Are Americans willing to pay the price of freedom in 2024? 

The Statue of Liberty stands proudly in New York’s Harbor. A gift from France in 1886, she symbolizes freedom and democracy. But even Lady Liberty might be struggling these days to decide where to shine her light, with so much darkness in the world.  

Assistance to Israel and Ukraine, along with concerns about enforcement of the U.S. border with Mexico, have been congressional “priorities” this week. But instead of finding solutions, it’s just been yet another unproductive tit-for-tat battle. 

Over the weekend, senators introduced legislation tackling all three in a $118 billion national security package that would, among other things, give the president more control of the border, close loopholes in the asylum process, replenish Israel’s air defenses, and provide funds for U.S. Central Command. But the response by the House was to call it “dead on arrival” — an unfortunate phrase, given the implications.  

In today’s political climate, any proposal by either party unleashes a wave of criticism and ugly debate. 

On Tuesday night the House rejected a standalone bill for Israel that would have provided $17.6 billion in assistance for our key ally. And precious congressional time was spent with House members trying to impeach Alejandro H. Mayorkas, the Homeland Security secretary — another move that ultimately failed.  

So, what is behind American paralysis on these issues? 

The U.S. is grappling with fundamental choices about global engagement, and like many aspects of society today, we lack consensus. 

In the past, we have engaged in major wars like WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as smaller conflicts. The U.S. has been involved in 393 military interventions in other nations since 1776, according to the Military Intervention Project at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. 

When there is loss of American lives, we respond quickly. 

Pearl Harbor was attacked on Dec. 7, 1941, killing 2,403 U.S. personnel, including 68 civilians, and destroying or damaging 19 U.S. Navy ships. The following day, President Roosevelt addressed the nation, asking for a declaration of war against Japan. It was unanimously agreed upon. 

When 19 terrorists from al Qaeda hijacked four airplanes and crashed them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11^th, 2001, killing nearly 3,000 people, America understood the need for a military response, and the nation stood together.  

But when Hamas took hostages, including Americans, on Oct. 7, 2023, after its terrorist attack on Israel, a major debate erupted over policies on Israel. 

Three American soldiers were killed this month in Jordan by a drone strike that the U.S. attributed to Iranian-backed militant groups. We have responded with military strikes, which have caused debates in Congress over whether it was the right response. 

U.S. public support for engaging overseas has been trending downward in recent years. 

A report last year by the Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs says, “almost six in 10 (57%) Americans continue to say that it would be best for the future of the country to take an active part in world affairs. Four in 10 (42%) say it would be best to stay out of world affairs. While still a majority, the 2023 result continues a steady decline in support for international engagement in recent years and is among one of the lowest levels of support recorded in the 49-year history of the Chicago Council Survey.” 

Even more telling is the finding that “both Millennials and Gen Z are more hesitant than their elders to endorse military approaches to foreign policy.” 

Some of American resistance today about military engagement is the financial costs of conflict; according to the Brown University Watson Center’s Cost of War Project, since invading Afghanistan in 2001, the United States the U.S. spent over $2.3 trillion on Afghanistan. 

Questions about American ambitions overseas must be in the forefront of our thinking as we approach the world today. Will there be a Palestinian State, and what role will we play? If the war in Ukraine ends, what will be our responsibility in rebuilding a broken nation? How much should we spend on enforcement of our borders? 

The world is watching as we debate the price of freedom. We have choices to make in the days and months ahead. Let’s hope we make them wisely.  

Tara D. Sonenshine is senior fellow at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.