July 6, 2015 | By Dina Smeltz, Craig Kafura

Americans Favor Deal with Iran; Willing to Back with Force

<a href="/sites/default/files/AmericansonIran_0.jpg" target="_blank">View larger</a>According to the 2015 Chicago Council Survey, fielded between May 25 and June 17, a majority of Americans support the outlines of a nuclear agreement with Iran when it is described as a tradeoff between the United States easing some economic sanctions against Iran, and Iran limiting its nuclear enrichment and development, increasing access to international inspectors, and extending the breakout time to develop a nuclear weapon (59%). Just over a third (36%) oppose the agreement. 

If Iran “commits a major violation of this agreement,” solid majorities would support the United States imposing tighter economic sanctions on Iran (80%) and continuing diplomatic efforts (71%).

At the same time, in principle, Americans seem willing to use force to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Before any mention of the current negotiations with Iran in the survey, two in three Americans said they would support “the use of US troops to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons” (67%), on par with opinion in 2014. If Iran violates the agreement, majorities would support the United States conducting cyber-attacks against Iran’s computer systems (60%) and airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities (56%). Fewer support sending US troops to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities (44% support, 51% oppose). 

Read all about Americans' views on US-Iran policy in the full brief.

About

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs highlights critical shifts in American public thinking on US foreign policy through public opinion surveys and research conducted under the Lester Crown Center on US Foreign Policy. 

The annual Chicago Council Survey, first conducted in 1974, is a valuable resource for policymakers, academics, media, and the general public. The Council also surveys American leaders in government, business, academia, think tanks, and religious organizations biennially to compare trends in their thinking with overall trends. And collaborating with partner organizations, the survey team periodically conducts parallel surveys of public opinion in other regions of the world to compare with US public opinion. 

The Running Numbers blog features regular commentary and analysis from the Council’s public opinion and US foreign policy research team, including a series of flash polls of a select group of foreign policy experts to assess their opinions on critical foreign policy topics driving the news.

Archive


| By Jack Benjamin

6 Ways in Which Liberal and Moderate Democrats Diverge on Key Issues

Democratic primary season is well under way, highlighted by recent debates and battleground fundraising by the large field of presidential hopefuls. As candidates deliver their pitch to voters, party supporters are not in lockstep on every issue.


| By Ruby Scanlon

The Generational Divide Over Climate Change

America’s young and old are split on what to do about climate change, presenting a major hurdle for the country’s youth to attain serious and immediate action.









| By Bettina Hammer

Americans Aren't Fans of Arms Sales

The United States has long been the tops arms supplier in the world. Yet public opinion data shows that Americans aren’t fans of U.S. arms sales.


| By Bettina Hammer

Little Admiration for the United States among MENA Publics

Most Americans believe that respect and admiration for the United States are instrumental in achieving US foreign policy goals. But a new poll finds publics in the Middle East and North Africa continue to view the United States unfavorably. 


| By Bettina Hammer

Peace to Prosperity Misses the Mark with Palestinians

At the June 25-26 Bahrain Peace to Prosperity Workshop, Jared Kushner presented the first component of a U.S. peace plan for the Middle East. But how does this plan sit with the Palestinian public?



| By Dina Smeltz, Brendan Helm

Scholars vs the Public: Collapse of the INF Treaty

In early February 2019, the United States withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty following President Trump’s October 2018 (and the Obama administration’s July 2014) accusations that Russia was failing to comply with the treaty. Russia withdrew from the treaty the next day.

Findings from a February 2019 Chicago Council on Global Affairs general public survey and a December 2018 Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) survey of International Relations (IR) scholars around the world illustrate how these different populations perceive the collapse of the INF Treaty.