In 2025, the United States had the largest number of active military personnel out of all North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries, with almost *** million troops. The country with the second-largest number of military personnel was Türkiye, at around ******* active personnel. Additionally, the U.S. has by far the most armored vehicles in NATO, as well as the largest Navy and Air Force. NATO in brief NATO, which was formed in 1949, is the most powerful military alliance in the world. At its formation, NATO began with 12 member countries, which by 2024 had increased to 32. NATO was originally formed to deter Soviet expansion into Europe, with member countries expected to come to each other’s defense in case of an attack. Member countries are also obliged to commit to spending two percent of their respective GDPs on defense, although many states have recently fallen far short of this target. NATO in the contemporary world Some questioned the purpose of NATO after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union a few years later. In 2019, French President Emmanuel Macron even called the organization 'brain-dead' amid dissatisfaction with the leadership of the U.S. President at the time, Donald Trump. NATO has, however, seen a revival after Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Following the invasion, Sweden and Finland both abandoned decades of military neutrality and applied to join the alliance, with Finland joining in 2023 and Sweden in 2024.

As of 2025,the combined forces of NATO had approximately 3.44 million active military personnel, compared with 1.32 million active military personnel in the Russian military. The collective military capabilities of the 32 countries that make up NATO outnumber Russia in terms of aircraft, at 22,377 to 4,957, and in naval power, with 1,143 military ships, to 419. In terms of ground combat vehicles, NATO had an estimated 11,495 main battle tanks, to Russia's 5,750. The combined nuclear arsenal of the United States, United Kingdom, and France amounted to 5,559 nuclear warheads, compared with Russia's 5,580. NATO military spending In 2024, the combined military expenditure of NATO states amounted to approximately 1.47 trillion U.S. dollars, with the United States responsible for the majority of this spending, as the U.S. military budget amounted to 967.7 billion dollars that year. The current U.S. President, Donald Trump has frequently taken aim at other NATO allies for not spending as much on defense as America. NATO member states are expected to spend at least two percent of their GDP on defense, although the U.S. has recently pushed for an even higher target. As of 2024, the U.S. spent around 3.38 percent of its GDP on defense, the third-highest in the alliance, with Estonia just ahead on 3.43 percent, and Poland spending the highest share at 4.12 percent. US aid to Ukraine The pause in aid to Ukraine from the United States at the start of March 2025 marks a significant policy change from Ukraine's most powerful ally. Throughout the War in Ukraine, military aid from America has been crucial to the Ukrainian cause. In Trump's first term in office, America sent a high number of anti-tank Javelins, with this aid scaling up to more advanced equipment after Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022. The donation of around 40 HIMARs rocket-artillery system, for example, has proven to be one of Ukraine's most effective offensive weapons against Russia. Defensive systems such as advanced Patriot air defense units have also helped protect Ukraine from aerial assaults. Although European countries have also provided significant aid, it is unclear if they will be able to fill the hole left by America should the pause in aid goes on indefinitely.

A majority of people in all countries which are part of NATO would vote to stay in the military alliance if they were given the option, with 70 percent of respondents advising they would vote in favor of NATO membership, compared with 17 percent who don't know, and 14 percent who would vote to leave. According to this survey which was conducted in 2024, NATO membership is most popular in Albania and Poland, with 98 percent and 91 percent indicating they would vote for NATO membership, and least popular in Slovenia, with just a slight majority of people there supporting membership.

In 2025, Norway spent an estimated ***** U.S. dollars per capita on defense, compared with the NATO average of ******* per capita.

The average for 2021 based on 28 countries was 82.2 percent. The highest value was in Denmark: 99.02 percent and the lowest value was in Albania: 26.98 percent. The indicator is available from 2011 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

On May 15, 2022, the Swedish government announced its intention to join the military alliance NATO. After over a year of negotiating with the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the two countries reached an agreement, with Erdoğan stating that he would support a Swedish NATO-membership. The final hurdle was removed in February 2024 when Hungary's parliament voted to approve Sweden's membership application, the last NATO-member needing to do so. As of March 2024, only a formal signing of the membership remains before Sweden will become the 32nd NATO member.

Membership comes after decades of neutrality

The Nordic country had remained outside the organization, referring to its neutrality, a stance supported by a majority of the population over the past years. However, following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, there were more Swedes in favor of a NATO-membership in 2022. By May 2022, nearly 60 percent of the Swedes were in favor of the country joining NATO, a trend that continued into 2023 and 2024. Also in Sweden's neighboring country Finland, who joined NATO in April 2023, there was a majority in favor of joining the alliance.

Increased military spending

Sweden's military spending reached a new record in 2022 amid the rising global tensions. As a share of the gross domestic product (GDP), the military expenditure reached 1.3 percent, below the NATO-target of two percent. Read all about the Swedish Armed Forces here.

