The Chicago Council on Global Affairs

11/01/2024 | Press release | Distributed by Public on 11/01/2024 09:32

America’s Foreign Policy Future: Public Opinion and the 2024 Election

The 2024 Chicago Council Survey finds there is often less division than imagined when it comes to long-standing pillars of US foreign policy.

Executive Summary

The 2024 presidential contest, like those in 2016 and 2020, features a clash of worldviews on US foreign policy.

For the Democrats, current Vice President Kamala Harris is the most recent Democratic candidate to act as standard-bearer of the 'rules-based order.' She has largely put forth a platform that advocates for the traditional American foreign policy of the past 70 years, centering the importance of allies and the US commitment to defending those allies if they come under attack. On the economic front, she has promised to protect American workers and plans to continue the industrial policies of the Biden administration that are pushing large investments into US manufacturing capacity as well as in high-tech sectors. While she has declared support for immigration reforms that would create more pathways to citizenship for undocumented migrants, she has also pledged to continue measures aimed at reducing the flow of asylum-seekers to the US-Mexico border.

For the third consecutive time in the past eight years, former President Donald Trump is the Republican nominee. As in his previous campaigns, Trump has advocated for a United States not necessarily less involved in world affairs, but a less multilateralist United States that looks out for its own interests first and foremost. If he prevails, Washington may no longer stand by its commitments to defend allies in the case of attack. As a part of his proposed retrenchment, Trump has suggested withdrawing troops from key allies around the world or withdrawing from specific defense treaties altogether. His economic policies promise 20 percent tariffs across the board on imported products in an effort to correct trade imbalances-though many experts say this would effectively result in a tax on the American public. And on immigration, one of his signature issues, he has not only promised to stop migration from unwanted countries of origin but to deport immigrants already in the country through state-run deportation camps.

Which of these platforms most closely aligns with the preferences of the American public? Just as there have been foreign policy swings since 2016 between the Trump and Biden administrations, the American public's foreign policy mood has also alternated over the past eight years.

When Trump was in office, Chicago Council Surveys captured how everyday Americans broke with the president's more isolationist ideas. Surveys from 2018 to 2020 reported some of the highest levels of public support for international engagement since the Council's first poll in 1974 for an active US role in the world (Figure A). In addition, public support for defending allies (see Appendix Table 16) and endorsing international trade rose to new heights during Trump's tenure (Figure B).

Since taking office in 2021, President Joe Biden has pursued a more active foreign policy agenda, reinvigorating relationships with other countries and uniting US allies to assist Ukraine economically and militarily against Russian forces. Additionally, after the October 7 Hamas attacks, Biden provided both US diplomatic and military aid to Israel in its war with Hamas. At the same time, as in the rest of the world, the United States dealt with a wave of inflation resulting largely from the COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing challenges to supply chains and disruptions to energy and food markets caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. In the face of higher consumer prices, some Americans now question whether US economic and military aid to other countries-even if they are allies-is warranted.

These combined factors have taken a toll on everyday Americans' backing US global engagement (56%, a near-record low) and their willingness to assist other countries. Many think US leaders should direct their resources to dealing with domestic challenges instead of international ones (Figure C and Appendix Table 2).

This does not mean that the American public is turning wholly isolationist. Americans are well aware of the ongoing turmoil around the globe and a majority prefer that the United States continue to play an active role in world affairs. Majorities continue to recognize the importance of both alliances and superior military power to US national security and continue to favor international trade. While majorities support US assistance to both Ukraine and Israel, there are key differences between Republicans and Democrats on these conflicts (see Figures 9, 10, and 14).

But in an election year, most Americans are focused on issues closer to home such as inflation, the economy, and American democracy. Many think the United States is overextending itself at a time when there are significant domestic problems requiring attention that they consider more important in their voting decisions than the wars in Ukraine or the Middle East. And the very public costs of US assistance to Ukraine and Israel at a time of high consumer prices at home have likely contributed to these perceptions.

Still, Americans overall do not want a radical change to US foreign policy. Support remains strong for the core pillars of US foreign policy, and the past 50 years of Chicago Council polling suggests that is likely to continue no matter who wins the presidency.

Introduction

The 2024 presidential election will carry significant consequences for the future of the United States on both domestic and foreign policy, being the third consecutive election in the past decade that pits an internationalist against a nationalist view of the American role in the world. The American public has experienced both approaches in consecutive Trump-Biden presidencies and is once again presented with contrasting plans for the best way forward. While it is domestic policy that is often top of mind for voters in presidential elections, where do Americans stand on these competing outlooks for the role of the United States in the world? As Chicago Council Surveys show, the US public seems to be somewhere in the middle. Moreover, the past decade of research suggests that on key foreign policy issues, public opinion often appears to move counter to the policy platforms enacted by the sitting president.

During Trump's presidency, the percentage of Americans who believed the United States should play an active part in world affairs soared to new highs in 2017 and 2018-levels not seen since just after the September 11 attacks in 2002. Support for defending key allies such as Japan, Korea and the Baltic NATO countries also hit their highest points. These spikes came as then-President Trump was actively trying to pull the United States back from a more engaged role in the world, threatening to end traditional alliances, and launching a trade war with China.

Since taking office in 2021, President Biden has executed a more activist foreign policy agenda. His administration has united US allies to continue economic and military support of Ukraine against Russian forces and maintained US military aid to Israel in its war with Hamas. At the same time, Biden officials kept many of the same tariffs that Trump imposed on Beijing, and have doubled down on industrial policies designed to boost the United States in its economic competition with China.

