Follow us on social

Shutterstock_2264967977-scaled

Is weakening support for Ukraine war following a historical pattern?

Recent polling shows that Biden’s pledge that the US will assist ‘for as long as it takes’ is a harder sell today.

Analysis | Washington Politics

Recent public opinion surveys regarding the extent of domestic backing for Washington’s Ukraine policy provide a decidedly mixed picture. A majority of Americans still support the Biden administration’s efforts to assist Kyiv’s war effort through financial and military aid and the sharing of military intelligence information.

However, the levels are down even from polls taken in late 2022, and they are down substantially from the extremely high support levels that existed immediately following Russia’s February 2022 invasion. 

American public opinion appears to be following the downward trajectory that marked previous U.S. war campaigns since World War II. However, this time the decline in support is taking place even though no U.S. forces are directly involved in the fighting, much less have incurred casualties. The growth of war weariness barely one year into the Ukraine conflict should be a warning signal to the administration that public support for Washington’s policy may be very fragile.

A February 15, 2023, Associated Press-NORC poll revealed that 48 percent of Americans favor providing U.S. weapons to Ukraine. Twenty-nine percent were opposed to that policy, and 22 percent said that they were neither in favor nor opposed. In May 2022, less than 3 months into the war, 60 percent were in favor of sending Kyiv weapons, while only 19 percent were opposed. 

Attitudes regarding financial assistance to Ukraine have followed a similar, albeit more modest, pattern of decline. The February AP poll showed that the pro-aid faction’s views no longer enjoyed even a plurality of support, much less a majority. Thirty-seven percent favored continuing to send such aid, but 38 percent were now opposed. In the earlier May survey, 44 percent backed aid, while 32 percent were opposed.

There was even some slippage in public support for imposing economic sanctions against Russia. It remained at a fairly robust 63 percent, but that was a drop from 71 percent in May. 

The gradual decline of public support for every aspect of the administration’s Ukraine policy is a development that is likely to prove troublesome going forward. 

Nevertheless, U.S. leaders seem determined to escalate Washington’s involvement on Ukraine’s behalf. The United States already has provided Kyiv with an abundance of sophisticated weaponry, and the list of items excluded because they are considered too provocative toward Russia continues to shrink. U.S. aid began by supplying small arms and ammunition, and it then graduated to such weapons as Javelin anti-tank missiles. Now, the United States is sending Abrams tanks into the fray. Washington’s willingness to share military intelligence to guide Ukrainian forces in their attacks on Russian targets also has grown steadily.

Although the administration insists that there are no plans to send F-16 fighters to Ukraine “for now,” it has not categorically ruled out even that highly provocative step. U.S. leaders are flirting with turning a proxy war into a direct war between NATO and Russia, even as domestic public enthusiasm for the existing, limited posture is waning.

The gradual erosion of domestic support for the Ukraine crusade follows the pattern of earlier U.S. ventures, especially the wars in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. In all of those cases, initial public enthusiasm for Washington’s intervention was extremely high. However, that enthusiasm plummeted and ended in bitter disillusionment as the mission dragged on with no clear victory in sight. The Ukraine mission is poised for a similar outcome

When President Harry Truman sent U.S. troops to defend South Korea from North Korea’s onslaught in late June 1950, 78 percent of Americans supported the move. Another Gallup survey in August, asking respondents if the intervention had been a mistake, found that only 20 percent embraced that view. After Communist China’s entry into the war in late 1950, however, the shift in public opinion was dramatic. A Gallup poll taken in early February 1951 showed that a plurality of 49 percent to 41 percent believed that Truman’s decision had been a blunder. Although support for the administration’s position recovered modestly thereafter, pro-intervention sentiment never again rose above 50 percent.

Public opinion regarding Washington’s intervention in Vietnam exhibited an even more pronounced downward spiral. Americans strongly favored Lyndon Johnson’s decision to dispatch U.S. ground forces to South Vietnam in 1965, 59 percent to 25 percent. By January 1967, however, support was down to 50 percent and opposition stood at 37 percent. At the point Richard Nixon entered the White House in January 1969, only 39 percent backed the war effort; 52 percent were now opposed. When the Paris Peace Accords were signed and direct U.S. military involvement in Vietnam’s strife ended in January 1973, pro-war sentiment had sagged to an anemic 29 percent. 

President George W. Bush encountered an even more rapid plunge of support with respect to his Iraq policy. A March 24, 2003, Gallup/USA Today/CNN poll showed that 72 percent of Americans supported the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, which had begun on March 19. Only 25 percent were opposed. However, by the summer of 2004, more than half of respondents in various surveys already believed that the U.S. intervention had been a mistake.

