug of Israel is a strategic blunder

Europe

As the European Union struggles to agree on a coherent response to Israel’s war on Gaza, Estonia’s and Latvia’s foreign ministers recently warmly welcomed their Israeli counterpart, Gideon Sa’ar.

This diplomatic embrace, occurring as Israel stands accused before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and International Criminal Court (ICC) of crimes against humanity and plausible acts of genocide, reveals a profound and damaging hypocrisy. It is also a strategic blunder.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.