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.


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

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
What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?
Top image credit: Voodison328 via shutterstock.com

What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?

Global Crises

Earlier this month in Geneva, delegates to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty’s 22nd Meeting of States Parties confronted the most severe crisis in the convention’s nearly three-decade history. That crisis was driven by an unprecedented convergence of coordinated withdrawals by five European states and Ukraine’s attempt to “suspend” its treaty obligations amid an ongoing armed conflict.

What unfolded was not only a test of the resilience of one of the world’s most successful humanitarian disarmament treaties, but also a critical moment for the broader system of international norms designed to protect civilians during and after war. Against a background of heightened tensions resulting from the war in Ukraine and unusual divisions among the traditional convention champions, the countries involved made decisions that will have long-term implications.

keep readingShow less
The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025
Top image credit: Dabari CGI/Shutterstock

The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025

Media

I spent the last few weeks asking experts about the foreign policy books that stood out in 2025. My goal was to create a wide-ranging list, featuring volumes that shed light on the most important issues facing American policymakers today, from military spending to the war in Gaza and the competition with China. Here are the eight books that made the cut.

keep readingShow less
Why Russians haven't risen up to stop the Ukraine war
Top image credit: People walking on Red square in Moscow in winter. (Oleg Elkov/Shutterstock)

Why Russians haven't risen up to stop the Ukraine war

Europe

After its emergence from the Soviet collapse, the new Russia grappled with the complex issue of developing a national identity that could embrace the radical contradictions of Russia’s past and foster integration with the West while maintaining Russian distinctiveness.

The Ukraine War has significantly changed public attitudes toward this question, and led to a consolidation of most of the Russian population behind a set of national ideas. This has contributed to the resilience that Russia has shown in the war, and helped to frustrate Western hopes that economic pressure and heavy casualties would undermine support for the war and for President Vladimir Putin. To judge by the evidence to date, there is very little hope of these Western goals being achieved in the future.

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.