The 2024 Chicago Council Survey shows that while public support for alliances, NATO, and international trade remains solid, only 56 percent of Americans now think the United States should play an active role in world affairs-one of the lowest levels ever recorded since the survey question was first asked in 1974. Only a slight majority say the benefits of maintaining the US role in the world outweigh the costs. And half the US public believes that because the United States has limited resources, its leaders should focus on problems at home and reduce its involvement in world affairs.

In a growing trend, partisanship is a core part of understanding differences in views on the US role in the world. There are deep divides between Republicans and Democrats on a range of issues-from Ukraine to immigration-and the two parties seem to be moving in opposite directions on core attitudes toward the US role in the world. But there is often less division than imagined when it comes to long-standing pillars of US foreign policy, such as US alliances and the importance of US military superiority.

I. Downward Shift in Public Support for US International Involvement

Over the past four years, the Biden administration has sought to manage multiple conflicts and competitions by taking an active approach to world affairs. For their part, a significant portion of the American public seems to think the United States might be at risk of overextending itself. Fewer than six in 10 Americans (56%) think the United States should play an active role in world affairs, the second-lowest percentage recorded since 1974 (the lowest was 54% in 1982). And more than four in 10 (43%) say the country should stay out of world affairs, the highest level ever recorded in the Chicago Council Survey's 50-year history.

As has been the case over the past decade, Democrats are more positive about an active role for the United States. In 2024, more than two-thirds of Democrats (68%, 31% stay out of world affairs) think it is best for the United States to play an active role. While this reading is still solidly supportive, it is down from an all-time high of 78 percent among Democrats in 2020. That high-water mark could be interpreted as an expressed corrective to the more isolationist foreign policies put in place by the Trump administration, which included withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement, unilaterally terminating the Iran nuclear deal, and demanding increased payments from allies in exchange for having their security guaranteed by the United States.

Among Republicans, only a bare majority currently think it is best for the United States to play an active role in world affairs (54%, 44% stay out), though this has increased from 47 percent favoring an active role in 2023. Both 2023 and 2024 readings are a far cry from previous highs of 77 percent in 2002 and 2006, when Republicans were the greater champions for active engagement, and a signal of how far the Republican electorate has moved on foreign policy over the past decade.

Narrow Majority See More Advantages Than Disadvantages to US Global Role

The appropriate level of US international engagement appears to be closely tied to perceptions about the required commitments to undertake US involvement. Half the American public (50% combined) either says that the United States has enough resources to take care of its own problems at home as well as take a leading role in world affairs (33%) or that, because the United States is the world's strongest and richest country, it has the responsibility to take a leading role in world affairs (17%). But the other half disagree, saying that the United States has limited resources and its own problems at home, so it needs to reduce its involvement in world affairs (49%).

Consistent with their higher level of support for an active US role in the world, two-thirds of Democrats (65%) say either the United States has the resources to handle a leading role while also taking care of problems at home (39%) or the United States has a responsibility to take a leading international role because it is the world's strongest and wealthiest nation (26%). By contrast, majorities of Republicans (57%) and Independents (54%) say the United States needs to reduce its global involvement because of its limited resources and problems at home-though, as in previous questions, sizable minorities of both partisan groups take the other position.

At the same time, a slight majority of the overall US public (54%) continues to say the benefits of maintaining the US role in the world outweigh the costs, largely unchanged from previous surveys. Here too, two-thirds of Democrats (65%) are convinced that the benefits of maintaining the US role outweigh the costs, while Republicans and Independents are evenly divided (49% each). But the divided responses on this question overall underscore that Americans are concerned about the costs of US involvement on global issues.

II. Declining Support for US Economic and Military Assistance to Other Countries

Nearly each year of the Biden administration has been accompanied by an end to a major conflict or the beginning of a new one. In 2021, the United States completed its withdrawal from Afghanistan, ending 20 years of US military deployment in that nation. In 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine, starting a war that continues to this day. And in 2023, Hamas launched a large-scale terror attack against Israel, sparking a massive Israeli response that now extends into both Gaza and neighboring Lebanon.

The Biden administration's approach to both ongoing conflicts has been to provide aid to Ukraine and Israel, rather than involving US forces directly in the fighting. Although a majority of Americans continue to say foreign assistance is an effective method to achieve US foreign policy goals, that confidence has declined since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022 and Israel's war with Hamas beginning in 2023. A smaller majority now than in 2022 say that economic assistance (62% vs. 73% in 2022) and military aid (67%, down from 75%) are somewhat or very effective foreign policy tools. Furthermore, an increasing percentage of Americans now say that federal spending on economic aid (51%, up from 41% in 2020) and military aid (50%, up from 42% in 2022) to other nations should be reduced. This suggests that the extended nature of both conflicts has demonstrated real limits to what US foreign assistance can achieve.

Support for US Assistance to Ukraine Weaker than At Start of War

As the war in Ukraine enters its third year, American assistance to Kyiv has become a contentious and increasingly partisan issue. Though a majority of the public overall continues to support aiding Ukraine with economic (58%) and military assistance (57%), support has fallen significantly from the initial highs of March 2022 when eight in 10 Americans favored US economic (78%) and military (79%) aid.

Support for aid to Ukraine has declined among all partisan groups over the past two years but has been especially sharp among Republicans. Between March 2022 and February 2024, Republican support for sending economic aid dropped by 34 percentage points, and support for sending military aid fell by 35 percentage points. Today, majorities of Democrats and Independents continue to support assistance to Kyiv compared to just 45 percent of Republicans.

