10 surprising things about American attitudes toward foreign policy

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs has released its latest biannual survey of American attitudes about foreign policy, titled "Foreign Policy in the Age of Retrenchment." (Full disclosure: I'm on the foreign-policy advisory board that consulted with and provided feedback to the survey team.)

The report is based on a large survey of Americans that was conducted in May — before the recent unpleasantness in various trouble spots in the world. I'm reasonably familiar with public opinion polling on foreign policy. That said, after going over the report, here are the 10 findings that genuinely surprised me:

They are rather cautious about the use of ground troops as an instrument of statecraft. Not so with sanctions. "Two in three Americans (65 percent, up 3 percentage points since 2012) consider sanctions at least somewhat effective" in achieving U.S. foreign-policy goals, according to the report.

Given that the war in Afghanistan was a response to an attack on American soil, this was surprising to me. As it turns out, this mostly has to do with the fact that the Afghanistan conflict has plummeted in popularity among Republicans; only 34 percent of them think the war was worth fighting, whereas 40 percent of them still think Operation Iraqi Freedom was worth it. Among Democrats and independents, Iraq still remains the more unpopular conflict — but it's surprisingly close.

The public isn't keen on too many uses of military force, but stopping Iran's nuclear program is an exception for 59 percent of respondents. On a barometer measure from 0 to 100 in terms of favorability, Iran scored only a 27 (North Korea did the worst, with a 23).

Some folks like to claim that powerful interest groups have somehow hoodwinked the American public into being predisposed toward defending Israel. It's certainly true that the barometer reading of Israel is 59, which is favorable. That said, what's surprising is how limited that support really is. Consider the following from the report:

• 64 percent of Americans say they prefer not to take sides in the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

• More Americans prefer cutting economic and military aid to Israel than increasing it (although the plurality is fine with the status quo).

Don't get me wrong, Americans like Israel some — just not quite as much as has often been averred inside the Beltway.

The Chicago Council conducted a survey experiment to see whether multilateral support would affect public attitudes for deploying U.S. troops. In the past, multilateral support of one kind or another usually primes respondents to look more favorably toward intervention. The Chicago Council's finding?

"On a wide range of possible situations where military force might be used — including in Syria, defending South Korea, ensuring the oil supply, Russia invading the rest of Ukraine, and others — there are no discernible differences in views among Americans toward the use of U.S. troops when multilateral action is not specified, as part of a coalition of like-minded allies, or as part of a U.N. Security Council authorized military mission."

In 1994, 72 percent of Americans thought "reducing illegal immigration" was a very important foreign-policy goal. Despite the best efforts of some, that number is down to 47 percent in 2014.

There have been many polls in which Americans have exaggerated Chinese power relative to the United States. This one didn't.

In May, a supermajority of Americans opposed the strategy that President Obama will now be pursuing there: "The public continues to oppose the United States providing arms and supplies to antigovernment groups in Syria (70 percent, vs. 25 percent). It is likely that this opposition is based on a desire to stay out of civil wars and internal political change."

Now to be fair, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant would count as an "antigovernment group in Syria," so maybe this was about the way the question was framed. I suspect, however, that the Chicago Council's analysis is correct. Given that Americans paid a lot of attention to the recent beheadings of two American journalists, and given Obama's volte-face on this issue, the polling numbers now will look different. Still, it's worth remembering.

The dirtiest secret in all of American politics: "Republicans and Democrats are generally on the same side when it comes to foreign policy, although to varying degrees. Majorities of supporters in both parties share similar concerns about top threats facing the country. They differ little in their preferred approaches toward China, Iran and Syria (except that Democrats are more willing to accept Syrian refugees into the United States). The sharpest differences between Democrats and Republicans are on the issue of immigration and on U.S. policy in the Middle East. In most cases, Republicans are more supportive of the use of force, while Democrats are more likely to favor peacekeeping missions. Independents generally tend to fall somewhere in between the views of Democrats and Republicans."