The Peace Index published regularly over the years by Tel Aviv University released its latest survey (summary of the results is here) of Israeli opinion on issues concerning relations with Israeli Palestinians and Palestinians under Occupation. The poll found strong support for annexation of the West Bank and denial of rights to its Palestinian residents. It also indicated that a plurality of Jews believed (mystifyingly) Israel should continue the Occupation even if there were a draft peace agreement with the Palestinians. The Index also showed a questionable commitment by Israeli Jews to democratic values when it concerns the Palestinian minority.
A slight plurality of Jews (44-43%) believe the Occupation has improved Israel’s security situation. 52% of Jews believe it has “contributed to Israel’s national interest.” 57% of both Jews and Palestinians believe it has worsened Israel’s diplomatic relations with the rest of the world. I’m not sure where the other 43% are living–in a cocoon or perhaps they don’t give a damn how Israel is perceived by the world.
A plurality (39%) of Israeli Jews do not believe that the Green Line represents Israel’s border, while 33% believe that it is. This confusion is completely understandable given the government’s deliberate attempt to sabotage through massive settlements and Occupation of the Syrian Golan and the West Bank, the notion that the Green Line is Israel’s border.
The pollsters asked Israeli Jews how many Jews lived in the West Bank. Interestingly and tellingly, the pollsters did not include East Jerusalem settlements, which it euphemistically called “expanded Jerusalem.” But the answer it deemed correct ranged from 250,000-500,000. There are roughly 500,000 Jews living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. So it seems those who prepared the poll were fudging on this issue. But claiming to omit East Jerusalem from Jewish settlements indicates a bias on the part of those preparing the Peace Index which raises questions about the credibility of this portion of the survey. One-fourth of those surveyed underestimated the number of Jews by half saying there were 100,000-250,000. 16% overestimated the population and nearly one-fourth had no idea of the answer.
Over 50% of Jews said they had not visited the West Bank in the past five years. Given such a figure, one wonders why any of them care about maintaining Israel’s grip there.
Jewish respondents were asked if a national referendum were held today about maintaining the Occupation or ending it, 52% would favor continuing it. Even if there were a draft peace treaty with the Palestinians, a 46% plurality would reject ending the Occupation. This makes one wonder on what basis these Israelis believe there could be any peace agreement. Only 51% of Israeli Jews believe Israeli Palestinian citizens should be entitled to vote in such a referendum. 44% believe they should not. In other words, a bare majority of Israeli Jews believe in according Palestinian citizens rights equal to theirs.
Nearly 40% of Israeli Jews predict the Occupation will “continue as it is.” 20% believe the international community will force Israel to end the Occupation. This is a very interesting figure and quite significant. The same percentage believe Israel will annex the Territories and deny Palestinians there their rights.
As for what the Jewish public prefers personally as the outcome: 23% believe it should remain as it is; 12% prefer the international community should intervene to compel Israel to end the Occupation; 32% prefer Israel annex the Territories and deny Palestinian residents there equal rights; 19% prefer annexation and granting non-Jewish inhabitants equal rights. Interestingly, only 26% of Israeli Palestinians prefer a one-state solution offering equal rights to Jews and Palestinians. Personally, I believe that a Jewish survey administered by a Jewish university and pollsters would very likely underreport the number of Israeli Palestinians supporting one-state. Perhaps not deliberately. But relatively few Israeli Jews support one state, therefore it’s easy to believe a bias crept into the survey results on this question.
It’s around 200k Jews in the expanded portion of “expanded Jerusalem” + 400k in the rest of the West bank. And growing fast (very high birth rate) – the numbers are totally different (particularly in the west bank proper) in relation to 1993.
From an Israeli standpoint east Jerusalem has been fully annexed to Israel. Muslim residents of east Jerusalem were granted permanent resident status (which means they can travel everywhere in Israel) and (if they request + know basic Hebrew) can get citizenship easily.
While the vast majority of the world doesn’t recognize the Israeli annexation, in terms of -internal- Israeli status there is a vast difference between the East Jerusalem and the west bank – including that East jerusalemite Muslims were already granted full rights – on the de jure level at least.
Regarding the Israeli public’s position – given that most do not want to live with Palestinians, yet experienced first hand the failure of the PA in the west bank in 2000, and Gaza post 2005 – leads to a very complex position.
@ lepxii: That is specious. East Jerusalem residents were OFFERED permanent resident status. Few of them accepted it. That means Israel has succeeded in annexing East Jerusalem without any of the nasty side effects. Nor do any wish citizenship. Even if they did want it, the current government would not grant citizenship to them. So acting as if it’s fine that Israel annexed East Jerusalem coz Palestinians, you know, are cool about it–is false.
Again, what Israel offers and what is the current reality are two entirely contradictory things.
Not so fast. Any Palestinian failure is entirely Israel’s fault. What happened in Gaza in 2006 had everything to do with Israel, which incited the civil war, refused to accept Hamas’ election victory, put Gaza under siege. This failure is yours & yours alone buddy. You can’t escape it. So the notion that it’s OK for Israelis to doubt the ability to make peace with Palestinians because, you know, the Palestinians are f(&ked up, is bogus and offensive.