In addition to reacting to opposition from some congressional GOP leaders, the drops in public support for sending economic and military aid to Ukraine may be partially due to the declining salience of the conflict and perception of threat that it poses to Americans. In March 2022-just after the war broke out-two-thirds of Americans (67%) cited Russia's territorial ambitions as a critical threat to US interests. Now, just five in 10 Americans (50%) say the same.

Support for US Role in Middle East, but also to Condition US Military Aid to Israel

Since its beginning in October 2023, the Israel-Gaza war has also divided the American public along partisan lines. And in a time where foreign assistance is already being called into question, the US role in the Israel-Gaza war-and its high cost to American taxpayers-may be another factor depressing public support for an active part in world affairs.

Across the board, Americans believe the United States is playing a positive role in resolving key challenges facing the Middle East (61%), and a plurality of Americans (42%) believe the United States is either striking the right balance (22%) in its support for Israel or not supporting it enough (20%). However, nearly a third (30%) say the United States is supporting Israel too much, a view more commonly held by Democrats (40%) and Independents (34%). By contrast, Republicans are more likely to say the United States is not supporting Israel enough (40%).

A plurality of Americans (43%) also say the United States has provided Israel with either the right amount (26%) or not enough (17%) military aid, while a third (34%) say it has provided too much military assistance. Partisans are again divided: pluralities of Democrats (42%) and Independents (39%) say the United States has provided Israel with too much military aid, while Republicans are more likely to say the United States has not given Israel enough military assistance (34%).

While 60 percent of Americans say that the United States should support Israel until the remaining hostages are returned, a slight majority (53%) also favor restricting US military aid to Israel so that it cannot be used in military operations against Palestinians. On this question, nearly seven in 10 (68%) Democrats favor such restrictions. Independents are more divided in their views, but more than half (54%) support restricting US military aid to Israel. By contrast, the majority of Republicans (59%) oppose such restrictions.

Finally, Americans are hesitant to aid reconstruction efforts in Gaza following the conflict. Nearly six in 10 Americans (57%) oppose the United States playing a leading role in the reconstruction of the enclave, something experts say would cost more than $80 billion to complete. Just over half of Democrats (51%) support this policy, while majorities of Republicans (71%) and Independents (58%) oppose US leadership in this area.

Council-Ipsos polling shows that Democrats have grown more critical of Israel's role in the Gaza conflict as well as in the broader Middle East. Their greater concern, relative to Republicans, for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the plight of Palestinian civilians is driving their more critical views of US support for Israeli military actions.

III: Enduring Support for US Alliance System

While support for an active American role in world affairs has declined, the 2024 survey also demonstrates durable support for some of the fundamental components of traditional US foreign policy. Americans view the US alliance system as beneficial to the United States, favor maintaining US military bases in allied nations around the world, want to maintain America's superior military power, and are willing-in some cases-to use that military power to defend allies.

Majorities Support Maintaining US Alliances and Superior Military Power

Trump has consistently questioned the value of US alliances, long considered an essential element of US global strength. While Trump has repeatedly stated that alliances do not benefit the United States, Biden and other Democrats have put allies at the forefront of their foreign policy strategy. For its part, the American public takes a positive view of US security alliances: nearly two-thirds (64%) think they benefit both the United States and its allies (51%) or mostly benefit the United States (13%).

Democrats are most emphatic about the positives of alliances, in part because they prefer a multilateral approach to international concerns.1 In total, 74 percent of Democrats say alliances benefit either the United States and allies (58%) or the United States alone (16%). One-quarter (24%) say alliances mostly benefit allies (19%) or benefit neither (5%).

Perhaps reflecting the messaging from Trump and his surrogates, Republicans are more divided. While 55 percent say alliances benefit either the United States (10%) or the United States and allies (45%), a sizable minority of Republicans (39%) say they mostly benefit US allies (and 4% say they benefit neither). Independents are in-between: six in 10 (62%) consider alliances to mostly benefit either the United States or the United States and its allies (49% both, 13% US alone), but nearly four in 10 think otherwise (26% allies alone, 11% neither).

Views in support of alliances are also likely tied to the fact that maintaining those alliances are viewed as one of the most highly effective tools in the US foreign policy arsenal (46% very, 43% somewhat effective). Reflecting their general preferences for multilateral approaches, Democrats (56%) are more likely than Republicans (41%) or Independents (40%) to view alliances as a very effective approach to US foreign policy and have been more likely to say so throughout the past decade.2

While a significant portion of Republicans also view alliances as very effective (41%), they are more likely to point to maintaining US military superiority as a very effective tool for achieving US foreign policy goals, as they have for the past decade. Six in 10 (63%) Republicans say it is a very effective approach to US foreign policy, as do half of Americans overall (48%) and four in 10 Independents and Democrats (42% each).

Broad Support for American Global Military Presence

American goals of working with allies and maintaining US military superiority come together in the US global network of military bases. A core component of the US alliance system, the United States maintains more than 700 military bases in roughly 80 countries. In a case of bipartisan agreement, Republicans and Democrats broadly support maintaining long-term US military bases in many countries around the world.

Majorities support long-term US bases in Germany (64%), South Korea (63%), Japan (62%), the Philippines (54%), NATO allies like Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia (54%), and Poland (53%). In each case, majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are in support.

Americans Ready to Use Force in Specific Scenarios

Americans also remain generally supportive of coming to the defense of US allies if they come under attack. The strongest support for such use is when traditional allies such as NATO or South Korea are involved. Majorities support using US troops to help a NATO ally like Germany (65%) or Latvia, Lithuania, or Estonia (51%) if Russia invaded. If North Korea invaded South Korea, half of Americans (51%) support using US troops to defend South Korea.