1199 persons were interviewed in the FRG, 1228 in France, 1178 in Great Britain, 1164 in Italy and 500 in Greece. The study has the USIA-designation XX-17. The USIA-Studies of the XX-Series (international relations) from XX-2 to XX-18 are archived under ZA Study Nos. 1969-1976 as well as 2069-2074 and 2124-2127.

For this survey, opinions were sought from respondents across Europe and the United States on several topics of national and international interest. These topics included: (1) the European Union (EU) and the United States as superpowers, threats facing the global community, (2) the United Nations (UN), (3) the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), (4) general opinions of various countries, institutions, and people, (5) actions taken by the George W. Bush Administration, (6) intervention policy, (7) Turkey's (potential) membership in the EU, (8) Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, (9) China's human rights record, and (10) political preferences and voter intentions. Regarding the EU and the United States as superpowers, respondents were asked whether it was desirable for the EU or the United States to exert strong leadership in the world, whether the EU or the United States or neither should be superpowers, if the motive for opposing the EU becoming a superpower was increased military expenditure, whether increased military expenditure was necessary for the EU to become a superpower, whether the EU should concentrate on becoming an economic power, and if a more powerful EU should cooperate with the United States. Respondents were asked about threats facing the world such as Islamic fundamentalism, immigration, international terrorism, global warming, the spread of diseases such as AIDS, a major economic downturn, and the spread of nuclear weapons, and whether they expected to be affected by any of them in the next ten years. With respect to the United Nations, respondents were asked their overall opinion of the UN, whether they believed UN involvement legitimized the use of military force, whether the UN could help manage the world's problems better than a single country could, and whether the UN helps to distribute the costs of international actions. Regarding the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), respondents were asked whether NATO could help share the United States military burden, whether NATO was an essential part of national security, if NATO involvement legitimized the use of military force, if NATO was dominated by the United States, and whether Europe should maintain a defensive alliance independent of the United States. Respondents were asked to give their opinions on the following countries, institutions, and population groups: the United States, Russia, Israel, the European Union, Palestinians, Italy, Turkey, China, Iran, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Spain. In regard to the Bush Administration, respondents were asked whether relations between the United States and Europe were better or worse, whether Bush's efforts to improve relations between the United States and Europe were successful, what the future of relations between the United States and Europe would be because of Bush's efforts, and whether or not Europe should be more independent from the United States with respect to issues of security and diplomacy. Respondents were also asked whether they approved of Bush's handling of international policies. With respect to intervention policy, the following questions were asked: should the EU help establish democracies, should the EU be involved in monitoring elections, would the respondent be in favor of the EU supporting trade unions, human rights associations, and religious groups in an effort to promote freedom, and should the EU support political dissidents and impose political and economic sanctions in opposition to an authoritarian regime. Respondents were asked several questions regarding Turkey's membership in the EU, including whether Turkey's membership in the EU could help promote peace and stability in the Middle East, if Turkey's membership in the EU would be good for the EU in economic terms, whether a predominately Muslim country belonged in the EU, if Turkey was too populous to become a member of the EU, and whether Turkey was too poor to be admitted into the EU. Respondents were also asked what they felt was the best way to put pressure on Iran in light of its attempts to acquire nuclear weapons and whether or not the EU should limit its relations with China due to China's human rights violations. Respondents were also asked about their voting intentions for the next elections and what factors they took into consideration when deciding for which party to vote. The dat

