American Public Opinion on US Responses to Russia's Nuclear Threats in Ukraine

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Kaitlin Peach, Andrew Fox, Kuhika Gupta, Joseph Ripberger, Cheyenne Black, Tristan Winkle, Hank Jenkins-Smith
{"title":"American Public Opinion on US Responses to Russia's Nuclear Threats in Ukraine","authors":"Kaitlin Peach,&nbsp;Andrew Fox,&nbsp;Kuhika Gupta,&nbsp;Joseph Ripberger,&nbsp;Cheyenne Black,&nbsp;Tristan Winkle,&nbsp;Hank Jenkins-Smith","doi":"10.1111/1758-5899.13490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, President Vladimir Putin's nuclear threats have reshaped the global nuclear landscape, potentially altering public attitudes toward nuclear deterrence and weapons use. This article examines American preferences for United States responses—nuclear, conventional, or nonmilitary—to three hypothetical scenarios involving Russia's potential use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Drawing on data from the 2022 National Security Survey by the Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis, we find that the American public generally favors conventional military responses over nuclear options, even in the face of increased nuclear threats. Qualitative analysis reveals that respondents primarily apply a “logic of consequences,” prioritizing strategic military utility over ethical or normative concerns when considering responses. These findings have significant implications for US nuclear policy and the theoretical discourse on nuclear nonuse.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51510,"journal":{"name":"Global Policy","volume":"16 2","pages":"235-245"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1758-5899.13490","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, President Vladimir Putin's nuclear threats have reshaped the global nuclear landscape, potentially altering public attitudes toward nuclear deterrence and weapons use. This article examines American preferences for United States responses—nuclear, conventional, or nonmilitary—to three hypothetical scenarios involving Russia's potential use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Drawing on data from the 2022 National Security Survey by the Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis, we find that the American public generally favors conventional military responses over nuclear options, even in the face of increased nuclear threats. Qualitative analysis reveals that respondents primarily apply a “logic of consequences,” prioritizing strategic military utility over ethical or normative concerns when considering responses. These findings have significant implications for US nuclear policy and the theoretical discourse on nuclear nonuse.

美国公众对美国应对俄罗斯在乌克兰核威胁的看法
自俄罗斯于2022年2月入侵乌克兰以来,弗拉基米尔·普京(Vladimir Putin)总统的核威胁重塑了全球核格局,可能会改变公众对核威慑和核武器使用的态度。本文考察了美国对美国应对措施的偏好——核武器、常规武器或非军事——以应对俄罗斯可能对乌克兰使用核武器的三种假设情景。根据公共政策研究与分析研究所(Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis) 2022年国家安全调查(National Security Survey)的数据,我们发现,即使面对日益增加的核威胁,美国公众也普遍倾向于传统的军事反应,而不是核选择。定性分析表明,受访者主要采用“后果逻辑”,在考虑回应时优先考虑战略军事效用,而不是道德或规范问题。这些发现对美国核政策和不使用核武器的理论论述具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Policy
Global Policy Multiple-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
125
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信