When it comes to using US troops to aid Israel, partisanship plays a larger role. If Israel were attacked by Iran, 53 percent of Republicans and 34 percent of Democrats favor using US troops to defend Israel. If Israel were attacked by its neighbors, 55 percent of Republicans and 35 percent of Democrats say the same.

Finally, when asked about using US troops to deal with one of the most contentious issues of the year-immigration-there are even deeper partisan divisions. While a narrow majority of Americans (53%) favor using US troops to stop immigrants coming into the country from Mexico, this is largely driven by Republicans: 84 percent are in favor, compared to half of Independents (50%) and just 30 percent of Democrats.

As the data show, despite Americans' concerns about the costs of the US role in the world, Americans remain strongly committed to their international alliances, and remain focused on maintaining a strong US military. One reason for their commitment to alliances: Americans see them as a force multiplier. When asked why they view alliances as beneficial for the United States, Americans say that alliances strengthen US diplomatic (57%) and military (50%) efforts around the world. And despite the shifts in policy between the Trump and Biden administrations, support for these two basic tenets of US foreign policy have remained generally stable and strong over the past decade.

IV. Support for Trade Holds Steady

Another major source of stability in American opinion in recent years has been on trade. Americans of all political stripes continue to see the benefits of international trade for both the United States at large and for their daily lives. Majorities say international trade is good for the US economy (75%), consumers like themselves (81%), creating jobs in the United States (58%), and their own standard of living (81%). Importantly, these stances are largely bipartisan except for views on creating jobs in the United States. Here, 69 percent of Democrats take a positive view versus 47 percent of Republicans.

But there is also broad support for greater economic self-sufficiency and some trade restrictions, especially when it comes to China. Even as Americans support international trade, two-thirds (66%) favor restricting that trade in order to protect American jobs. That includes 77 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Democrats.

Attitudes on trade restrictions may be in part formed by economic competition with China. As economic competition with China becomes more entrenched, maintaining the United States' technological edge in high-tech industries is a key goal for Americans. Six in 10 overall (60%), and similar majorities across party lines, say this is a very important goal, trailing only the goal of avoiding a military conflict with China (69% very important).

One way to maintain that edge: export controls on high-technology products. Eight in 10 Americans favor prohibiting US companies from selling sensitive high-tech products to China (79%, up from 71% in 2021), including large majorities across party lines. A majority of Americans also continue to support increased tariffs on Chinese imports. However, only a minority of Americans now favor significant reductions in US-China trade, even if it leads to greater costs for Americans (45%, down from 57% in 2021).

Conclusion

The American public is deeply divided as it heads into the 2024 presidential election. Issues such as the economy, immigration, and the perceived threats to democracy are major issues on which Republicans and Democrats hold starkly different views. These divisions extend into foreign policy now more than a few decades ago, with growing gaps between Democrats and Republicans in their views of the role the United States should play in the world, best illustrated by the partisan differences on assisting Ukraine and Israel. However, these divisions have not yet fully manifested when it comes to the broader framework of US foreign policy. Americans still broadly support alliances, international trade, and the global presence of the US military. This should create the basis for continuity in US foreign policy no matter who wins the White House.

  • 1For example, Democrats are more willing than other Americans to make decisions with allies even if it results in a policy that is not the United States' first choice (71%). A majority of Americans overall and Independents agree (58% each), though just 46 percent of Republicans are of the same mind (and 53% disagree).
  • 2Full results for the 2024 iteration of this question can be found in the Appendix.
Appendix

Part I

Table 1. Support for Active US Engagement in World Affairs

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 (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
1974 67 72 68 65
1978 59 61 58 63
1982 54 64 49 55
1986 64 71 58 68
1990 62 69 61 59
1994 65 -- -- --
1998 61 66 61 60
2002 71 77 70 69
2004 67 74 65 64
2006 69 77 65 68
2008 63 72 59 60
2010 67 72 68 64
2012 61 70 60 55
2014 58 60 64 51
2015 64 69 67 57
2016 64 64 70 57
2017 64 64 69 59
2018 70 70 75 63
2019 69 69 75 64
2020 68 64 78 63
2021 64 61 68 62
2022 60 55 68 55
2023 57 47 70 53
2024 56 54 68 47
Stay out (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
1974 23 19 23 26
1978 29 27 32 26
1982 35 27 39 35
1986 27 22 34 22
1990 28 22 29 32
1994 29 -- -- --
1998 28 27 26 31
2002 25 20 27 26
2004 30 24 33 30
2006 28 21 33 30
2008 36 27 40 40
2010 31 27 30 34
2012 38 30 39 44
2014 41 40 35 48
2015 35 30 32 42
2016 35 36 29 41
2017 35 34 31 39
2018 29 29 24 35
2019 30 31 24 35
2020 30 34 22 35
2021 35 38 32 36
2022 39 44 31 43
2023 42 53 29 46
2024 43 44 31 51

Table 2. US Responsibility in World Affairs

Which of these statements comes closest to your own view?