Einstellung zum arabisch-israelischen Konflikt, zur Wirtschaftspolitik,zur Europäischen Union, zur Ausländerpolitik und Einwanderung, zuinternationalen Beziehungen, zum Irak-Krieg, zu Militärinterventionen,zur nationalen Sicherheit, zur NATO, zu Atomwaffen, zur politischenEinflussnahme, zum Terrorismus und zu den Vereinten Nationen. Themen: Befürwortung der Übernahme einer aktiven Rolle des Landes inder internationalen Politik; Einstellung zur globalen Führungsrolle derUSA; Präferenz für eine europäische oder amerikanischeSupermachtstellung; Ablehnung des Supermachtstatus der EU wegen einer zuerwartenden Erhöhung von Militärausgaben; wünschenswerte Stärkung derEU, um zu einem besseren Wettstreit mit den USA zu kommen; Einstellungzur Höhe der Verteidigungsausgaben des Landes; Einstufung potentiellerBedrohungen der Interessen Europas durch den islamischenFundamentalismus, den internationalen Terrorismus, die hohe Zahl vonEinwanderern und Flüchtlingen in Europa, den militärischen Konfliktzwischen Israel und seinen arabischen Nachbarn, die weltweiteAusbreitung von AIDS, den wirtschaftlichen Abschwung sowie einenterroristischen Angriff mit Massenvernichtungswaffen; Einstellung zu denVereinten Nationen; Sympathie-Skalometer (100-stufige Skala) für dieUSA, Russland, Israel, die Europäische Union, die Palästinenser,Nordkorea, die Türkei, China, den Iran, Saudi-Arabien, Frankreich undDeutschland; Einstellung zur internationalen Politik der amerikanischenRegierung unter George W. Bush; Existenz gemeinsamer Wertvorstellungenzwischen den USA und der EU; Europäische Union oder USA als wichtigsterPartner des eigenen Landes; Einschätzung der Entwicklung der Nähezwischen Europa und den USA; Wunsch nach engerer Partnerschaft zwischenden USA und der EU (Split: allgemein und in Anbetracht desIrak-Krieges); Bedeutung der NATO für die Sicherheit; Einstellung zueinem Einsatz des nationalen Militärs zur Vereitelung einesterroristischen Anschlags, zur Versorgung von Kriegsopfern mitNahrungsmitteln und medizinischer Hilfe, zur Beendigung der Kämpfe ineinem Bürgerkrieg, zur Sicherung der Ölversorgung, zur Bereitstellungvon Friedenstruppen nach Beendigung eines Bürgerkrieges, zur Entmachtungeiner menschenrechtsverletzenden Regierung, zur Verhinderung derVerbreitung von Atomwaffen sowie zur Verteidigung einesNATO-Mitgliedslandes; Einstellung zur Stationierung von Truppen deseigenen Landes in Afghanistan; Preis für den Irak-Krieg zu hoch (Split:allgemein und unter dem Gesichtspunkt der Befreiung des irakischenVolkes); Einstellung zur Entscheidung der nationalen Regierung, Truppenbzw. keine Truppen in den Irak zu entsenden; Einstellung zur Entsendungvon Landestruppen in den Irak im Falle der Zustimmung der UN (Split:allgemein und unter US-Kommando); Auswirkung der Militäraktion im Irakauf die Bedrohung durch den weltweiten Terrorismus; Einstellung zurNotwendigkeit, sich vor der Anwendung militärischer Gewalt derUnterstützung der UN (dreifacher Split: NATO bzw. der wichtigsteneuropäischen Verbündeten) zu versichern; Einstellung zu einerMitgliedschaft der Türkei in der EU; Hauptgrund für eine Befürwortungbzw. Ablehnung einer Mitgliedschaft der Türkei in der EU; Einstellung zueinem Militäreinsatz der Landestruppen in einem anderen Land zurBeseitigung eines drohenden Terrorangriffs (Split: einem Bürgerkrieg inAfrika) nach Zustimmung der UN (dreifacher Split: der NATO bzw. derwichtigsten europäischen Verbündeten); Unterstützung eines solchenMilitäreinsatzes trotz fehlender Zustimmung der UN, der NATO bzw. derwichtigsten europäischen Verbündeten; wirtschaftliche oder militärischeMacht als wichtigste Grundlage zur Beeinflussung des Weltgeschehens;Einstellung zur Notwendigkeit eines Krieges und zum Übergehen der UN;militärische Stärke als Friedensgarant; Maßnahmen zur nationalenSicherheit nur mit den Bündnispartnern ergreifen; Unabhängigkeit derEuropäer von den USA durch militärische Stärke; Militäraktionen oderErhöhung des Lebensstandards als bester Weg zur Terrorismusbekämpfung. Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter; höchster Schulabschluss;Parteipräferenz (Sonntagsfrage); wichtigste Issues für eigeneWahlentscheidung bei der nächsten Wahl; Einstufung auf einemLinks-Rechts-Kontinuum; Schulbildung, Beruf, Haushaltsgröße; Wohnorttyp;(in den USA zusätzlich: Migrationshintergrund; Land). Attitudes towards the Arab/Israeli conflict, economic policy, theEuropean Union, immigration, international relations, the Iraq war,military interventions, national security, NATO, nuclear weapons, theuse of political power, terrorism, and the United Nations. Topics: support for an active role of own country in internationalpolitics; attitude towards strong leadership in world affairs by theUSA; personal preference for superpower status of the European Unionand/or the USA; against superpower status for the European Unionbecause of higher military spending; support for a politicalstrengthening of the European Union to better compete with the USA orto better cooperate with the USA; assessment of own country´s amount ofmilitary expenditure; assessment of potential international threats toEurope/the USA: Islamic fundamentalism, large numbers of immigrants andrefugees, international terrorism, the military conflict between Israeland its Arab neighbors, the global spread of AIDS (HIV), a majoreconomic downturn, a terrorist attack on own country using weapons ofmass destruction; attitude towards the United Nations in general;100-point sympathy temperature scale for the USA, Russia, Israel, theEuropean Union, the Palestinians, North Korea, Turkey, China, Iran,Saudi Arabia, France, and Germany; assessment of the George W. Bushadministration´s handling of foreign policy; European Union and USAhave enough common values to cooperate; European Union or the USA moreimportant for vital interests of own country; assessment of thedevelopment of transatlantic relations in recent years; support forcloser partnership between the European Union and the USA in general(split A) and especially considering the developments in Iraq (splitB); opinion on NATO´s importance for own country´s security; attitudetowards the use of own country´s military to prevent an imminentterrorist attack, to provide humanitarian assistance to victims of war,to stop civil wars, to ensure the supply of oil, for peacekeepingmissions, to remove governments that abuse human rights, to preventnuclear proliferation, and to defend a NATO ally under attack;assessment of costs in lives and money for Iraq war (split A) andespecially considering the liberation of the Iraqi people (split B);attitude towards presence of own country´s troops in Iraq (exceptFrance, Germany, Spain, Turkey); attitude towards decision not to sendtroops to Iraq (only France, Germany, Turkey); attitude towardsdecision to remove troops from Iraq (only Spain); attitude towards owncountry´s troops in Iraq if supported by United Nations mandate (splitA) or if led by the USA under United Nations mandate (split B);assessment of Iraq war´s influence on the threat of internationalterrorism; attitude towards the need to ensure support for militaryaction similar to Iraq war by the United Nations (split A), by theEuropean Union (split B) or by the most important European allies(split C); attitude towards European Union membership of Turkey; mainreasons for rejecting/supporting Turkish EU membership; support formilitary action to prevent an imminent terror attack if sanctioned bythe United Nations (split A), NATO (split B), the most importantEuropean allies (split C); support for military action to end a civilwar in Africa if sanctioned by the United Nations (split A), NATO(split B), the most important European allies (split C); support formilitary action without mandate by the United Nations (split A), NATO(split B), the most important European allies (split C); economicstrength more important than military strength in world affairs;attitude towards the necessity of war to fight injustice; attitudetowards ignoring the United Nations if vital interests of country areconcerned; military strength is best way to secure peace; importance ofcooperating with allies on national security issues; need for Europe tostrengthen military to reduce dependence on USA; regarding globalissues USA does not need European support; combating terrorismmilitarily is best; raising living standards in foreign countries isbest way to combat terrorism; political affiliation (USA only). Demography: sex; age; highest level of education received; age whenfinished full-time education; current occupation; voting intention(Sonntagsfrage); most important political issues in decision to vote;self-placement on a left-right continuum, size of household; ethnicbackground (US only). Additional variables: country, region, degree of urbanity. Weights: redressment weight for age, gender and education (USA: racenot considered); redressment weight for age, gender and education (USA:race considered); population weight for all European countries;population weight for European countries except Slovakia, Turkey andSpain; population weight for European countries except Turkey.

