23 January 2008
Most Americans and Russians agree that their governments should work together to prevent an arms race in space. Large majorities in both countries favor unilateral restraint and a treaty that would keep space free of weapons.
Americans and Russians also support treaties that would prohibit countries from attacking or interfering with each others' satellites and from testing or deploying weapons designed to attack satellites.
These are among the key findings of a WorldPublicOpinion.org poll of 1,247 Americans and 1,601 Russians developed in conjunction with the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland (CISSM). Knowledge Networks in the United States and the Levada Center in Russia conducted the interviews.
Majorities in both the United States (78%) and Russia (67%) say that as long as no other country puts weapons into space, their own governments should also refrain from doing so.
Most Russians (72%) and Americans (80%) also favor a new treaty banning all
weapons in space. Support for such a ban was strong among Americans even when
they were presented counter arguments about the potential military advantages of
deploying such systems.
Steven Kull, director of WorldPublicOpinion.org, noted that there was remarkable agreement within and between the two countries on the issue of space weapons.
"What is striking is the robust consensus among Russians as well as Americans, and among Republicans as well as Democrats that space should not be an arena for the major powers to compete for military advantage," Kull said.
John Steinbruner, director of CISSM, added that the observed consensus also reflects a robust conception of security interest.
"The use of space for common protection is, in fact, far more important for all countries under the circumstances of globalization than the pursuit of national advantage in performing traditional military missions," Steinbruner said.
Asked how high a priority their governments should place on bilateral cooperation to prevent an arms race in space, large majorities of Americans (86%) and Russians (also 86%) agree that it should be an important priority. A majority of Russians (53%) consider this a top priority.
American respondents were asked how they would like presidential candidates to deal with US national security and space weapons.
Sixty-seven percent overall said they would have more confidence in a presidential candidate who favors a treaty banning weapons in space, including 57 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Democrats. Seventy-three percent would also have more confidence in a candidate who took the position that as long as no other country puts weapons in space, the United States should not do so (Republicans 63%, Democrats, 83%).
Americans and Russians agree that a treaty prohibiting countries from attacking or interfering with each others' satellites is a good idea, even when given the argument that disabling satellites could be useful militarily. Seventy-eight percent of Americans and 65 percent of Russians say that such a treaty should be negotiated.
Similarly, both Americans (79%) and Russians (63%) favor a treaty that would prevent countries from testing or deploying weapons systems dedicated to attacking satellites, even when given the counterargument that arms control treaties are sometimes ineffective.
Furthermore, majorities of Americans (77%) and Russians (61%) favor a treaty prohibiting interference with satellites. Support for these treaties was bipartisan in the United States, though Democratic support was larger.
Americans and Russians also overwhelmingly reject the idea of preventively
destroying another country's missiles that could be used in an anti-satellite
The Russian poll had a nationwide sample of 1,601 respondents taken Sept. 14-24, 2007. Most questions were administered to a half sample, thus the margin of error is plus or minus 3.5 percent. The poll was fielded by the Levada Center using face-to-face interviews.
The study received development assistance from the Secure World Foundation;
additional financial support was provided by the John D. and Catherine T.
MacArthur Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation and the Ploughshares Fund.