Following the Global Financial Crisis, two lengthy wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the inauguration of a new administration, the American public’s outlook on the world in 2010 is at a critical juncture. For the past sixty or more years of internationalism, the United States has maintained a major hegemonic presence. Particularly, the high point or “golden age” of U.S. power has been the post-Cold War period, in which it was dominant and remained unchallenged for the best part of two decades. However, recent trends have shown the United States is in relative decline as it reels from the effects of the financial crisis and two exhaustive wars. The rise of China and other emerging powers has further compounded its decline.

The Global Crisis and the subsequent recession are taking its toll on the American people, who in the recent mid-term elections expressed their frustration and constraint over the ongoing economic problems at home. To what extent has American opinion changed toward its nation’s foreign policy while the public recognizes its declining influence? In light of costly wars abroad and economic turmoil at home, are we seeing signs of growing isolationism?

Every two years, The Chicago Council on Global Affairs (CCGA) has undertaken the Global Views survey to assess the American public’s opinion toward U.S. foreign policy issues. To explain more on the CCGA’s Global Views 2010 survey and its implications, the EAI invited Marshall Bouton (President, CCGA) to talk about its findings with South Korean experts on foreign policy. Bouton gave an overview of the survey, exploring the results and outlining the policy implications. Considering all that has happened in the last two years, Bouton hypothesized that they expected the results to show that there would be incipient isolationism among the American people toward U.S. foreign policy. The results, though, showed a complex picture in which the public were not interested in isolationism yet wished for a more selective foreign policy. In general, the survey revealed that they have a strong grasp of international affairs.

The following is a summary of the presentation by Marshall Bouton and the subsequent discussion among the experts and Bouton.

Presentation

Relative U.S. Decline but Support for International Commitments

The picture painted by Global Views 2010 is of an American public amply aware of the relatively declining position of the United States in the world today. They see an international landscape that is in change, becoming more multipolar and less dependent on the United States. At a time of great economic strain, this is in some ways welcomed by Americans. Evidently, the influence of the United States still ranks at the top among other surveyed countries. Yet, these numbers are declining in comparison with previous years and by 2020 U.S. influence is projected to be equal with China. It is important to note that in this survey the decline of U.S. influence began in 2008, with the financial crisis.

Possibly the greatest indicator of the perceived decline in U.S. global power is the survey on Washington’s role as a world leader. This asked the question of the percentage who thinks the United States plays a stronger role in the world compared to ten years ago. Only 24 percent felt that way, down from a high of 55 percent in 2002. It is currently at the lowest point since the survey was first conducted in the early 1970s.

Emphasizing these perceptions is the view that American power is increasingly constrained in international affairs. The outlook on the U.S. ability to achieve its foreign policy goals is fairly pessimistic, with 53 percent believing that its ability to achieve foreign policy goals has declined over the last few years. This may strongly relate to the threat of terrorism to which Americans do not feel any safer from. In the survey, 50 percent felt that the ability of terrorists to launch an attack against the United States is the same as the time of 9/11.

Despite these results, Bouton explained that contrary to expectations, the American public does not support isolationism and turned to further data to prove this point. Figures from Global Views 2010 show that Americans continue to support U.S. global commitments. Answering a direct question on whether the United States should take on an active part in world affairs, support has remained steady at 67 percent. Respondents have also taken favorable views toward support for international treaties, maintaining a superior military power, and operating military bases in other countries. Participation in international organizations such as the United Nations and commitments to alliances all remain positive.

Furthermore, asked about the U.S. role in solving problems overseas, a strong 71 percent was in favor of the United States playing its part with other countries. Along with this favorable response to multilateral commitments, it highlights how the American public feels that U.S. power should be expressed differently.

A Preference for Selective Engagement

At the heart of the respondents’ views on U.S. foreign policy is a preference for selective engagement. Bouton categorized this approach into five core principles: defending only vital interests: participate in low-risk and low-cost humanitarian missions, pursue multilateral actions through the United Nations, maintain a lighter U.S. military footprint, and stay on the sidelines of conflicts that do not directly affect the United States.

This preference means becoming involved abroad only when threats endanger U.S. vital interests. In identifying these kinds of major threats, Americans show strong support for actions against terrorism and WMDs. In the survey, preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and combating international terrorism brought about a strong response, 73 and 69 percent respectively regard them as very important foreign policy goals. The responses to the case of Iran’s disputed nuclear program are an interesting example of selective engagement. Since there is a divide over whether to use military force, diplomacy and economic sanctions are more favored. In an alternative scenario, were Israel to go to war with Iran over its nuclear program, a majority of 56 percent would not support the United States becoming militarily involved in such a conflict. This shows the way in which the American public does not wish to become embroiled in the conflict of other nations.

U.S. Policy in Asia: the Good News Story

In spite of the preference for selective engagement, the American public continues to favor building up relations with its traditional allies in the Asia region. There is also a cautious acceptance of China’s rise, which at this stage is not seen as threatening; only 46 percent are somewhat worried that China will be a future military threat. Recognition of China’s position is partly connected with the acceptance of less dominance by the United States relative to the rise of other powers.

When asked how to deal with the rise of China, a majority of 68 percent believed the United States should undertake friendly cooperation and engagement, with only 28 percent supporting active measures to limit the growth of China’s power. From this result, it can be seen that there is little support for a containment policy against Beijing. This is further supported by the fact that Americans now view China as more important to the vital interests of the United States than Japan. It also ranks at the top of a list of the most important countries to the United States which had long been dominated by Britain and Canada. In line with China’s importance, there is growing opposition to the use of U.S. troops were there to be any conflict between China and Taiwan. A strong majority of 71 percent are against any involvement, reflecting the favored selective engagement of keeping out of the conflicts of other countries.

Bouton summarized that this positive yet cautious view of China shows us two characteristic about the American public’s perception of China. Firstly, Americans finally understand China’s rise, secondly, they are no longer worried about this ascent.

Considering the lack of achievements elsewhere in the world and the poor economic situation at home, the success and stability in Asia represents something positive in its overall policy. With this optimistic assessment of Washington’s policy, the American public’s support for its alliances in Asia is strong. South Korea in particular is at the top of a list of overseas military bases that should continue to be maintained; 62 percent are in favor. However, approaches to the Korean Peninsula reflect the broader feelings toward U.S. foreign policy and selective engagement. Responses to the sinking of the Cheonan, a South Korean Navy corvette, by North Korea in March, 2010 reveals that 67 percent of respondents believe that although the United States should criticize North Korea, it should view the incident as one of many between the two Koreas. Another question on the use of U.S. forces to defend South Korea reveals that 56 percent oppose the use of U.S. troops if North Korea attacked South Korea; however this changes to 61 percent in favor if it is a UN-sponsored effort. As Victor Cha highlighted in a report assessing Global Views 2010, were North Korea to attack the South, the U.S. effort would automatically come under UN mandate anyway. Therefore, in the event of any future contingency this aspect must be made clear to the American public...(Continued)

Marshall Bouton is President of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

Discussants

Sang-Yoon Ma (Professor of Catholic University)

Nae-Young Lee (Professor of Korea University)

Woojin Lee (Professor of Korea University)

Sungho Sheen (Professor of Seoul National University)  

Byoung-Kwon Sohn (Professor of Chung-Ang University)

Okyeon Yi (Professor of Seoul National University)