Summary: opinions across Europe and the United States on several topics of national and international interest. These topics included: the European Union (EU) and the United States as superpowers, threats facing the global community, the United Nations (UN), the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), general opinions of various countries, institutions, and people, actions taken by the George W. Bush Administration, intervention policy, Turkey´s (potential) membership in the EU, Iran´s pursuit of nuclear weapons, China´s human rights record, and political preferences and voter intentions.

Topics: Regarding the EU and the United States as superpowers, respondents were asked whether it was desirable for the EU or the United States to exert strong leadership in the world, whether the EU or the United States or neither should be superpowers, if the motive for opposing the EU becoming a superpower was increased military expenditure, whether increased military expenditure was necessary for the EU to become a superpower, whether the EU should concentrate on becoming an economic power, and if a more powerful EU should cooperate with the United States. Respondents were asked about threats facing the world such as Islamic fundamentalism, immigration, international terrorism, global warming, the spread of diseases such as AIDS, a major economic downturn, and the spread of nuclear weapons, and whether they expected to be affected by any of them in the next ten years. With respect to the United Nations, respondents were asked their overall opinion of the UN, whether they believed UN involvement legitimized the use of military force, whether the UN could help manage the world´s problems better than a single country could, and whether the UN helps to distribute the costs of international actions. Regarding the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), respondents were asked whether NATO could help share the United States military burden, whether NATO was an essential part of national security, if NATO involvement legitimized the use of military force, if NATO was dominated by the United States, and whether Europe should maintain a defensive alliance independent of the United States. Respondents were asked to give their opinions on the following countries, institutions, and population groups: the United States, Russia, Israel, the European Union, Palestinians, Italy, Turkey, China, Iran, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Spain. In regard to the Bush Administration, respondents were asked whether relations between the United States and Europe were better or worse, whether Bush´s efforts to improve relations between the United States and Europe were successful, what the future of relations between the United States and Europe would be because of Bush´s efforts, and whether or not Europe should be more independent from the United States with respect to issues of security and diplomacy. Respondents were also asked whether they approved of Bush´s handling of international policies. With respect to intervention policy, the following questions were asked: should the EU help establish democracies, should the EU be involved in monitoring elections, would the respondent be in favor of the EU supporting trade unions, human rights associations, and religious groups in an effort to promote freedom, and should the EU support political dissidents and impose political and economic sanctions in opposition to an authoritarian regime. Respondents were asked several questions regarding Turkey´s membership in the EU, including whether Turkey´s membership in the EU could help promote peace and stability in the Middle East, if Turkey´s membership in the EU would be good for the EU in economic terms, whether a predominately Muslim country belonged in the EU, if Turkey was too populous to become a member of the EU, and whether Turkey was too poor to be admitted into the EU. Respondents were also asked what they felt was the best way to put pressure on Iran in light of its attempts to acquire nuclear weapons and whether or not the EU should limit its relations with China due to China´s human rights violations. Respondents were also asked about their voting intentions for the next elections and what factors they took into consideration when deciding for which party to vote.

