A national defense survey released Wednesday by the Ronald Reagan Institute found 64% of Americans want the United States to play a more active leadership role internationally, even as fewer than half said the U.S. military could win a major war overseas or effectively deter foreign aggression, according to a Fox News report.
The 2025 Reagan National Defense Survey found just 49% of respondents said they had a “great deal” of confidence in the armed forces, a drop of 21 percentage points since 2018. At the same time, respondents showed stronger support for supplying weapons to Ukraine and for committing forces to defend Taiwan if China attempted an invasion.
Why it matters: the results reflect a public that broadly favors American global engagement but doubts current military readiness. That tension has implications for defense strategy, resource priorities, congressional oversight and public trust in core institutions.
Background
The Ronald Reagan Institute released its annual National Defense Survey Wednesday. The survey is designed to measure public attitudes toward U.S. military capabilities, international threats and foreign policy priorities and to track shifts in those views over time. The institute is affiliated with the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute.
The findings fit into ongoing national debates over how the United States should balance deterrence, alliances and force posture amid a competitive rivalry with China and a continuing war in Ukraine. Reporters and lawmakers covering these issues can follow developments in our Politics Coverage.
Survey authors highlighted several consistent patterns: a strong preference for U.S. leadership abroad, rising concern about China, growing willingness to back allies with weapons or other assistance, and a notable decline in public confidence in the military since 2018.
- 64% of respondents said the U.S. should be more engaged and take the lead internationally.
- 49% said the military could win a war overseas, while 45% said it could effectively deter aggression.
- Only 49% reported a “great deal” of confidence in the armed forces, down 21 percentage points since 2018.
Survey findings and trends
Officials who briefed reporters noted that support for engagement is broad but conditional. When asked about specific missions or tradeoffs, respondents expressed more caution, signaling that popular support for leadership does not automatically translate into support for any particular use of force.
The survey showed growing public concern about China’s rise and intentions. That concern correlated with increased backing for a more robust U.S. posture in the Indo-Pacific and for concrete measures to assist partners such as Taiwan.
- Support for sending U.S. weapons to Ukraine rose to 64%, an increase of nine points from last year.
- About two-thirds of respondents said they want Ukraine to win, while 45% supported backing Kyiv until it regains all Russian-occupied territory.
- Support for committing U.S. forces to defend Taiwan rose to 60%, up from 48% last year.
Rachel Hoff, policy director at the Reagan Institute and a coauthor of the survey, said the decline in confidence is broad-based across party, gender and age groups and appears to have stabilized over the past two years. Hoff pointed to concerns about the military’s ability to deter great-power aggression and to questions about institutional independence as factors shaping views.
Officials and political reactions
Survey authors and some lawmakers framed the findings as a signal to policy- and budget-makers. Defense officials have acknowledged force-structure and readiness challenges in public testimony to Congress, and the survey gives political cover for lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to press for changes.
Some Republicans and Democrats used the data to argue opposing courses. Those favoring a stronger posture in the Indo-Pacific cited the rising public concern about China and the increased willingness to defend Taiwan. Others focused on the erosion of confidence in the military and urged attention to issues such as recruitment, retention, readiness and the consequences of politicization.
Reactions from the Pentagon emphasized ongoing adjustments to strategy and force posture to address the combined challenges posed by peer competitors and regional conflicts. Defense leaders say they must balance near-term readiness with long-term modernization, a choice that carries fiscal tradeoffs.
Policy context and budgetary stakes
The survey arrives as Congress and the White House debate defense priorities amid competing demands for domestic spending. Policymakers face a set of questions that the public’s answers will shape: how much to invest in new technologies and platforms, how to sustain forward presence with allies, and how to preserve the size and readiness of the force.
Restoring confidence could require both concrete changes and improved public messaging. Concrete steps might include bolstering training and maintenance budgets, accelerating recruitment and retention initiatives, and clarifying chains of command and civilian oversight. Communicating those steps will be important to reassure voters who question whether limits on U.S. military power hamper deterrence.
The survey also touches on governance issues. If large swaths of the public perceive the military as politicized or misaligned with civilian leadership, that perception can complicate civil-military relations and congressional oversight. Lawmakers have indicated they will use oversight hearings and budget control measures to press for accountability where they see gaps.
Analysis
The survey underscores a central tension for U.S. national security policy: a public that wants the country to lead globally but doubts whether the armed forces are prepared to deliver that leadership at scale. That combination complicates the political consensus needed to fund sustained presence and to deter major competitors.
For governance, the decline in confidence presents an accountability challenge. Military and civilian leaders will need to show how strategy aligns with capabilities and costs. Clear benchmarks for readiness and transparent oversight by Congress can help rebuild trust while constraining wasteful or politically driven initiatives.
On security, stronger backing for defending Taiwan and increased support for aiding Ukraine suggest sustained public appetite for confronting authoritarian advances through alliances and targeted assistance rather than unilateral large-scale deployments alone. That preference could push policymakers toward investments that emphasize partnerships, forward presence and capabilities tailored to deterrence in the Indo-Pacific.
Ultimately, the survey should prompt both strategic and institutional responses: a reassessment of force posture and budgeting priorities to match public expectations, and stronger communication and accountability to restore confidence in the military as a nonpartisan institution dedicated to national defense. Those debates will shape congressional oversight, budget negotiations and strategy-setting in the months ahead.
