Follow us on social

Poll: Americans want Ukraine talks, conditions on aid to Israel

Poll: Americans want Ukraine talks, conditions on aid to Israel

Yet they are split along party lines on a host of issues ahead of the elections

Reporting | QiOSK

A new poll finds that 66% of Americans want a NATO-U.S. push for a negotiated settlement in the Ukraine War and less than 24% believe that weapons and aid should be given to Israel unconditionally in its war on Gaza.

But interestingly, not Ukraine, Gaza, or even China, are the biggest foreign policy issues on the minds of Americans this election season, at least according to a new survey by the Institute of Global Affairs (IGA). In fact, ahead of those hot button conflicts and global pressure points, immigration (39%), climate change (34%), and terrorism (32%) are ranked among respondents’ top three concerns. Israel’s war in Gaza (18%), the rise of China (16%), and the Ukraine war (13%) were far down in the list.

But that doesn’t mean Americans don’t have strong opinions — many along partisan lines — about the U.S. role in the world, its military footprint, and who they trust to do a better job as the next president.

IGA and YouGov polled a national sample of 1,835 voting-age Americans between August 15 and 22 with over-samples in swing states in the Rust Belt (Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin) and the Sun Belt (Georgia, Arizona and Nevada) regions. Questions covered an array of foreign policy topics from ongoing wars and conflicts to more general issues of militarism, immigration and soft power.

The poll found that a slight majority of voters on a national level (53%) trust Harris more to represent America’s interest on the global stage. However, voters in swing states trust Trump more not only in this category (53%), but also in his ability to reform immigration (56%), end the Ukraine and Gaza Wars (58%), and respond effectively to a potential Chinese attack on Taiwan (58%).

Also according to other results, 58% of Harris supporters stated that the U.S. should maintain or increase its number of overseas troops, while 58% of Trump supporters think that number should decrease. Some 75% of Americans agreed that the president should be required to obtain congressional approval before ordering any military action overseas, a check required by the Constitution but increasingly ignored in the post-9/11 era.

Another point of agreement among most Americans across party lines centers on the U.S. and NATO pushing for a negotiated settlement as a means to end the war in Ukraine. 70% of Republicans, 71% of Independents and 60% of Democrats marked support for this approach.

Stark ideological divides made themselves clear, however, regarding the situation in the Middle East. A strong majority of Democrats said the U.S. should either stop supporting Israel’s war efforts entirely or make that support conditional on a ceasefire (67%) — compared to just 41% of Republicans. While only 23% support unconditional aid to Israel, this too split along partisan lines, with only 8% of Democrats and 42% of Republicans agreeing with the idea.

Age also came in as a factor, with twice as many voters under 30 as those above 65 (23% vs. 11%) thinking the U.S. must stop supporting Israel’s war in Gaza altogether.

Opinions on President Joe Biden’s foreign policy record as he exits office are mixed. Americans cited NATO expansion and the release of American prisoners from Russia as key successes, with addressing climate change being the top choice among Democrats specifically. Republicans and Democrats saw immigration as Biden’s top foreign policy failure, and Democrats pointed most often to his administration’s handling of the war in Gaza as a key failure. Republicans widely see Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan and bringing the troops home as his biggest failure next to immigration.

On China, a majority of those polled (58%) say the U.S. should prepare for a Cold War, including 52% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans. As far as Taiwan goes, 40% say the U.S. should defend the island if militarily attacked by China, though 39 percent say they have “no opinion.”


(Shutterstock/Kilmer Media)

Reporting | QiOSK
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

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.