A new Reuters/Ipsos poll has some surprising results.
A two-day survey of Americans conducted in the wake of Wagner Group militia leader Yevgeny Prigozhin’s audacious mutiny in Russia has found a substantial increase in support for aiding Ukraine’s resistance against invading Russian forces.
According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday morning, 65 percent of respondents approve of sending financial aid and armaments to Ukraine — up dramatically from 46 percent support in May. That includes 81 percent of Democrats as well as 56 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of independents. Poll takers also prefer a presidential candidate who will support Ukraine (67 percent) and back NATO (73 percent), and, to the tune of 76 percent, they believe the West’s material provisions for Ukraine’s defense communicates to China that the United States has “the will and capability to protect our interests, our allies and ourselves.”
Reuters/Ipsos polling is far less ambiguous than a recent NBC News poll conducted prior to Prigozhin’s rebellion testing eleven controversial policy proposals. One of those proposals involved “providing more funding and weapons to Ukraine.” That survey found that, among all voters, 37 percent describe themselves as being more likely to support a presidential candidate who backs Ukraine. By contrast, 40 percent say they are less likely to back that candidate. Among Republican primary voters, 52 percent say they are less likely to back a pro-Ukraine candidate compared with just 28 percent who would favor that candidate.
How do we square these divergent results? If we assume distinct methodologies and samples, question wording and order, and normal rates of error do not account for this deviation, it’s possible that events in Russia over the weekend have, at least for now, upended some assumptions about the wisdom of the West’s investment in Ukrainian sovereignty.
The mutiny created uncertainty about the relative commitment of the forces Russia has brought to bear in Ukraine to the Kremlin’s cause. It sowed chaos behind Russian lines, which Ukraine is exploiting. It has fixed a spotlight on internal political divisions inside Russia and exposed the hollowness of the Russian state both politically and militarily. It has incepted into observers’ minds an element of doubt that time is, in fact, on Russia’s side.
If voters intuit these conclusions about the possible near- and medium-term effects of Prigozhin’s mutiny, it is understandable that they would revise their views on the conflict that was the proximate cause of that insurrection.