AMERICA’S WORLD ROLE: DIVIDED WE STAND : The Public : Americans View Troop Deployments Cautiously : * A majority think famine relief warrants dispatching soldiers abroad. But they draw the line at such tasks as restoring law and order.

Setbacks in Somalia and Haiti have knocked public approval of President Clinton’s foreign policy leadership sharply downward--but the public still supports using U.S. troops to deliver famine relief to war-torn countries abroad, according to a Times Mirror poll conducted in late October.

A 56% majority of the general public said they approve of sending American forces to countries in Africa or Asia to prevent famine--the mission that drew the United States into Somalia last year.

And 63% still support using troops to defend allies against aggressive dictators such as Iraq’s Saddam Hussein.

But the public draws a line at broader goals such as restoring law and order when governments collapse in Africa or Asia. A solid 60% majority opposes sending troops on that kind of mission.

And in a related survey conducted in September, the public opposed fighting on behalf of South Korea, for Israel or to shore up a Mexican government threatened by revolution or civil war. They did support sending troops if Iraq invaded Saudi Arabia, but by a smaller majority than in October.

“This says important things about the limits of isolationism in the public,” said Andrew Kohut, director of the Times Mirror Center for The People & The Press, which administered the follow-up survey of 1,200 randomly chosen Americans.

“Americans don’t want to be the world’s policeman, but they don’t want to withdraw from the world either,” he said.

Last month, for the first time since the Persian Gulf war in 1991, the public said the most important current events were not domestic, but foreign--in this case, the conflict between U.N. troops and warlord Mohammed Farah Aidid in Somalia, the standoff between the United States and the military leaders of Haiti and the abortive uprising in Russia against President Boris N. Yeltsin.

But the public still wants Clinton to focus on domestic policy, not foreign policy, by a whopping margin of 76% to 13%.

Clinton’s problems in Somalia and Haiti cost him dearly in public esteem: Only 39% said they approve of the way he is handling foreign policy, and 46% disapproved. As recently as last August, 52% approved and 25% disapproved.

On specific issues, Clinton’s performance in Somalia was highly unpopular: 54% disliked his handling of the situation, while 33% approved. On Bosnia, 43% disliked his policy while 36% approved. On Haiti, the public was evenly split: 38% disapproved, 36% approved.

But the domestic-minded public was not so harsh on Clinton’s overall performance: 44% said they approve of the way he is handling his job, and 42% disapproved.

*

That split verdict appears to reflect the relative weight of the public’s concerns. Foreign policy is important, particularly when it means sending American troops into danger, the public said. But fixing the domestic economy is still priority No. 1.

“This isn’t really isolationism; it’s self-centeredness,” Kohut said. “This is a public that is still willing to engage in international action, but only when it is in its own interest--or not too painful.”

Last month’s poll of the general public, and a similar survey of 2,000 in September, were administered as companions to a Times Mirror poll of 649 U.S. opinion leaders in fields ranging from business and government to science, religion and the arts.

The surveys describe a public that is preoccupied with domestic issues, and interested in foreign affairs largely when they affect life at home--by taking young men and women for military duty abroad, by shaping the job market or by contributing to problems such as immigration and drug trafficking.

*

Last month’s setbacks in Somalia cost the United Nations some public support--but perhaps less than might have been expected. In October, 64% of the public wanted the United States to “cooperate fully with the U.N.,” down from 71% in September.

But on one U.N. issue, the public had its mind made up long ago--well before the Clinton Administration. In September, 69% of the public said American troops should fight only under American command, not in a multinational U.N. force. At the time, the Clinton Administration--and 77% of the foreign affairs experts surveyed in the Times Mirror poll of leadership groups--favored a U.N. force.

Then American forces in Somalia suffered heavy losses under U.N. direction, and the Administration reversed its stand.