Initial support for using force in Afghanistan after the 9-11 terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center was even more lopsided than sentiment in favor of military action against Iraq. In November 2001, support levels were above 90 percent. An inexorable decline then began from that lofty height, although it was noticeably more gradual than public attitudes regarding Iraq. In 2004, support for the Afghanistan mission was still at 72 percent, and it was not until 2014 that more Americans were opposed to the counterinsurgency/nation-building campaign than were in favor. 

Favorable sentiment regarding the Iraq and Afghanistan interventions did not age well over the longer term either. An August 2021, AP/NORC survey found that 62 percent of Americans believed that the Afghanistan War had not been worth fighting, while the figure for the Iraq War was 63 percent.

The repeated — and sometimes rapid — onset of war weariness with respect to Washington’s wars of choice should be flashing a bright caution light to the Biden administration. The American people do not exhibit much patience regarding overseas crusades that produce inconclusive results, much less undeniable failure. Biden’s pledge that the United States will assist Ukraine “for as long as it takes” to repel Russia’s aggression may be issuing a promissory note that the American public is not willing to back.


Photo: photowalking via shutterstock.com
Analysis | Washington Politics
Somalia
Top image credit: U.S. forces host a range day with the Danab Brigade in Somalia, May 9, 2021. Special Operations Command Africa remains engaged with partner forces in Somalia in order to promote safety and stability across the Horn of Africa. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Zoe Russell)

Why the US can't beat al-Shabaab in Somalia

Africa

The New York Times reported earlier this month that recent gains by al-Shabaab Islamist militants in central and southern Somalia has prompted a debate within the State Department about closing the U.S. Embassy in Mogadishu and withdrawing most American personnel. At the forefront of some officials’ minds, according to the Times, are memories of recent foreign policy fiascos, such as the fall of the Afghan government amid a hasty American withdrawal in 2021.

There are good reasons to question why the U.S. has been unable to defeat al-Shabaab despite nearly 20 years of U.S. military involvement in the country. But the scale of the U.S. role is drastically different than that of Afghanistan, and the U.S. cannot necessarily be described as the most significant external security actor on the ground. At the same time, the Trump administration has given no indication that it will scale down drone strikes — meaning that the U.S. will continue to privilege military solutions.

keep readingShow less
Hegseth Guam
Top photo credit: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth departs Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, March 27, 2025. (DOD photo by U.S. Air Force Madelyn Keech)

Hegseth goes to 'spear point' Guam to prep for war with China

Asia-Pacific

The Guam headlines from the recent visit of the U.S. secretary of defense are only part of Secretary Hegseth’s maiden visit to the Pacific. It is Guam’s place in the larger picture - where the island fits into U.S. strategy - that helps us understand how the “tip of the spear” is being positioned. Perhaps overlooked, the arrangement of the “Guam piece” gives us a better sense not only of Guam’s importance to the United States, but also of how the U.S. sees the larger geopolitical competition taking shape.

Before he landed on Guam, the secretary of defense circulated a secret memo that prioritized U.S. readiness for a potential conflict with China over Taiwan. At the same time, it was reported that U.S. intelligence assessed that Guam would be “a major target of Chinese missile strikes” if China launched an invasion of Taiwan.

keep readingShow less
Pope Francis' legacy of inter-faith diplomacy
Top image credit: Pope Francis met with Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani, one of the Muslim world's leading authorities on March 6, 2021 in Najaf, Iraq. (Vatican Media via REUTERS)

Pope Francis' legacy of inter-faith diplomacy

Global Crises

One of the most enduring tributes to Pope Francis, who passed away this Easter, would be the appreciation for his legacy of inter-religious diplomacy, a vision rooted in his humility, compassion, and a commitment to bridging divides — between faiths, cultures, and ideologies — from a standpoint of mutual respect and tolerance.

Among his most profound contributions is his historic meeting with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Najaf, Iraq, on March 6, 2021. What made this meeting a true landmark in inter-faith dialogue was the fact it brought together, for the first time, the spiritual leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics and one of the most revered figures in Shia Islam, with influence on tens of millions of Shia Muslims globally. In a humble, yet moving ceremony, the meeting took place in al-Sistani’s modest home in Najaf. A frail al-Sistani, who rarely receives visitors and typically remains seated, stood to greet the 84-year-old Pope and held his hand, in a gesture that underscored mutual respect.

keep readingShow less

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.