Follow us on social

google cta
52228546612_bb9a630ae3_k

Here's why America's trust in the military is still in the dumps

After a precipitous decline in confidence, the Ronald Reagan Institute poll asked for reasons. The answers are illuminating.

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
google cta
google cta

The Ronald Reagan Institute has released its annual poll on Americans' trust in its military, and not surprisingly, it's still in the dumps. While the organization says the free fall from 70 percent just five years ago is "stabilizing," the fact is that only 48 percent of respondents expressed "a great deal of trust and confidence" in the institution — just three points up from 2021.

I wrote about the possible reasons for this last year. The organization's head, Richard Zakheim, had acknowledged that the 2021 poll did not drill down on the reasons why respondents had lost faith in the one institution that up until then had still been held in high esteem by most Americans. He speculated that it was due to over-politicization, like the National Guard being used to crack down on protesters during the George Floyd protests in 2020. I thought that was ignoring the role our 20-years of failed wars had played in the perception of the military's honesty and competence.

Well this year, the institute did ask the question, and the results are more mixed than either of us had anticipated.

According to the poll, 62 percent of respondents blame politicization. We don't know what that means exactly, but it is interesting that there is no real split here between Republicans (65 percent), Democrats (60 percent) or independents (60 percent). Politicization appears to be the biggest culprit and could be blamed on politicization today under Biden, or yesterday, under Trump, or a culmination of recent administrations dating back through he Global War on Terror.

Next, nearly 60 percent said it was the performance/competence of the commander-in-chief that depressed their trust and confidence. Some 55 percent said it was the civilian leadership, and slightly fewer (52 percent) said it was the uniformed leaders.

What did run along party lines was the number that said "woke" policies in the military have degraded their trust (50 percent, mostly Republicans) versus those who blamed far-right extremism in the military (46 percent, mostly Democrats).

What about the failures of our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Some 47 percent said it was a reason for their decreased confidence. Not a majority, like I had argued, but it definitely played a big role in damaging perceptions of the institution. That's especially clear when you see that only 50 percent of those polled have great confidence in their military to keep them safe, down from 57 percent last year. As for whether the ability to win a future war is a reason for their lack of confidence, 52 percent said yes.

Perhaps even more damning is the question of whether the military is seen as able to perform in a "professional and non-political manner." This number took a nosedive year-over-year, from 40 percent to 35 percent.

Sadly, this hasn't been lost on the young. The institute also asked 18-29 year-olds about recruitment. Only 38 percent said they would be willing to join, along a range of very likely to somewhat likely.

The military used to be the most trusted institution in a culture that had already lost faith in its courts, its church, and its politicians. There needs to be a much deeper dive to explore where, when, and how things went so terribly wrong. One theory is that the professional military — with its perverse promotional incentives; its co-dependency on private industry and Washington politics for survival; and its own rules and culture, disconnected from the rest of American society — has become corrupt and incompetent at the same time.

There is a lot to be done to right this ship, but until then, the American people seem more clear-eyed than ever about what the military can or cannot do. All the better reason for Washington to recognize its limits, de-militarize its foreign policy, and get its national defense back in order.


Secretary of Defense, Lloyd J. Austin III and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley answer questions during a press conference at the Pentagon, July 20, 2022. (DoD photo by Chad J. McNeeley)
google cta
Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
Arlington cemetery
Top photo credit: Autumn time in Arlington National cemetery in Arlington County, Virginia, across the Potomac River from Washington DC. (Shutterstock/Orhan Cam)

America First? For DC swamp, it's always 'War First'

Military Industrial Complex

The Washington establishment’s long war against reality has led our country into one disastrous foreign intervention after another.

From Afghanistan to Iraq, Libya to Syria, and now potentially Venezuela, the formula is always the same. They tell us that a country is a threat to America, or more broadly, a threat to American democratic principles. Thus, they say the mission to topple a foreign government is a noble quest to protect security at home while spreading freedom and prosperity to foreign lands. The warmongers will even insist it’s not a choice, but that it’s imperative to wage war.

keep readingShow less
Trump Maduro Cheney
Top image credit: Brian Jason, StringerAL, Joseph Sohm via shutterstock.com

Dick Cheney's ghost has a playbook for war in Venezuela

Latin America

Former Vice President Richard Cheney, who died a few days ago at the age of 84, gave a speech to a convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in August 2002 in which the most noteworthy line was, “There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.”

The speech was essentially the kickoff of the intense campaign by the George W. Bush administration to sell a war in Iraq, which it would launch the following March. The campaign had to be intense, because it was selling a war of aggression — the first major offensive war that the United States would initiate in over a century. That war will forever be a major part of Cheney’s legacy.

keep readingShow less
Panama invasion 1989
Top photo credit: One of approximately 100 Panamanian demonstrators in favor of the Vatican handing over General Noriega to the US, waves a Panamanian and US flag. December 28, 1989 REUTERS/Zoraida Diaz

Invading Panama and deposing Noriega in 1989 was easy, right?

Latin America

On Dec. 20, 1989, the U.S. military launched “Operation Just Cause” in Panama. The target: dictator, drug trafficker, and former CIA informant Manuel Noriega.

Citing the protection of U.S. citizens living in Panama, the lack of democracy, and illegal drug flows, the George H.W. Bush administration said Noriega must go. Within days of the invasion, he was captured, bound up and sent back to the United States to face racketeering and drug trafficking charges. U.S. forces fought on in Panama for several weeks before mopping up the operation and handing the keys back to a new president, Noriega opposition leader Guillermo Endar, who international observers said had won the 1989 election that Noriega later annulled. He was sworn in with the help of U.S. forces hours after the invasion.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.