Because the United States is the world's strongest and richest country, it has the responsibility to take a leading role in world affairs (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 33 30 39 31
Because the United States has limited resources and its own problems at home, it needs to reduce its involvement in world affairs (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 49 57 35 54
The United States has enough resources to take care of its own problems at home as well as take a leading role in world affairs (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 17 13 26 14

Table 3. Cost and Benefit of Maintaining the US Role in the World

Overall, when it comes to maintaining the US role in the world, do you think:

The costs outweigh the benefits (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2021 42 47 35 45
2022 42 46 34 47
2023 41 43 34 45
2024 45 49 35 50
The benefits outweigh the costs (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2021 56 52 64 53
2022 56 52 65 51
2023 58 55 65 53
2024 54 49 65 49

Part II

Table 4. Efficacy of Foreign Aid

How effective do you think each of the following approaches are to achieving the foreign policy goals of the United States - very effective, somewhat effective, not very effective, or not effective at all? Economic aid to other countries

Very effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 11 7 17 8
2017 17 9 27 15
2022 20 11 32 16
2024 14 6 24 11
Somewhat effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 47 42 53 45
2017 48 44 52 47
2022 43 49 56 52
2024 48 44 54 46
Not very effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 30 37 24 31
2017 27 39 17 28
2022 21 33 10 24
2024 27 38 17 29
Not very effective at all (%)
Overall Republican Democrat INdependent
2015 10 12 5 14
2017 7 7 3 9
2022 5 6 2 8
2024 9 12 4 13

How effective do you think each of the following approaches are to achieving the foreign policy goals of the United States - very effective, somewhat effective, not very effective, or not effective at all? Military aid to other countries

Very effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 12 12 15 8
2017 12 9 17 11
2022 16 11 23 14
2024 16 10 23 14
Somewhat effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 48 47 52 45
2017 56 62 56 52
2022 59 61 59 58
2024 51 54 54 46
Not very effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 29 30 25 31
2017 25 24 21 29
2022 20 23 17 22
2024 24 29 18 27
Not very effective at all (%)
Overall Republican Democrat INdependent
2015 10 9 6 14
2017 6 4 4 8
2022 4 4 1 5
2024 8 7 5 13

Table 5. Federal Budget Allocations

Below is a list of present federal government programs. For each, please select whether you feel it should be expanded, cut back, or kept about the same. Economic aid to other nations

Cut back (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
1974 56 57 56 57
1978 50 50 49 53
1982 54 55 53 56
1986 48 51 44 50
1990 61 65 56 65
1994 58 -- -- --
1998 48 52 45 50
2002 50 50 46 54
2004 64 69 65 61
2008 55 56 48 61
2010 60 67 51 62
2014 60 67 49 66
2017 51 69 37 51
2020 41 60 23 44
2024 51 69 34 53

Below is a list of present federal government programs. For each, please select whether you feel it should be expanded, cut back, or kept about the same. Military aid to other nations

Cut back (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
1974 71 69 71 73
1978 64 65 63 69
1982 65 58 66 69
1986 62 56 66 64
1990 73 71 73 78
1994 68 -- -- --
1998 55 52 54 60
2002 48 42 51 53
2004 65 60 71 63
2008 59 49 67 60
2010 60 55 60 63
2014 59 57 56 64
2017 50 55 43 53
2020 42 47 36 46
2024 50 60 39 54

Table 6. US Policy toward Russia-Ukraine War

In response to the situation involving Russia and Ukraine, would you support or oppose the United States: Providing economic assistance to Ukraine

Support (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 50 50 53 48
March 2022 78 74 84 74
July 2022 71 64 82 66
November 2022 66 50 81 64
September 2023 61 47 76 58
February 2024 58 40 78 54
June 2024 58 45 72 57
Oppose (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 47 47 44 50
March 2022 20 26 13 22
July 2022 27 35 16 32
November 2022 32 49 17 32
September 2023 37 52 22 40
February 2024 38 58 20 42
June 2024 27 51 25 40

In response to the situation involving Russia and Ukraine, would you support or oppose the United States: Sending arms and military supplies to the Ukrainian government

Support (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 40 47 39 36
March 2022 79 80 83 76
July 2022 72 68 79 68
November 2022 65 55 76 63
September 2023 63 50 77 60
February 2024 58 45 75 54
June 2024 57 45 71 54
Oppose (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 56 50 57 61
March 2022 18 19 14 21
July 2022 26 30 19 29
November 2022 32 44 22 32
September 2023 35 49 20 38
February 2024 38 53 23 41
June 2024 39 51 26 42

Table 7. Threats to the Vital Interests of the United States in 10 Years

Below is a list of possible threats to the vital interest of the United States in the next 10 years. For each one, please select whether you see this as a critical threat, an important but not critical threat, or not an important threat at all: Russia's territorial ambitions

Critical threat (%)
Overall Repubican Democrat Independent
2014 38 48 35 34
2015 32 39 28 30
2016 30 32 31 29
March 2022 67 66 73 64
July 2022 60 56 68 56
2024 50 48 60 42

Table 8. Role in Resolving Key Problems Facing the Middle East

In your opinion, are the following countries and groups playing a very positive, somewhat positive, somewhat negative, or very negative role in resolving the key problems facing the Middle East? United States

Very or somewhat positive (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 69 69 74 65
2024 61 68 66 52

Table 9. US Support for Israel in Gaza War

Thinking about the Israel Gaza war, do you think the United States is:

Supporting Israel too much (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 30 15 40 34
Not supporting Israel enough (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 20 40 8 14
Striking about the right balance (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 22 23 24 29
Not sure (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 27 21 27 31

Table 10. US Military Aid to Israel

Do you think the United States is providing too much, not enough, or the right amount of military aid to Israel?

