Foreign Policy Attitudes Now Driven by 9/11 and Iraq

Copyright © 2004 The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
people-press.org

Eroding Respect for America Seen as Major Problem

• Only 34% say  NAFTA and other trade agreements  have helped their own financial situation but 47% still believe such agreements are beneficial to the US . 59% majority faults the administration for being too quick to use force rather than trying hard enough to reach diplomatic solutions.

For the first time since the Vietnam era, foreign affairs and national security issues are looming larger than economic concerns in a presidential election. The Sept. 11 attacks and the two wars that followed not only have raised the stakes for voters as they consider their choice for president, but also have created deep divisions and conflicting sentiments over U.S. foreign policy in a troubled time.

Dissatisfaction with Iraq is shaping opinions about foreign policy as much, if not more than, Americans' continuing concerns over terrorism. Both attitudes now inform the public's point of view of the U.S. role in the world. Tellingly, the poll finds about as many respondents favoring a decisive foreign policy (62%) as supporting a cautious approach (66%). And reflecting an ever-widening partisan gap on foreign policy issues, Republicans assign higher priority to decisiveness than to caution, while Democrats do just the opposite.

The new survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, conducted in association with the Council on Foreign Relations, finds the public is acutely aware of -- and worried about - the loss of international respect for the United States given disillusionment over Iraq. Two-thirds say the U.S. is less respected by other countries than in the past, and this opinion is particularly prevalent among opponents of the Iraq war.

The survey of foreign policy attitudes, conducted July 8-18 among 2,009 adults nationwide, also finds:

· While Americans have deep reservations over the war in Iraq, there is continuing support for the doctrine of preemption. A 60% majority believes that the use of military force can be at least sometimes justified against countries that seriously threaten the U.S. but have not attacked. This is only a slight decline from May 2003 (67%).

· A narrow majority of Americans (53%) believe that torture should rarely or never be used to gain important information from suspected terrorists, but a sizable minority (43%) thinks torture can at least sometimes be justified under these circumstances.

· The public supports a cooperative stance toward America's allies. By 49%-37%, more people hold the view that the nation's foreign policy should strongly take into account the interests of U.S. allies, rather than be based mostly on the national interests of the United States.

· Continuing discontent with the way things are going in Iraq underlies public criticism of the Bush administration's approach to national security. A solid 59% majority faults the administration for being too quick to use force rather than trying hard enough to reach diplomatic solutions.

· Republicans and Democrats now hold sharply divergent views on a range of foreign policy attitudes, even the root causes of the 9/11 attacks. A growing number of Democrats (51%) and independents (45%) believe that U.S. wrongdoing in dealings with other countries might have motivated the 9/11 attacks. Republicans decisively reject that view.

· There has been a sharp decline in the percentage of Americans who regard U.S. policies in the Middle East as fair -- 35% say that now, down from 47% in May 2003. Attitudes on this issue also have become increasingly polarized.

· The public remains divided over the impact of free trade. A 47% plurality says NAFTA and other trade agreements have been good for the U.S., but only 34% say such agreements have helped their own financial situation.

View Report [here ]