GALLUP NEWS SERVICE
PRINCETON, NJ -- Anti-war protests around the world last weekend included a heavy dose of skepticism about the U.S. government's motives for a possible war with Iraq, with many charging that the effort is more about advancing U.S. oil interests there than about defending against weapons of mass destruction. More broadly, the Iraq controversy has renewed attention to the priorities that shape U.S. foreign policy, whether in war or peace.
According to Gallup's annual World Affairs poll, conducted Feb. 3-6, the vast majority of Americans believe that preventing future acts of international terrorism and preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction are very important foreign policy goals for the United States. But ranking third on the list of nine possible goals presented in the survey -- with 68% of Americans rating it as "very important" -- is securing adequate supplies of energy. This does not mean that Americans would necessarily favor an unprovoked attack on Iraq or any other oil-producing country, but it does suggest that, coupled with national security concerns, Iraq's possession of an important oil supply could be a factor strengthening public support for the war.
Securing adequate supplies of energy is of somewhat higher perceived importance to the public than is defending U.S. allies (which 60% rate as a very important goal), maintaining superior military power worldwide (56%), and promoting and defending human rights abroad (50%). Concern about energy far exceeds concern for protecting weaker nations against foreign aggression (40%) and helping to improve the standard of living in less-developed countries (35%).
Perceived Importance of Possible U.S. Foreign Policy Goals % rated "very important" Feb. 3-6, 2003 |
|
% |
|
1. Preventing future acts of international terrorism |
87 |
2. Preventing spread of weapons of mass destruction |
82 |
3. Securing adequate supplies of energy |
68 |
4. Defending our allies' security |
60 |
5. Maintaining superior military power worldwide |
56 |
6. Promoting and defending human rights in other countries |
50 |
7. Protecting weaker nations against foreign aggression |
40 |
8. Improving the standard of living of less-developed nations |
35 |
9. Building democracy in other countries |
29 |
All of the goals asked about in the survey are considered at least "somewhat important" by a majority of respondents. The maximum number rating any of these as "not too important" or "not at all important" is just 22%, and was measured on the goal for building democracy in other countries.
Next, I'm going to read a list of possible foreign policy goals that the United States might have. For each one please say whether you think it should be a very important foreign policy goal of the United States, a somewhat important goal, not too important a goal, or not an important goal at all.
|
||
Very/ |
Not too/ |
|
% |
% |
|
Preventing future acts of international terrorism |
97 |
2 |
Preventing spread of weapons of mass destruction |
95 |
4 |
Securing adequate supplies of energy |
91 |
6 |
Defending our allies' security |
94 |
4 |
Maintaining superior military power worldwide |
83 |
15 |
Promoting and defending human rights in other countries |
86 |
12 |
Protecting weaker nations against foreign aggression |
88 |
10 |
Improving the standard of living of less-developed nations |
82 |
16 |
Building democracy in other countries |
75 |
22 |
Republicans and Democrats Mostly Agree on Goals
Although there are differences in the percentages of Republicans and Democrats rating certain goals as very important, the ranking of the nine goals is essentially the same for both groups.
The largest gap is observed on the importance of maintaining superior military power worldwide. Two-thirds of Republicans (66%) compared with only a bare majority of Democrats (51%) consider this very important. By a 10-point margin, Democrats are also less likely than Republicans to consider the prevention of the spread of weapons of mass destruction to be a critical goal.
The two goals which Democrats are more likely than Republicans to consider very important both have an altruistic orientation: helping to improve the standard of living of less-developed nations and defending human rights abroad.