Too much (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 34 19 42 39
Not enough (%)
Overall Republican democrat Independent
2024 17 34 7 14
Right amount (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 26 29 28 22
Not sure (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 23 17 23 25

Table 11. US Policy toward Israel-Gaza War

Do you favor or oppose the United States…? Supporting Israel militarily until the hostages are returned

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 60 76 55 52

Do you favor or oppose the United States…? Supporting Israel militarily until Hamas is dismantled or destroyed

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 49 67 41 44

Do you favor or oppose the United States…? Playing a leading role in the reconstruction of Gaza

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 37 24 51 36

Do you favor or oppose the United States…? Officially recognizing a Palestinian state

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 50 33 66 49

Table 12. Restriction of US Military Aid to Israel

Do you support or oppose putting restrictions on US military aid to Israel so that cannot use that aid toward military operations against Palestinians?

Support (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 53 35 68 54
Oppose (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 42 59 27 41

Part III

Table 13. View of US Security Alliances

As you may know, the United States has security alliances with countries around the world. Which of the following comes closest to your view. Do they:

Mostly benefit the United States (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 13 10 16 13
Mostly benefit our allies (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 28 39 19 26
Benefit both the US and our allies (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 51 45 58 49
Benefit neither (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 7 4 5 11

Table 14. Effective US Foreign Policy Approaches

How effective do you think each of the following approaches are to achieving the foreign policy goals of the United States - very effective, somewhat effective, not very effective, or not effective at all? Maintaining existing alliances

Very effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2014 38 37 41 34
2015 32 31 37 26
2016 40 40 45 34
2017 49 43 56 47
January 2020 55 56 60 51
2022 54 50 62 49
2024 46 41 56 40
Somewhat effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2014 49 51 49 49
2015 52 51 52 54
2016 50 48 49 52
2017 42 48 35 44
January 2020 35 41 30 37
2022 30 43 33 41
2024 43 49 36 44
Not very effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2014 9 9 7 11
2015 11 12 7 13
2016 7 9 4 9
2017 7 7 6 7
January 2020 5 3 4 7
2022 6 6 4 8
2024 8 8 5 10
Not effective at all (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2014 3 1 2 4
2015 4 4 2 6
2016 2 2 1 3
2017 1 0 2 2
January 2020 3 1 5 4
2022 1 1 0 2
2024 3 1 2 6

How effective do you think each of the following approaches are to achieving the foreign policy goals of the United States - very effective, somewhat effective, not very effective, or not effective at all? Maintaining US military superiority

Very effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2012 42 50 40 39
2014 47 54 43 45
2015 40 50 37 34
2016 47 61 43 42
2017 47 66 38 43
January 2020 53 80 39 46
2022 51 66 42 48
2024 48 63 42 42
Somewhat effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2012 42 40 44 41
2014 37 34 42 37
2015 40 35 45 40
2016 38 30 43 39
2017 37 29 42 38
January 2020 35 19 42 39
2022 36 27 43 36
2024 36 27 43 37
Not very effective (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2012 12 9 13 13
2014 12 10 12 15
2015 13 9 12 17
2016 11 7 12 14
2017 12 4 15 15
January 2020 7 0 11 9
2022 10 6 12 12
2024 10 8 11 13
Not effective at all (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2012 3 1 2 5
2014 2 2 2 3
2015 6 4 4 8
2016 3 2 2 4
2017 3 1 4 4
January 2020 4 0 6 4
2022 2 1 2 4
2024 5 2 3 8

Table 15. Support for Long-Term Military Bases Abroad

Do you think the United States should or should not have long-term military bases in the following places? Japan

Should have (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2002 63 67 60 63
2004 52 56 52 50
2006 57 66 52 57
2008 58 67 59 57
2010 49 56 46 47
2014 55 59 50 56
2016 60 69 57 56
2018 65 72 65 61
2021 59 65 54 59
2022 67 72 64 66
2023 63 65 62 62
2024 62 69 61 59

Do you think the United States should or should not have long-term military bases in the following places? South Korea

Should have (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2002 67 74 66 64
2004 62 71 62 56
2006 62 73 57 61
2008 63 72 59 59
2010 60 68 58 58
2014 64 79 61 64
2016 70 76 70 64
2018 74 79 73 71
2020 69 80 65 65
2021 66 70 65 65
2022 72 77 72 69
2023 64 63 66 62
2024 63 67 61 63

Do you think the United States should or should not have long-term military bases in the following places? Germany

Should have (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2002 69 73 66 68
2004 57 62 58 53
2006 57 64 57 54
2008 59 64 59 53
2010 50 59 46 48
2012 51 54 50 51
2014 57 62 53 57
2016 61 70 58 56
2018 60 66 60 57
2022 68 71 68 66
2023 61 67 63 55
2024 64 71 62 59

Do you think the United States should or should not have long-term military bases in the following places? Turkey

Should have (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2002 58 64 55 57
2004 46 56 44 42
2006 46 51 42 48
2008 49 56 40 40
2010 42 49 40 40
2012 40 45 39 38
2014 43 47 40 43
2018 53 59 51 50
2022 56 65 55 51
2023 50 48 51 50
2024 46 46 46 44

Do you think the United States should or should not have long-term military bases in the following places? Australia

Should have (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2012 40 44 38 39
2014 42 44 38 43
2016 46 53 42 45
2021 54 56 49 56
2022 56 64 51 55
2023 49 52 49 48
2024 48 52 46 49

Do you think the United States should or should not have long-term military bases in the following places? Poland

Should have (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2014 37 39 32 39
2018 47 55 44 46
2022 62 68 59 61
2023 54 53 54 54
2024 53 54 53 55

Do you think the United States should or should not have long-term military bases in the following places? NATO allies like Latvia, Lithuania, or Estonia

