Messaging and the bomb: public attitudes toward nuclear proliferation

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper presents findings from an original survey of US public attitudes toward nuclear proliferation issues to determine what types of elite messaging, if any, impact those attitudes. It considers two contemporary proliferation topics, the Iran nuclear deal and the AUKUS nuclear-powered-submarine initiative, making it among the first to gather data on how Americans view the trilateral security partnership among Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The findings demonstrate that elite messaging does impact attitudes toward proliferation issues, but that those effects vary across different issues. Various types of messaging impacted attitudes toward the Iran deal, whereas only messaging related to alliance considerations impacted attitudes toward the AUKUS initiative. Although the survey provides mixed results as to whether different types of messaging have distinct effects on proliferation attitudes, the findings further reveal that opposition to the Iran deal is particularly insensitive to messaging and that messaging does more to confuse than clarify public views on the AUKUS initiative. The survey results provide insight into the nature and pliability of Americans’ proliferation attitudes, with important implications for policy makers seeking to identify effective messaging strategies for engaging the public on future nuclear-proliferation policies.