Partisan Rating of Foreign Policy Goals February 2003
|
|||
Republicans |
Democrats |
Difference (Rep minus Dem) |
|
% |
% |
||
Maintaining superior military power |
66 |
51 |
15 |
Preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction |
87 |
77 |
10 |
Preventing future terrorism |
92 |
84 |
8 |
Defending allies' security |
63 |
57 |
6 |
Securing adequate supplies of energy |
70 |
66 |
4 |
Building democracy in other countries |
32 |
29 |
3 |
Protecting weaker nations against foreign aggression |
40 |
38 |
2 |
Promoting and defending human rights |
46 |
51 |
-5 |
Improving standard of living of less-developed nations |
30 |
38 |
-8 |
Energy of Somewhat Less Concern Today Than Two Years Ago
While the importance of U.S. access to energy remains a high priority for Americans, it is seen as somewhat less important today than when Gallup last polled on this issue two years ago. In February 2001, 79% of Americans considered securing adequate energy supplies to be a very important goal. That figure is 11 points higher than today. However, the 2001 survey was taken amid the West Coast energy crisis (recall the rolling blackouts in California), and during a period of escalating gas prices at the pump nationally, and thus most likely reflected the public's heightened energy concerns at that point. Given that the decline from 2001 to 2003 occurred about evenly among Republicans, independents, and Democrats, it is unlikely that the drop is tied to the current politics of the debate over attacking Iraq (which a majority of Republicans favor, and Democrats oppose).
The only other significant trend in the ratings of foreign policy goals is a slight decline, from 40% in 2001 to 35% today, in the perceived importance of "helping to improve the standard of living of less-developed nations."
Next, I'm going to read a list of possible foreign policy goals that the United States might have. For each one please say whether you think it should be a very important foreign policy goal of the United States, a somewhat important goal, not too important a goal, or not an important goal at all.
|
||
2001 |
2003 |
|
% |
% |
|
1. Preventing future terrorism |
-- |
87 |
2. Preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction |
82 |
82 |
3. Securing adequate supplies of energy |
79 |
68 |
4. Defending allies' security |
62 |
60 |
5. Maintaining superior military power |
59 |
56 |
6. Promoting and defending human rights |
51 |
50 |
7. Protecting weaker nations against foreign aggression |
39 |
40 |
8. Improving standard of living of less-developed nations |
40 |
35 |
9. Building democracy in other countries |
32 |
29 |
Survey Methods
These results are based on telephone interviews with a randomly selected national sample of 1,001 adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 3-6, 2003. For results based on this sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum error attributable to sampling and other random effects is ±3 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
Next, I'm going to read a list of possible foreign policy goals that the United States might have. For each one please say whether you think it should be a very important foreign policy goal of the United States, a somewhat important goal, not too important a goal, or not an important goal at all. How about -- [ITEMS A-H ROTATED, THEN ITEM I READ]?
A. Maintaining superior military power worldwide
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
56 |
27 |
11 |
4 |
2 |
2001 Feb 1-4 |
59 |
29 |
9 |
2 |
1 |
B. Defending our allies' security
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
60 |
34 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
2001 Feb 1-4 |
62 |
33 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
C. Preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
82 |
13 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2001 Feb 1-4 |
82 |
14 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
D. Securing adequate supplies of energy
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
68 |
23 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
2001 Feb 1-4 |
79 |
17 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
E. Building democracy in other countries
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important at all |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
29 |
46 |
17 |
5 |
3 |
2001 Feb 1-4 |
32 |
46 |
16 |
5 |
1 |
F. Protecting weaker nations against foreign aggression
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
40 |
48 |
8 |
2 |
2 |
2001 Feb 1-4 |
39 |
50 |
7 |
3 |
1 |
G. Promoting and defending human rights in other countries
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
50 |
36 |
9 |
3 |
2 |
2001 Feb 1-4 |
51 |
36 |
10 |
2 |
1 |
H. Helping to improve the standard of living of less-developed nations
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
35 |
47 |
12 |
4 |
2 |
2001 Feb 1-4 |
40 |
45 |
11 |
3 |
1 |
I. Preventing future acts of international terrorism
Very important |
Somewhat important |
Not too important |
Not important |
No |
|
2003 Feb 3-6 |
87% |
10 |
1 |
1 |
1 |