Demography: gender, age, level of education, occupation, household size, region, and ethnicity (United States only).

This study sought opinions from respondents across Europe and the United States on various topics pertaining to foreign policy and international relations. The primary topics included: (1) the state of relations between the European Union (EU) and the United States, (2) the George W. Bush Administration's handling of global affairs, (3) the functioning of the European Union (EU), (4) the relevance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), (5) general opinions on various countries, institutions, and population groups, (6) perception of potential international threats, (7) China as an emerging power, (8) Iran and its pursuit of nuclear weapons, (9) civil liberties and national security, (10) the compatibility of Islam and democracy, and (11) the role of the EU and the United States in establishing democracy. Respondents were asked about relations between the United States and Europe including whether it was desirable for the EU to exert strong leadership in the world, whether they were in favor of the United States exerting strong leadership in the world, whether relations between the United States and Europe had improved or gotten worse, and how relations between the United States and Europe regarding security and diplomatic affairs should evolve in the future. Respondents also were asked whether they approved or disapproved of the way George W. Bush was handling international policies. There were several questions that related to the functioning of the EU, such as (1) whether the EU should have its own foreign minister, (2) whether military or economic power is more important when dealing with international problems, (3) whether the EU should seek to strengthen its military power, (4) what effect Turkey's membership would have on the EU, and (5) how further enlargement would change the EU's role in world affairs and its ability to promote peace and democracy. Respondents were questioned about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and whether they believed NATO was still essential to their country's national security. Respondents were asked to give their opinions on the following countries, institutions, and population groups using a scale of 0 (very cold, unfavorable feeling) to 100 (very warm, favorable feeling): the United States, Russia, Israel, the European Union, Palestinians, Italy, Turkey, China, Iran, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Spain. Respondents were also asked about potential threats facing Europe and the United States such as international terrorism, the inflow of immigrants and refugees, Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, the spread of diseases like avian flu, a major economic downturn, global warming, the growing economic and military power of China, instability in Iraq, and Islamic fundamentalism. Respondents were then asked if they perceived these threats to be important in the next ten years. With respect to Iran, respondents were asked whether action should be taken to prevent it from obtaining nuclear weapons, what would be the best and worst options for preventing Iran from obtaining them, whether military action should be taken if diplomacy could not prevent Iran from obtaining them, and which country or organization was best suited for handling the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons. The survey contained a series of questions relating to national security and civil liberties. Opinions were sought on whether respondents would support the government taking actions such as monitoring phone calls, Internet communication, and banking transactions made by citizens, all in the name of preventing terrorism. Questions were also asked about Islam and democracy including whether the values of the two institutions were compatible or not, and if there were problems, whether they existed in Islam as a whole or just in certain Islamic groups. In addition, respondents were asked if the EU and the United States should help establish democracy in other countries, whether this help should be dependent on whether or not the countries would be more likely to oppose the EU and/or the United States, and whether the EU and United States should monitor elections in new democracies, support independent groups and political dissidents, impose political and/or economic sanctions, or intervene militarily in order to establish democracy. Finally, respondents were asked about their voting intentions for

Just ahead of NATO's 75th Anniversary Summit in Washington, D.C. approximately 70 percent of people within NATO member states would vote to remain a member of the military alliance, compared with 14 percent who would vote to leave.

