'None have called me directly, but I know that indirectly, they're not giving me rave reviews,' Mr Prestowitz said during a recent stop-over in Hong Kong.

That is hardly surprising. When he speaks of Mr Bush's chances of winning November's election, he could well be a stalwart of the opposition Democratic Party.

If front-running Democratic contender John Kerry won, his administration would be rhetorically less strident and objectionable, Mr Prestowitz contended. The Democrat Vietnam war veteran had had substantial exposure to a non-American culture, been at the centre of political life as a senator for 19 years and taken time to become informed about foreign policy. Before becoming president, Mr Bush had spent only a few days outside the US.

'I have to believe that a president like Kerry, who has had a deep exposure of other cultures, would have a better understanding of relative shifts and balances and costs and benefits,' he said.

That did not mean there was no hope for Mr Bush, though. A second Bush presidency would, he suggested, be less adventurous and more multilateralist in response to the realities it faced.

Mr Prestowitz's views are based on him having spent a lot of time overseas, looking at the US from the outside. His resultant observations were the basis for Rogue Nation: American Unilateralism and the Failure of Good Intentions - an attempt to explain to Americans why they were so disliked by some nations in the wake of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Fluent in Japanese, Dutch, German and French, he worked in the US, Asia, Europe and Latin America for multinational American companies before joining the Reagan administration. He led many US trade and investment negotiations in China, Japan, Europe and Latin America.

Through the right-wing Washington-based think-tank he founded and his writings, he has become widely considered as an expert on international trade and US foreign policy - issues for which he feels the Bush administration lacks understanding, leading to a worsening of his nation's international standing.

'We remember September 11 as we rightly should, but we tend to forget September 12,' Mr Prestowitz said. 'That was significant because there was an incredible outpouring of sympathy for the US around the world, which basically was saying we don't hate you. That didn't get as much attention in the US as it should have.

'What if, on September 13, Bush had ... called world leaders to his ranch to give his personal thanks and formulate a strategy?'

Instead, the missed opportunity and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq led to a breakdown in long-standing alliances and an escalation of anti-Americanism in Muslim and Arab countries.

But such sentiment was not entirely the fault of Mr Bush and his officials. It had been brewing since the end of the cold war in the late 1980s. Coalitions had become alliances of the willing and the US had been unwilling to participate in international treaties ranging from bans on small arms to the rights of women and children. There had been double standards on trade and a perceived bias towards Israel in the conflict with the Palestinians.

'We don't play well with others - we have a hard time engaging in any kind of an agreement that diminishes sovereignty,' Mr Prestowitz said. 'The message that this sends to others is one set of rules for us and another set for you. But don't worry about that, because we're nice guys and have good intentions. It's not a good way to win friends and influence people.'

Even hardened Bush supporters cannot argue with such logic. At a recent speech in Houston, the heartland of support for the president, an audience of 400 were not as sceptical as might be expected. 'Their reaction was 'tell me more - we don't agree with everything you're saying, but I'm troubled. We're obviously losing the thread'.'

From a foreign policy point of view, his panacea for the world's biggest problems involves fair and even-handed treatment of North Korea's and Iran's nuclear proliferation and the democratic reconstruction of Iraq. Bringing stability to Pakistan, which he considered the most dangerous country in the world, should have a high priority.

Relations between the US and China were better and would continue to improve. 'Today, you don't hear about human rights, the US has told the Taiwanese specifically and directly there is one China and by no means should they even consider independence. We ... asked the Chinese to facilitate the talks with the North Koreans. We are co-operating extensively on the war on terror. I don't hear much criticism of China.'