For nearly 50 years, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs has been tracking American public opinion on U.S. foreign policy through its annual survey. It began at the behest of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who wanted to know whether the public would still support an active foreign policy in the wake of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal.
The first survey concluded that Americans opposed sending troops abroad but, overall, supported engagement in the world. Today, most Americans still support active global engagement, but that support has softened, down from 67% in 1974 to 57% today.
The drop has been partisan. For decades, the Republican Party favored global engagement more than Democrats, but that flipped in 2014. Republican interest in playing an active part in world affairs has dropped from 72% in 1974 to a mere 47% today. Meanwhile, Democratic interest in global engagement is up to 70%.
What’s driving the shift in public opinion and its partisan dimension?
Trust in what we were doing around the world has had a lot to do with it. From the Vietnam War through the global war on terror years, Democrats mostly supported global engagement, but many questioned how we pursued it. During the Barack Obama years, Democratic support started increasing, while Republican support began to decline. That trajectory in both directions continued under President Donald Trump, as some Republicans embraced Trump’s “America First” skepticism of playing a global role.
[ Elizabeth Shackelford: America’s political dysfunction is harming our reputation and national security ]
Russia’s war in Ukraine has brought the reality of international engagement home. The partisan split exists here, too, with more Republicans (61%) than Democrats (29%) questioning whether America’s support to Ukraine has been worthwhile. But most Americans, including half of Republicans, still support the United States continuing military assistance to Ukraine.
Republican enthusiasm for this assistance is down five points in the past year. This comes at a time when a small but vocal minority of Republicans in Congress has lambasted that support as too expensive. It’s unclear whether the small decline in public support is a result of this loud minority view in Congress or simply the impact of public fatigue over time.
But views on Russia seem to play a big part in changing Republican perspectives. For decades during the Cold War and thereafter, countering Russian aggression was the greatest foreign policy concern for Republicans, and being tough on Russia was considered an area of Republican strength. While most Republican lawmakers maintain a tough stance toward Russia, Trump took a suspiciously friendly approach toward Russian President Vladimir Putin, and that seems to have shaped the small soft-on-Russia club in Congress, along with some of the Republican rank and file. With Russia more aggressive on the world stage today than it has been in decades, this shift has even some Republican leaders alarmed.
So what do these trends mean for our political leaders in Washington? I wouldn’t recommend foreign policy by national referendum, any more than I would make a plumbing repair decision based on a survey of my neighbors (see: Brexit). But public opinion is still an important form of accountability for the role political leaders choose to have America play in the world.
Having worked in government, I know that what serves American interests often looks different from inside Washington than it does elsewhere, and this is where understanding American opinion can be most valuable.
Most Americans don’t vote on foreign policy issues, but understanding where the public stands on them can have influence in both directions. Many Americans are often uninformed about foreign affairs and don’t understand why or how particular foreign policy positions serve their interests. When our political leaders know that American support for a foreign policy position is weak, they need to invest more in making the case.
The Biden administration has taken that role seriously. In a recent Oval Office address, President Joe Biden made his case for wartime aid to Israel and Ukraine directly to the American people in prime time. In today’s hyperpartisan environment, a portion of the population exists beyond persuasion, but many Americans tuned in, as did the journalists and commentators. Biden understands that if the public is with him on this issue, it will be harder for hard-liners in Congress to thwart it.
Even strong opposition by a small group isn’t necessarily reason to change course, but understanding trends can help our government be more responsive to the public. If a foreign policy action becomes deeply unpopular, though, that means that the American people aren’t convinced that it serves their needs. That should raise real questions about whether it’s just a matter of messaging, or if those policies just aren’t as good for Americans as our leaders think they are.
Our leaders can’t take for granted that Americans will always support an active role in the world. It’s up to them to persuade the public that our foreign policy actions ultimately serve their interests.
Elizabeth Shackelford is a senior fellow on U.S. foreign policy with the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. She was previously a U.S. diplomat and is the author of “The Dissent Channel: American Diplomacy in a Dishonest Age.”
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
Elizabeth Shackelford: What Americans think about the US role in the world and why it matters
5
0
03.11.2023
For nearly 50 years, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs has been tracking American public opinion on U.S. foreign policy through its annual survey. It began at the behest of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who wanted to know whether the public would still support an active foreign policy in the wake of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal.
The first survey concluded that Americans opposed sending troops abroad but, overall, supported engagement in the world. Today, most Americans still support active global engagement, but that support has softened, down from 67% in 1974 to 57% today.
The drop has been partisan. For decades, the Republican Party favored global engagement more than Democrats, but that flipped in 2014. Republican interest in playing an active part in world affairs has dropped from 72% in 1974 to a mere 47% today. Meanwhile, Democratic interest in global engagement is up to 70%.
What’s driving the shift in public opinion and its partisan dimension?
Trust in what we were doing around the world has had a lot to do with it. From the Vietnam War through the global war on terror years, Democrats mostly supported global engagement, but many questioned how we pursued it. During the Barack Obama years, Democratic support started increasing, while Republican support began to decline. That trajectory in both directions continued under........
© Chicago Tribune
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Nikkei Editorial
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