Bewertung globaler Bedrohungen. Einstellung zur Führungsrolle der USAbzw. der EU. Einstellung zum Nuklearstreit mit dem Iran, zu staatlichenBefugnissen zur Terrorabwehr und zur Demokratieförderung. Einschätzungdes wachsenden Machtpotentials Chinas. Themen: Häufigkeit politischer Gespräche im Freundeskreis; politischeMeinungsführerschaft; Einstellung zur globalen Führungsrolle der USAsowie der Europäischen Union; Einschätzung der Beziehung zwischen denUSA und Europa; Einstellung zur Partnerschaft zwischen den USA und derEU in der Sicherheits- und Außenpolitik; Beurteilung derinternationalen Politik der amerikanischen Regierung unter George W.Bush; Einstellung zur Stärkung der internationalen Rolle der EU (Skala:eigener Außenminister, Militäreinsätze, wirtschaftliche Stärke,Stärkung der Streitkräfte); Einstellung zur EU-Mitgliedschaft derTürkei; Einstellung zur Ausweitung der EU als Mittel zur Stärkung derinternationalen Bedeutung, zur Förderung von Frieden und Demokratie,als Hinderungsgrund für eine gemeinsame europäische Identität;Bedeutung der NATO für die nationale Sicherheit; Einstellung zu denVereinten Nationen; Sympathie-Skalometer (100-Punkte-Skala) für dieUSA, Russland, Israel, die Europäische Union, die Palästinenser,Italien, die Türkei, China, den Iran, das Vereinigte Königreich,Frankreich, Deutschland und Spanien; Einstufung der potentiellenBedrohung Europas und der USA durch den internationalen Terrorismus,die hohe Zahl von Einwanderern und Flüchtlingen nach Europa, den Erwerbvon Atomwaffen durch den Iran, die weltweite Ausbreitung von Seuchenwie der Vogelgrippe, eine Konjunkturdämpfung, die globale Erderwärmung,die wachsende Macht Chinas, Gewalt und Instabilität im Irak sowie denislamischen Fundamentalismus (Split: Vorgabe unterschiedlicherAntwortkategorien); Einschätzung des Bedrohungspotentials durch diewachsende Wirtschaft bzw. Militärmacht Chinas; präferierteVorgehensweise der Europäischen Union und der USA im Nuklearstreit mitdem Iran: Duldung des Erwerbs von Atomwaffen durch den Iran oderweitere Bemühungen, den Iran davon abzuhalten; präferierte sowiebesonders abgelehnte Vorgehensweise, um den Iran vom Atomwaffenerwerbabzuhalten; Einstellung zu einem Militäreinsatz gegen den Iran;kompetenteste Verhandlungspartner zur Lösung des Irankonflikts(Vereinte Nationen, NATO, die USA oder die Europäische Gemeinschaft);Einstellung zu staatlichen Befugnissen zur Terrorabwehr: Überwachungvon Telefongesprächen, der Kommunikation im Internet und desGeldtransfers bei Banken sowie die Installation von Überwachungskamerasauf öffentlichen Plätzen; Einstellung zur Vereinbarkeit der Werte desIslam mit der Demokratie des eigenen Landes; Islam allgemein oderbestimmte islamische Gruppierungen als Grund für dieNichtvereinbarkeit; Einstellung zur Rolle der Europäischen Union bzw.der USA beim Demokratisierungsprozess in anderen Ländern; Festhalten ander Demokratisierungsabsicht auch bei Protesten dieser Länder gegendiese europäische bzw. amerikanische Politik und bei der Wahl islamischfundamentalistischer Führer; befürwortete Maßnahmen zurDemokratieförderung in autoritären Regimes durch: die Beobachtung vonWahlen, die Unterstützung von unabhängigen Gruppen wie Gewerkschaften,humanitäre Hilfsorganisationen und religiöse Gruppen sowie vonRegimekritikern oder Verhängen politischer und wirtschaftlicherSanktionen sowie militärische Intervention; wirtschaftliche odermilitärische Macht als präferierte Grundlage zur Beeinflussung desWeltgeschehens; Einstellung zur Notwendigkeit von Krieg; Einstellungzur Orientierung an den Alliierten in Sicherheitsfragen;Selbsteinschätzung der politischen Orientierung. Demographie: Parteipräferenz; Parteipräferenz bei der nächstenPräsidentschaftswahl; Selbsteinstufung auf einemLinks-Rechts-Kontinuum; Konfession; Geschlecht; Alter; höchsterSchulabschluss; Beruf; Migrationshintergrund; Haushaltsgröße; Land;Urbanisierungsgrad. Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Gewichtung. Opinions across Europe and the United States on various topicspertaining to foreign policy and international relations. The primarytopics included: the state of relations between the European Union (EU)and the United States, the George W. Bush Administration´s handling ofglobal affairs,) the functioning of the European Union (EU), therelevance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), generalopinions on various countries, institutions, and population groups,perception of potential international threats, China as an emergingpower, Iran and its pursuit of nuclear weapons, civil liberties andnational security, the compatibility of Islam and democracy, and therole of the EU and the United States in establishing democracy. Topics: Respondents were asked about relations between the UnitedStates and Europe including whether it was desirable for the EU toexert strong leadership in the world, whether they were in favor of theUnited States exerting strong leadership in the world, whetherrelations between the United States and Europe had improved or gottenworse, and how relations between the United States and Europe regardingsecurity and diplomatic affairs should evolve in the future.Respondents also were asked whether they approved or disapproved of theway George W. Bush was handling international policies. There wereseveral questions that related to the functioning of the EU, such aswhether the EU should have its own foreign minister, whether militaryor economic power is more important when dealing with internationalproblems, whether the EU should seek to strengthen its military power,what effect Turkey´s membership would have on the EU, and how furtherenlargement would change the EU´s role in world affairs and its abilityto promote peace and democracy. Respondents were questioned about theNorth Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and whether they believedNATO was still essential to their country´s national security.Respondents were asked to give their opinions on the followingcountries, institutions, and population groups using a scale of 0 (verycold, unfavorable feeling) to 100 (very warm, favorable feeling): theUnited States, Russia, Israel, the European Union, Palestinians, Italy,Turkey, China, Iran, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Spain.Respondents were also asked about potential threats facing Europe andthe United States such as international terrorism, the inflow ofimmigrants and refugees, Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, the spread ofdiseases like avian flu, a major economic downturn, global warming, thegrowing economic and military power of China, instability in Iraq, andIslamic fundamentalism. Respondents were then asked if they perceivedthese threats to be important in the next ten years. With respect toIran, respondents were asked whether action should be taken to preventit from obtaining nuclear weapons, what would be the best and worstoptions for preventing Iran from obtaining them, whether militaryaction should be taken if diplomacy could not prevent Iran fromobtaining them, and which country or organization was best suited forhandling the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons. The survey contained aseries of questions relating to national security and civil liberties.Opinions were sought on whether respondents would support thegovernment taking actions such as monitoring phone calls, Internetcommunication, and banking transactions made by citizens, all in thename of preventing terrorism. Questions were also asked about Islam anddemocracy including whether the values of the two institutions werecompatible or not, and if there were problems, whether they existed inIslam as a whole or just in certain Islamic groups. In addition,respondents were asked if the EU and the United States should helpestablish democracy in other countries, whether this help should bedependent on whether or not the countries would be more likely tooppose the EU and/or the United States, and whether the EU and UnitedStates should monitor elections in new democracies, support independentgroups and political dissidents, impose political and/or economicsanctions, or intervene militarily in order to establish democracy.Finally, respondents were asked about their voting intentions for thenext elections and what factors they took into consideration whendeciding for which party to vote. demography: gender, age, level of education, occupation, householdsize, region, and ethnicity.