Do not slip in specious false narratives into your comments.
East Jerusalmites -ARE- permenant residents of Israel. They were/are offered citizenship – which most of them refused or didn’t choose to pick up (numbers are rising in recent years – but acceptance is a small minority. The fence (particularly the annexed out-of-fence zones) is part of the uptick).
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.669643
[to be precise a very small number are non-permanent residents – mainly due to marriage of a West-Bank resident and an East Jersualem permanent resident]
See here for instance –
https://settlementwatcheastjerusalem.wordpress.com/a-brief-history-of-east-jerusalem/
I did not say the status in East Jerusalem is “fine” – I would argue it is not. But it is definitely a different status from the rest of the West bank. For the most part (and wholly if they go for citizenship) they have equal rights within de jure (Of course the de facto situation can be different than de jure). They definitely have more rights than west-bankers – they can move about freely in Israel for instance, and receive social security payments.
I didn’t say Israel wasn’t to blame (in and of itself or in conjunction with others) for the Oslo and Gaza withdrawal failures. But the Israeli public sees this as a failure, and the Israeli public also tends not to blame itself for failures (this is a human trait common to many people).
@ lepxii: E. Jerusalem Palestinians having a different status than West Bank residents means very little esp. to E Jerusalem Palestinians. To Israeli authorities the difference is meaningful, to the people actually affected it is not. So you’re talking about bureaucratic technicalities rather than anything substantive (to Palestinians). Israel will have to offer the same status to all Palestinians in the West Bank, E. Jerusalem & Israel itself. Or it will have to end the Occupation & recognize a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. Those are the only 2 acceptable options for Palestinians. Nothing short of this is acceptable.
Saying that E. Jerusalem Palestinians have equal rights is ridiculous. Even you know it is false. And you know I’m not talking about the technicalities, but rather the reality. If they have equal rights they wouldn’t be living in slums with no city services, no social services, no educational services. They wouldn’t have a living standard far below even Israeli Palestinian citizens. They would have the same access as Israeli citizens & you know they don’t.
I really don’t care what Israelis feel about Palestinian so-called failures. The world has given up on trying to persuade Israelis about reality since they are living in delusion. If someone has a mental illness or delusion it’s hopeless trying to get them to understand what is true & real. The world is under no obligation, after having tried for decades to do so, to continue beating its head against the wall.
Right now only 12% of Israelis favor international intervention (20% expect it). I suspect this number will rise the worse things get in Israel–and they will get worse.
Slums with no services? What on Earth are you talking about that is a blatant falsehood and fantasy have you even been there
@John F: You have never been to a Palestinian village in yr life. There are virtually no Israeli official government services. Don’t you dare ever accuse me of lying or you’ll be banned so fast yr head will spin.
I haven’t been to a Palestinian village/town/city they’re not all “villages” you know, a term always used for its bucolic connotations…but I have been plenty around in Jerusalem including East Jerusalem.
@ John F.: You claim that saying Palestinian villages aren’t abandoned by the state is a lie. Then when I call them ‘villages’ you imply that they’re not “bucolic” oases, which was my original point entirely. They are what they are because the state has abandoned them.
I didn’t ask whether you’d drive through a village. I asked whether you had visited a village, had a meal with a Palestinian family, knew any Palestinians, knew firsthand what life is like in these places. You clearly don’t.
That was your last comment in this thread. Move to another thread if you choose. Do not publish in this one again.
Every Palestinian living in East Jerusalem is a permanent resident with a teudat zehut (ID card) that entitles them to vote in Municipal elections, access health services, open a bank account, pay into and receive benefits from bituach leumi, get a driver’s license, buy a car etc. Everyone in Israel is supposed to carry their teudat zehut with them or risk detention. What they were offered is citizenship and while few have taken it, the application numbers and grants are growing increasingly, see http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.669643 for a more nuanced description of permanent residence and citizenship in East Jerusalem.
@Pea: What Israel claims E Jerusalem Palestinians are entitled to & what they get in reality are two entirely different things. Pretending they aren’t is disingenuous.
lepxii – Richard is right about the Palestinians not being “f(&ked up”. 2000 was a deliberate and designed plan to break whatever remained of the Oslo agreements. They are grown up who should take responsibility of their actions and the outcomes.
Richard – “This failure is yours & yours alone” – seriously??? Now who treats the Palestinians as incompetent children who can’t, or don’t have to, take any responsibility whatsoever?
Already moderation?
@Shlomi: It is Israel which infantilizes Palestinians by denying them agency. Israel controls Palestinians in almost every way & where it doesn’t directly control them it indirectly does.
Israel is the one which refuses to take responsibility for its actions, not Palestinians. They have been prepared for a two state solution for decades. It is your lot which are the rejectionists.
You said whaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
“They have been prepared for a two state solution for decades” LOL
Do we live on the same planet? You preach all the time against PA and Abu-Mazen and their lack of credibility in PAlestinian society. All of the sudden they are lighthouse for the peace process.
Not, it can’t be… did you mean… Hamas? Do I really have to explain why this is a joke?