Should have (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2022 65 67 67 61
2023 53 45 61 52
2024 54 54 58 52

Table 16. Support for Use of US Troops in Other Parts of the World

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: If North Korea invaded South Korea

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
1990 44 53 40 43
1994 39 -- -- --
1998 30 33 28 33
2002 36 50 31 37
2004 43 49 43 39
2006 45 55 42 41
2008 41 51 32 45
2010 40 47 38 36
2012 41 51 40 36
2014 47 53 44 46
2015 47 53 50 42
2017 62 70 59 61
2018 64 70 63 61
2019 58 63 57 56
2020 58 56 58 58
March 2021 63 68 61 62
2021 63 68 61 62
2022 55 54 58 53
2023 50 46 57 48
2024 51 52 54 49

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: If China invaded Taiwan

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
1982 19 25 17 17
1986 19 22 18 18
1998 27 30 24 30
2002 31 39 24 32
2004 33 40 30 31
2006 32 39 31 29
2008 32 36 27 34
2010 25 34 21 21
2012 28 35 26 23
2013 23 26 19 25
2014 26 25 24 29
2015 28 28 29 28
2018 35 39 36 33
2019 38 42 38 35
2020 41 43 40 40
March 2021 42 47 37 42
July 2021 52 60 50 49
2022 44 44 46 42
2024 43 45 44 40

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: To be part of an international peacekeeping force to enforce a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2002 65 63 73 60
2004 52 49 55 50
2006 51 45 55 53
2008 51 47 60 49
2010 49 47 56 46
2012 50 51 55 45
2014 50 46 59 42
2019 59 61 64 52
2024 54 48 62 51

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: If Israel were attacked by its neighbors

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2010 47 60 41 42
2012 49 64 44 42
2014 45 52 41 44
2015 53 67 49 46
2018 53 69 45 50
2021 53 72 41 49
2024 41 55 35 35

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: If Israel were attacked by Iran

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2024 42 53 34 42

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: If China initiates a military conflict with Japan over disputed islands

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2015 33 32 33 33
2017 40 45 35 41
2018 41 47 42 37
2019 43 48 40 41
March 2021 44 50 41 42
2023 43 45 45 41
2024 44 45 46 42

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: If Russia invades a NATO ally like Latvia, Lithuania, or Estonia

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2014 44 50 41 43
2015 45 45 51 40
2017 52 54 52 51
2018 54 52 61 50
2019 54 56 56 51
2020 52 47 56 52
March 2021 44 44 44 44
July 2021 59 57 63 58
March 2022 56 48 62 58
2023 57 48 68 55
2024 54 50 62 50

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: If Russia invades a NATO ally like Germany

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2023 64 64 69 60
2024 65 66 68 61

There has been some discussion about the circumstances that might justify using US troops in other parts of the world. Please give your opinion about some situations. Would you favor or oppose the use of US troops: To stop immigrants coming into the US from Mexico

Favor (%)
Overall Republican Democrat Independent
2019 49 82 21 50
2023 47 79 23 44
2024 53 84 30 50

Part IV

Table 17. Value of International Trade

Overall, do you think international trade is good or bad for: The US economy

Good (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2004 57 59 55 57
2006 54 60 52 53
2016 59 51 68 56
2017 72 68 80 69
2018 82 82 84 81
2019 87 87 89 84
2020 74 73 79 72
2021 75 66 84 74
2023 74 64 83 73
2024 75 68 82 74

Overall, do you think international trade is good or bad for: Consumers like you

Good (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2004 73 74 73 72
2006 70 78 68 69
2016 70 67 75 69
2017 78 76 83 76
2018 85 84 86 86
2020 82 80 86 81
2021 82 78 90 80
2023 82 75 88 81
2024 81 78 85 81

Overall, do you think international trade is good or bad for: Creating jobs in the US

Good (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2004 38 37 38 39
2006 37 38 38 36
2016 40 34 47 37
2017 56 48 68 51
2018 67 64 71 65
2020 59 59 64 54
2021 60 51 68 59
2023 63 52 74 61
2024 58 47 69 57

Overall, do you think international trade is good or bad for: Your own standard of living

Good (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2004 65 66 63 65
2006 64 70 64 62
2016 64 60 72 60
2021 79 75 87 76
2023 80 73 87 79
2024 81 75 86 81

Table 18. Priorities in US Trade Policy

Generally speaking, do you think US trade policy should have restrictions on imported foreign goods to protect American jobs, or have no restrictions to enable American consumers to have the most choices and the lowest prices?

US trade policy should have restrictions on imported foreign goods to protect American jobs (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2018 60 77 49 59
2023 66 79 61 62
2024 66 77 63 61
US trade policy should have no restrictions to enable American consumers to have the most choices and the lowest prices (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2018 38 21 49 40
2023 32 20 36 36
2024 31 22 34 37

Table 19. US-China Policy

Would you support or oppose the following U.S. policies towards China? Increasing tariffs on products imported from China

Support (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2020 55 76 39 57
2021 62 83 45 62
2024 Flash Poll 55 78 39 53

Would you support or oppose the following U.S. policies towards China? Limiting the number of Chinese students studying in the United States

Support (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2019 40 57 28 38
2020 45 65 32 44
2021 46 72 32 41
2024 Flash Poll 46 65 32 44

Would you support or oppose the following U.S. policies towards China? Significantly reduce trade between the US and China, even if this leads to greater costs for American consumers

Support (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2020 54 70 41 55
2021 Trilateral 51 70 40 51
2021 57 77 44 56
2024 Flash Poll 45 63 35 44