Opinions across Europe and the United States on various topics pertaining to foreign policy and international relations. The primary topics included: the state of relations between the European Union (EU) and the United States, the George W. Bush Administration´s handling of global affairs,) the functioning of the European Union (EU), the relevance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), general opinions on various countries, institutions, and population groups, perception of potential international threats, China as an emerging power, Iran and its pursuit of nuclear weapons, civil liberties and national security, the compatibility of Islam and democracy, and the role of the EU and the United States in establishing democracy.

Topics: Respondents were asked about relations between the United States and Europe including whether it was desirable for the EU to exert strong leadership in the world, whether they were in favor of the United States exerting strong leadership in the world, whether relations between the United States and Europe had improved or gotten worse, and how relations between the United States and Europe regarding security and diplomatic affairs should evolve in the future. Respondents also were asked whether they approved or disapproved of the way George W. Bush was handling international policies. There were several questions that related to the functioning of the EU, such as whether the EU should have its own foreign minister, whether military or economic power is more important when dealing with international problems, whether the EU should seek to strengthen its military power, what effect Turkey´s membership would have on the EU, and how further enlargement would change the EU´s role in world affairs and its ability to promote peace and democracy. Respondents were questioned about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and whether they believed NATO was still essential to their country´s national security. Respondents were asked to give their opinions on the following countries, institutions, and population groups using a scale of 0 (very cold, unfavorable feeling) to 100 (very warm, favorable feeling): the United States, Russia, Israel, the European Union, Palestinians, Italy, Turkey, China, Iran, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Spain. Respondents were also asked about potential threats facing Europe and the United States such as international terrorism, the inflow of immigrants and refugees, Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, the spread of diseases like avian flu, a major economic downturn, global warming, the growing economic and military power of China, instability in Iraq, and Islamic fundamentalism. Respondents were then asked if they perceived these threats to be important in the next ten years. With respect to Iran, respondents were asked whether action should be taken to prevent it from obtaining nuclear weapons, what would be the best and worst options for preventing Iran from obtaining them, whether military action should be taken if diplomacy could not prevent Iran from obtaining them, and which country or organization was best suited for handling the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons. The survey contained a series of questions relating to national security and civil liberties. Opinions were sought on whether respondents would support the government taking actions such as monitoring phone calls, Internet communication, and banking transactions made by citizens, all in the name of preventing terrorism. Questions were also asked about Islam and democracy including whether the values of the two institutions were compatible or not, and if there were problems, whether they existed in Islam as a whole or just in certain Islamic groups. In addition, respondents were asked if the EU and the United States should help establish democracy in other countries, whether this help should be dependent on whether or not the countries would be more likely to oppose the EU and/or the United States, and whether the EU and United States should monitor elections in new democracies, support independent groups and political dissidents, impose political and/or economic sanctions, or intervene militarily in order to establish democracy. Finally, respondents were asked about their voting intentions for the next elections and what factors they took into consideration when deciding for which party to vote.

demography: gender, age, level of education, occupation, household size, region, and ...

In 2024, 63 percent of people in NATO countries agreed that their country should defend another NATO country if it was attacked, compared with 11 percent who disagreed.

Context

I've created this dataset as I want to compare the Russia and the NATO's armies.

Content

You will find a ranking with a Power Index calculated for every country by the "Global Fire Power" organization : this is not simple to make a fair comparison between Russia and the 27 countries of the NATO because we can't really summarize what "would be" the Power Index of an alliance.

