skip to main content
Americans Support Active Role for U.S. in World Affairs

Americans Support Active Role for U.S. in World Affairs

GALLUP NEWS SERVICE

For fifty years, the majority of U.S. adults have said it is best for the future of the country that the United States take an active part in world affairs. Pure isolationists have generally been limited to just a quarter of the American public.

The latest update of this post-World War II trend was obtained last fall in a Chicago Council on Foreign Relations survey conducted by The Gallup Organization. Sixty-one percent of Americans in the poll, compared to 68% in a 1947 Gallup poll, said the U.S. should take an active role internationally. The Council has sponsored the current foreign policy survey every four years since 1974, tracking U.S. attitudes on this and a variety of other international issues.

The 1998 survey provides an interesting backdrop to the tepid public support being recorded today for American military involvement in the Balkans. (The most recent Gallup poll finds barely half of Americans in favor of U.S. participation in NATO air strikes on Serbian targets in Yugoslavia, and other polling indicates slim support for the presence of U.S. troops in Bosnia.)

Americans Define "Critical Threats" in Conventional Terms
While Americans indicate in the Chicago Council survey that they support an active international role, it is clear, when their responses to other questions are analyzed, that they define U.S. vital interests somewhat narrowly around military and biological threats. Specifically, three quarters or more of Americans consider international terrorism, chemical and biological weapons, and nuclear proliferation to be critical threats to the vital interests of the United States. By contrast, less than half consider economic competition, Islamic fundamentalism, or regional ethnic conflicts to represent critical threats.

Americans' brand of active foreign involvement is also exemplified by their support for the NATO military alliance: 59% would maintain the United States' commitment and an additional 9% would increase it. Only one in five respondents said the U.S. should decrease or end its commitment to NATO. A majority of Americans, 57%, also thinks the U.S. should participate in peacekeeping operations in troubled parts of the world, rather than leave the job to other countries.

At the same time Americans favor NATO and support a peacekeeping role for the United States, they tell Gallup in the Chicago Council survey that they would oppose sending U.S. troops in response to Russia invading Poland, China invading Taiwan, a coup attempt in Cuba, and several other hypothetical situations where American soil is not directly threatened.

It should be noted that the Chicago Council survey was conducted several months before the arguments in favor of NATO intervention in Yugoslavia were publicly articulated by the Clinton Administration and other NATO leaders. However, the fall 1998 study did include a question about sending in U.S. troops if Serbian forces killed large numbers of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, showing only 36% in favor. That percentage is consistent with recent Gallup Poll results showing only 31% of Americans would favor Clinton sending U.S. ground troops to Kosovo if the air and missile attacks are not effective in achieving the United States' objectives.

Foreign Policy Goals Put America First
Americans were also asked to rate a variety of possible foreign policy goals in the Council survey. The ranking appears to be more in step with the political philosophy of isolationists such as Republican presidential candidate Pat Buchanan than with the grounds President Clinton outlined for U.S. involvement in Kosovo. At the top of Americans' list of foreign policy goals is preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, followed by stemming the flow of drugs into the U.S. and protecting American jobs. Combating terrorism and securing energy supplies also rank highly, with more than 60% rating these as very important goals. Defending our allies' security, defending human rights, and protecting weaker nations from aggression rank in the bottom half of the list of seventeen items tested.

There are two exceptions to the general pattern of self-interest outranking altruism on the list of foreign policy goals: combating world hunger-coming in ahead of maintaining superior military power worldwide-and improving the global environment, ranking ahead of reducing the U.S. trade deficit.

The 1998 Chicago Council on Foreign Relations survey was conducted by The Gallup Organization October 15-November 10, 1998 through in-person interviews with 1,507 national adults aged 18 and older, and has an associated margin of sampling error of ±3 percentage points.

Do you think it will be best for the future of the country if we take an active part in world affairs or if we stay out of world affairs?

Active part

Stay out

Don't know

Year
1998

61%

28%

11%

1994

65

29

6

1990

62

28

10

1986

64

27

9

1982

54

35

11

1978

59

29

12

1974

66

24

10

1973

66

31

3

1956

71

25

4

1955

72

21

7

1954

69

25

6

1953

71

21

8

1952

68

23

9

1950

66

25

9

1949

68

25

7

1948

70

24

6

1947

68

25

7

I am going to read you a list of possible threats to the vital interest of the United States in the next 10 years. For each one, please tell me if you see this as a critical threat, an important but not critical threat, or not an important threat at all.

Critical Threat

Threats to U.S. Vital Interest
International terrorism

84%

Chemical and biological weapons

76

The possibility of unfriendly countries becoming nuclear powers

75

AIDS, the Ebola virus, and other potential epidemics

72

The development of China as a world power

57

Large numbers of immigrants and refugees coming into the U.S.

55

Economic competition from Japan

45

Global warming

43

Economic competition from low-wage countries

40

Islamic fundamentalism

38

The military power of Russia

34

Regional ethnic conflicts

34

Economic competition from Europe

24

Some people feel that NATO, the military organization of Western Europe and the United States, has outlived its usefulness, and that the United States should withdraw militarily from NATO. Others say that NATO still has a function in preserving peace in Europe. Do you feel we should increase our commitment to NATO, keep our commitment what it is now, decrease our commitment but still remain in NATO, or withdraw from NATO entirely?

Increase
commitment

Keep
commitment same

Decrease
commitment

Withdraw
entirely

Year
1998

9

59

16

5

1994

5

56

20

6

1990

4

56

22

5

1986

8

62

11

5

1982

9

58

11

4

1978

9

58

9

4

1974

4

50

13

7

In general, when the United States is asked to be part of a United Nations international peacekeeping force in a troubled part of the world, do you think we should take part, or should we leave this job to other countries?

Should take part

Should not take part

Depends on circumstances

1998

57%

20%

16%

1994

51

19

23

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using U.S. troops in other parts of the world. I'd like to ask your opinion about some situations. First, would you favor or oppose the use of U.S. troops...

Favor

Oppose

Not sure

Circumstances
If Iraq invaded Saudi Arabia

46%

43%

11%

If Arab forces invaded Israel

38

49

13

If people in Cuba attempted to overthrow the Castro dictatorship

38

51

11

If Serbian forces killed large numbers of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo

36

47

17

If North Korea invaded South Korea

30

58

12

If Russia invaded Poland

28

55

17

If China invaded Taiwan

27

58

15

I am going to read a list of possible foreign policy goals that the United States might have. For each one please say whether you think that it should be a very important foreign policy goal of the United States, a somewhat important foreign policy goal, or not an important goal at all.

Very Important

Foreign Policy Goal
Preventing the spread of nuclear weapons

82%

Stopping the flow of illegal drugs into the United States

81

Protecting the jobs of American workers

80

Combating international terrorism

79

Securing adequate supplies of energy

64

Combating world hunger

62

Maintaining superior military power worldwide

59

Controlling and reducing illegal immigration

55

Improving the global environment

53

Reducing our trade deficit with foreign countries

50

Strengthening the United Nations

45

Defending our allies' security

44

Promoting and defending human rights in other countries

39

Promoting market economies abroad

34

Protecting weaker nations against aggression

32

Helping to bring a democratic form of government to other nations

29

Helping to improve the standard of living of less developed nations

29


Gallup https://news.gallup.com/poll/3961/americans-support-active-role-us-world-affairs.aspx
Gallup World Headquarters, 901 F Street, Washington, D.C., 20001, U.S.A
+1 202.715.3030