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
G7 Summit
Top photo credit: May 21, 2023, Hiroshima, Hiroshima, Japan: (From R to L) Comoros' President Azali Assoumani, World Trade Organization (WTO) Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the G7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan. (Credit Image: © POOL via ZUMA Press Wire)

Middle Powers are setting the table so they won't be 'on the menu'

Asia-Pacific

The global order was already fragmenting before Donald Trump returned to the White House. But the upended “rules” of global economic and foreign policies have now reached a point of no return.

What has changed is not direction, but speed. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s remarks in Davos last month — “Middle powers must act together, because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu” — captured the consequences of not acting quickly. And Carney is not alone in those fears.

keep readingShow less
Vice President JD Vance Azerbaijan Armenia
U.S. Vice President JD Vance gets out of a car before boarding Air Force Two upon departure for Azerbaijan, at Zvartnots International Airport in Yerevan, Armenia, February 10, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/Pool

VP Vance’s timely TRIPP to the South Caucasus

Washington Politics

Vice President JD Vance’s regional tour to Armenia and Azerbaijan this week — the highest level visit by an American official to the South Caucasus since Vice President Joe Biden went to Georgia in 2009 — demonstrates that Washington is not ignoring Yerevan and Baku and is taking an active role in their normalization process.

Vance’s stop in Armenia included an announcement that Yerevan has procured $11 million in U.S. defense systems — a first — in particular Shield AI’s V-BAT, an ISR unmanned aircraft system. It was also announced that the second stage of a groundbreaking AI supercomputer project led by Firebird, a U.S.-based AI cloud and infrastructure company, would commence after having secured American licensing for the sale and delivery of an additional 41,000 NVIDIA GB300 graphics processing units.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Monitors at the United Nations General Assembly hall display the results of a vote on a resolution condemning the annexation of parts of Ukraine by Russia, amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, New York, U.S., October 12, 2022. REUTERS/David 'Dee' Delgado||

We're burying the rules based order. But what's next?

Global Crises

In a Davos speech widely praised for its intellectual rigor and willingness to confront established truths, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney finally laid the fiction of the “rules-based international order” to rest.

The “rules-based order” — or RBIO — was never a neutral description of the post-World War II system of international law and multilateral institutions. Rather, it was a discourse born out of insecurity over the West’s decline and unwillingness to share power. Aimed at preserving the power structures of the past by shaping the norms and standards of the future, the RBIO was invariably something that needed to be “defended” against those who were accused of opposing it, rather than an inclusive system that governed relations between all states.

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.