Acknowledgements

Thanks for your support, if you use this dataset consider giving me credits or share with me your works !

Context

On 24 February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine in a major escalation of the Russo-Ukrainian War that began in 2014. The invasion caused Europe's largest refugee crisis since World War II, with more than 6.3 million Ukrainians fleeing the country and a third of the population displaced (Source: Wikipedia).

Content

This dataset is a collection of 407 news articles from NYT and Guardians related to ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The publishing date of articles ranges from Feb 1st, 2022 to Jul 31st, 2022.

What you can do?

Here are some ideas to explore:

• Discourse analysis of Russia-Ukraine conflict (How the war has evolved over months?)
• Identify most talked about issues (refugees, food, weapons, fuel, etc.)
• Extract sentiment of articles for both Russia and Ukraine
• Which world leaders have tried to become mediators?
• Number of supporting countries for both Russia and Ukraine
• Map how NATO alliance has been affected by the war

I am looking forward to see your work and ideas and will keep adding more ideas to explore.

This data collection, which focuses on military spending and arms transfers, supplies information on 145 developed and developing countries of the world. The first file contains background data for each country, including items such as region, sub-region, alliances (OPEC, NATO, and Warsaw Pact), and OECD and World Bank membership. The second file tabulates annual military expenditures, GNP, central government expenditures, arms imports and exports, and total imports and exports in current and constant dollars for each country from 1973 to 1983. Additional variables detail total population, number of armed forces personnel, number of armed forces personnel per 1000 people, GNP in constant dollars per capita, and military expenditures in constant dollars per capita. (Source: downloaded from ICPSR 7/13/10)

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at ICPSR at https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR08532.v1. We highly recommend using the ICPSR version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

Degree of political interest and media usage, solidarity with the GDR, attitudes to military questions, organizations and alliances, personal defense preparedness and pre-military training completed. Topics: Constant part: interest in GDR or world politics; frequency of use of GDR and FRG media (scale); preference of position of West or East stations; truth content of political information of West or East stations; frequency of use of daily newspapers; frequency of political conversations with various groups of persons (scale); attitude to the world-wide victory of socialism, the Soviet Union, the Marxist-Leninist world view; pride in the GDR; feeling of solidarity with the GDR; world view; convincing others of one's own world view; willingness to defend the GDR and reasons for or against this (scale); self-assessment of achievements in training and regarding social activity; assessment of the danger of war in view of the existence of means of mass extermination, the military balance of power, aggressive plans of imperialism; attitude to military aid for friendly countries; assessment of the consequences of the NATO missile resolution for the socialist countries; character of the Federal German Armed Forces; assessment of foreign policy goals of the FRG regarding the existence of socialism; comparison of aggressiveness of FRG and USA imperialism; attitude to possibility of German-German unification; willingness to defend the GDR; opinion on the invincibility of the socialist community of nations and reasons for this; stand on mutual military aid of the states of the Warsaw Pact; training steps completed in pre-military training; interest in pre-military career training in general and in special training branches; completion of pre-military training; participation in athletic competitions of FDJ and GST; evaluation of benefit of pre-military training; stand on unconditionally carrying out orders; valuation of the conditions in training camp (scale); training achievements; possession of the achievement badge; qualification in the GST paramilitary; attitude to military service; preferred form of military service to be performed; reasons for or against serving longer in the NVA (scale); personal effects of military service expected; expected difficulties from military service (scale); expectations of army service (scale); experiences described by others performing military service; stand of partner on military service; final grades in POS/EOS and over-all grade; training occupation; achievement assessment in vocational training; apprentice year; qualification and activity of father and mother; activity of father in NVA or other armed organs; presence of relatives or acquaintances in the FRG/West Berlin; membership in social organizations; possession of sports certificate of the GDR. Questionnaire I: work motivation (scale); assessment of the danger of war and reasons for the world political situation; interest in pre-military career training and selected form of training; valuation of different forms of training; participation in athletic competitions (scale); knowledge about pre-military training; participation in GST paramilitary and reasons for this (scale); knowledge of political, military, historical events and personalities; frequency of reading selected magazines (scale); reasons for reading the ´Armeerundschau´ (scale). Questionnaire II: goals in life (scale); personal ability in political argumentation (scale); attitude to recognition of GDR citizenship by the FRG; orientation on the opinion of others with factual questions (scale); presence of differences of opinion and agreement on political topics with father; evaluation of relationship with father and mother; valuation of specified films (scale); frequency of attending cultural events (scale); assessment of the danger of war and reasons for world political situation; participation in GST member meetings; expectations of military service; future in training occupation; preferred place of residence and work; migration intents; acceptance of a personal task in the battle program of the FDJ; opinion on maximum age for membership in FDJ; honorary functions of parents; personal effects of military service (scale).

Among the founding NATO nations, the United States was the country with the highest incarceration rate of *** per 100,000 population in 2021. The United Kingdom was second on the list, with *** prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants.