Increase Aid or Pull Back? Americans Split on Foreign Policy

The debate over  U.S. participation in foreign conflicts was at the forefront of the 2024 presidential election. Now that Donald Trump has been elected, the future of the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East is still unclear. However, based on the latest survey from the Ronald Reagan Institute, Americans still want the government to take the lead in negotiating the two conflicts.

The survey, conducted post-election from Nov. 8-14 among 2,510 U.S. adults, found that 57% think the U.S. should be “more engaged and take the lead” in international events, while 32% said the U.S. should be less engaged. Additionally, 62% said the U.S. should maintain its current military bases around the world, while 33% said the United States should reduce its presence overseas.

Other recent polls indicate that Americans have confidence in President-elect Trump to take charge in these foreign situations. In an Economist poll conducted from Nov. 17-19, 50% said they were confident Trump would “deal wisely” with an international crisis, while 39% said they were uneasy. Furthermore, 56% expressed confidence that Trump would be an effective commander in chief, while 38% said they were not confident.

Despite the ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, 27% of respondents in the Reagan Institute poll said the focus for U.S. forces should be East Asia. This was followed by 25% who said the Middle East, 18% who said Europe, and less than 5% for all other regions.

Part of the increased support for a military focus in East Asia is attributed to the perceived strength of the Chinese military. According to the survey, 28% of respondents said the U.S. military could not win a war against China, while only 20% said the same of Russia, 16% for North Korea, and 10% for Iran.

On the issue of Russia, 79% expressed concern about military aggression against a member of NATO, and 70% were concerned about Russia launching a thermonuclear attack against the U.S. 

The poll was conducted before President Biden authorized Ukraine to strike inside Russia with U.S.-supplied long-range missiles. Following that authorization, Russian strongman Vladimir Putin stated on Russian state television that the conflict had shifted from “a regional conflict in Ukraine previously provoked by the West” to one that “has acquired elements of a global character.”

With Trump set to enter office on Jan. 20, questions remain about how he will handle the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Before the presidential election, Trump repeatedly promised to end the conflict before his inauguration. However, since then, he has yet to lay out a specific plan. Trump has nominated Keith Kellogg, former national security adviser and retired lieutenant general, to serve as special envoy to Ukraine and Russia in his second administration. Neither Kellogg nor Trump has publicly stated how they will negotiate an end to the war since Election Day.

In April, the America First Policy Institute published a report authored by Kellogg and Fred Fleitz titled “America First, Russia, & Ukraine,” which examined the Biden administration’s handling of the war and proposed strategies for negotiating a ceasefire. One of the bargaining chips Kellogg suggested at the time was to “put off NATO membership for Ukraine for an extended period in exchange for a comprehensive and verifiable peace deal with security guarantees.” Other proposed elements of a negotiated peace deal included removing economic sanctions on Russia and establishing a possible demilitarized zone between the two countries.

The report repeatedly emphasized that a prolonged war is not in the U.S.’ best interest, warning that it could entrench alliances between Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. “Sending weapons to an endless stalemate for these reasons is expensive virtue signaling and not a constructive policy to promote peace and global stability,” Kellogg and Fleitz wrote.

Americans are nearly evenly divided into three camps on the issue of continued aid to Ukraine. In the Economist poll, 26% supported increasing military aid to Ukraine, 28% favored decreasing it, and 25% said the U.S. should maintain the current level of aid.