Would you support or oppose the following U.S. policies towards China? Prohibiting US companies from selling sensitive high-tech products to China

Support (%)
OVerall Republican Democrat Independent
2020 74 85 67 74
2021 Trilateral 71 80 69 74
2024 Flash Poll 79 86 78 80
Methodology

This analysis is based on data from the 2024 Chicago Council Survey of the American public on foreign policy, an annual project of the Lester Crown Center on US Foreign Policy. The 2024 Chicago Council Survey was conducted June 21-July 1, 2024, by Ipsos using its large-scale nationwide online research panel, KnowledgePanel, in English and Spanish among a weighted national sample of 2,106 adults 18 or older living in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. KnowledgePanel is the first and largest online research panel that is representative of the entire U.S. population. Ipsos recruits panel members using address-based sampling (ABS) methods to ensure full coverage of all households in the nation.

The margin of sampling error for the full sample is ±2.3 percentage points, including a design effect of 1.1229. The margin of error is higher for partisan subgroups (±4.2 points for Republicans, ±3.9 points for Democrats, and ±3.8 points for Independents) or for partial-sample items. Partisan identification is based on how respondents answered a standard partisan self-identification question: "Generally speaking, do you think of yourself as a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, or what?"

The 2024 Chicago Council Survey was fielded to a total of 3,661 panel members yielding a total of 2,204 completed surveys (a completion rate of 60.2%). The median survey length was 25 minutes. Of the 2,204 total completed surveys, 98 cases were excluded for quality control reasons, leaving a final sample size of 2,106 respondents.

Cases were excluded if they failed one of the following three criterions:

  1. Speedsters: Respondents who completed the survey in 8 minutes or less.
  • Total cases removed: n=55
  1. Refused 50% or more of questions: Respondents who refused to answer 50% or more of the eligible survey questions.
  • Total cases removed: n=59; n=43 unique to criteria group
  1. Data Check Score of 3 of 4: Respondents who failed 3 or 4 of the quality checks implemented (see criteria below).
  • Total cases removed: n=13; n=0 unique to criteria group
  1. Completed survey faster than 8 minutes.
  2. Did not accurately input a "4", refused or skipped Question Q3_1 in the survey, which was designed to make sure respondents were paying attention to the survey. ("In order to make sure that your browser is working correctly, please select number 4 from the below list.").
  3. Refused one or more full battery of 5 attributes or more (Q2F, Q131, Q5, Q7, Q8, Q25, Q30, Q451S, Q40, Q491, Q44, Q86, Q325, Q257, QTW2, QVOTEISSUE).
  4. Respondents who straight lined their responses to a battery of grid questions (Q131, Q44, Q325, QVOTEISSUE).

For more information about the Chicago Council Survey, please contact Dina Smeltz, Vice President and Senior Fellow, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy ([email protected]) or Craig Kafura, Director, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy ([email protected]).

Additional data comes from a joint Chicago Council-Ipsos survey conducted September 13-15, 2024 using the KnowledgePanel among a weighted national sample of 1,019 adults 18 or older living in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. The margin of sampling error for the full sample is ±3.6 percentage points, including a design effect of 1.40.

Results were weighted to adjust for gender by age, race/ethnicity, education, Census region, metropolitan status, and household income using demographic benchmarks from the 2023 March Supplement of the Current Population Survey (CPS). Specific categories used were:

  • Gender (Male, Female) by Age (18-29, 30-44, 45-59 and 60+)
  • Race/Hispanic Ethnicity (White Non-Hispanic, Black Non-Hispanic, Other Non-Hispanic, Hispanic, 2+ Races Non-Hispanic)
  • Education (Less than High School, High School, Some College, Bachelor's Degree or Higher)
  • Census Region (Northeast, Midwest, South, West)
  • Metropolitan status (Metro, Non-Metro)
  • Household Income (Under $25,000, $25,000-$49,999, $50,000­-$74,999, $75,000-$99,999, $100,000-$149,999, $150,000+)

The 2024 Chicago Council Survey is made possible by the generous support of the Crown family, the Korea Foundation, and the United States-Japan Foundation.

About the Authors
Vice President, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
Dina Smeltz, a polling expert, has more than 25 years of experience designing and fielding international social and political surveys. Prior to joining the Council to lead its annual survey of American attitudes on US foreign policy, she served in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research at the US State Department's Office of Research from 1992 to 2008.
Marshall M. Bouton Fellow for Asia Studies
Karl Friedhoff was a Korea Foundation-Mansfield Foundation US-Korea Nexus Scholar and a member of the Mansfield Foundation's Trilateral Working Group prior to joining the Council. Previously, he was a program officer in the Public Opinion Studies Program at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies based in Seoul, South Korea.
Director of Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
Craig Kafura is the director of public opinion and foreign policy at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, a Security Fellow with the Truman National Security Project, and a Pacific Forum Young Leader. At the Council, he coordinates work on public opinion and foreign policy and is a regular contributor to the public opinion and foreign policy blog Running Numbers.
Research Assistant, Public Opinion and US Foreign Policy
Lama El Baz joined the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in 2023 as a research assistant for the public opinion and US foreign policy team within the Lester Crown Center. She is passionate about public opinion research, data analytics, and the regional affairs of the Middle East and North Africa.
Communications Officer
As the communications officer for the Lester Crown Center, Libby Berry works to connect audiences with foreign policy research and analysis.
About the Chicago Council Survey The Chicago Council Survey has tracked American public opinion on important US foreign policy issues since 1974. Now in its 50th year, it remains a valuable resource for shaping debates and informing key decisions.