The Structure of Foreign Policy Attitudes among American Leaders

The recent renaissance of interest in public opinion and foreign policy has generated a vigorous debate about the dimensions that characterize foreign policy attitudes. This paper assesses a scheme that emerged from Wittkopf's analyses of the Chicago Council on Foreign Policy surveys. Two dimensions (militant internationalism and cooperative internationalism) are crossed to create four types: hard-liners (support MI, oppose CI), internationalists (support both MI and CI), isolationists (oppose both MI and CI), and accommodationists (oppose MI, support CI). After developing scales for MI and CI, the scheme is tested with data from nationwide surveys of opinion leaders undertaken in 1976 (N = 2,282), 1980 (N = 2,502), and 1984 (N = 2,515). The MI/CI scheme is tested--and strongly supported--by examining the pattern of responses by hard-liners, internationalists, isolationists, and accommodationists to a broad range of questions from the three surveys of opinion leaders. The background attributes and other political attitudes associated with the four types are then examined. Correlations are strong for ideology and party; moderate for occupation; and weak for gender, age, education, travel, and military service. The conclusion raises some questions about the isolationist category and speculates about the broader implications of the findings.