@Shlomi: every poll of Palestinian opinion back to 1993 shows strong support of 2 states. Of course many would prefer one, just as mot Israelis would prefer no Palestinian state & even no Palestinians. Abu Mazen’s lack of credibility has nothing to do with one or two states. It has to do with him being a corrupt, ineffectual, sclerotic autocrat who offers Palestinians nothing.
It would be nice to see a link that supports it. But more important, do they also support full peace with Israel? Only getting land and sovereignty but giving nothing in return doesn’t count much, won’t you agree?
@Shlomi: No actually Palestinians are quite devious. They want partial peace with Israel. Only getting land and a state. But they intend to continue fighting for extermination of Israel, which is their secret goal. Didn’t they teach you that in Hasbara Central??
In actuality, there are probably more Jews who will resist a Peace deal violently than there are Palestinians who will do so. And those Israeli Jews will be far better armed than any Palestinian can be.
[comment deleted: it is excruciatingly boring arguing what Yasser Arafat said & whether it was terrorist and other assorted bullshit. Move on to another thread or I will moderate you.]
Very interesting survey that teaches a lot about the winds in Israeli society.
Hasbara point of the day – both questions about withdrawal which got about 40% pro-withdrawal do not address past failures of the peace process. Had the question be “in case of truthful peace partner with guaranteed end of violence” – the result would have been very different. Right now, there is no trust (from either side).
I love how you skipped some of the interesting stats of the Arab population. 33% prefer the situation stays the same and only 69% to “exceed three-fourths” would vote for withdrawal even with ‘draft peace agreement’. Apparently, ‘Israeli-Palestinians’ are not fond of their ‘Palestinian-Palestinians’ brothers and sisters as leftists have been preaching for years. It would have been interesting to see how many of them support Lieberman’s offer to switch land and have ‘the triangle’ moved under Palestinian sovereignty. Would the percentage be in the low double digits or only single digit?
Care to define the term ‘leftists’ for me?
Thanks.
Kirk Lazarus: Everybody knows you never go full retard.
Tugg Speedman: What do you mean?
Kirk Lazarus: Check it out. Dustin Hoffman, ‘Rain Man,’ look retarded, act retarded, not retarded. Counted toothpicks, cheated cards. Autistic, sho’. Not retarded. You know Tom Hanks, ‘Forrest Gump.’ Slow, yes. Retarded, maybe. Braces on his legs. But he charmed the pants off Nixon and won a ping-pong competition. That ain’t retarded. Peter Sellers, “Being There.” Infantile, yes. Retarded, no. You went full retard, man. Never go full retard. You don’t buy that? Ask Sean Penn, 2001, “I Am Sam.” Remember? Went full retard, went home empty handed…
“Tropic Thunder” (2008)
It would appear that the State of Israel has gone “Full Retard”
The reason for continuing occupation with a draft agreement is simple: Israeli Jews don’t trust the Palestinians to keep the agreement.
@John F
The obvious needs restatement:
From an interview with Ilan Pappe by Eli Massey in “In these Times”:
“Massey: One of the things Edward Said argues in Orientalism is that the West’s representation of the Orient says more about the West than it does the Orient. What does Israel’s representation of Palestinians as terrorists say about Israel and Zionism?
Pappe: In essence it’s inversion. The way you demonize the “other” is usually a reflection of the attributes that you yourself possess and are uneasy with. For instance, if Palestinians are blamed for understanding only the language of force, it actually means that Zionists only understand the language of force. If Palestinians are described as people who would resort to violence in order to determine facts on the ground, actually history shows it was Zionism that believed you can change reality on the ground by force.
There is this process by which you can take the collective image that Israel constructs about the Palestinian and ask yourself if that is not actually a very good description of Zionism itself. Zionism does not describe aliens to the land as motivated by violence for the sake of violence. All of these features can be very easily attributed to Zionism itself.”
http://inthesetimes.com/article/19107/ilan-pappe-Bernie-Sanders-Noam-Chomsky-BDS-Israel-Palestine
“Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts, Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truth seekers,”
Ilan Pappe, interview with Le Soir, Nov. 29 1999
@John F: You took the quotation out of context. A fuller version is here:
““I am not as interested in what happened as in how people see what’s happened. (“An Interview of Ilan Pappé,” Baudouin Loos, Le Soir [Bruxelles],Nov. 29, 1999)
“I admit that my ideology influences my historical writing…”(Ibid)
“Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truth seekers”. (Ibid)
“My bias is apparent despite the desire of my peers that I stick to facts and the ‘truth’ when reconstructing past realities. I view any such construction as vain and presumptuous. This book is written by one who admits compassion for the colonized not the colonizer; who sympathizes with the occupied not the occupiers.”–A History of Modern Palestine.
In fact, I’d argue that every hasbara commenter here including you do precisely what Pappe says in this passage. But you do it far worse than Pappe does.
Your comment was totally off-topic. Comments must relate directly to the post. Follow that rule in future.
I don’t see how the fuller context changes the plain-meaning of the quote. And it’s not off-topic, I’ve seen you and others challenge the credibility of sources.
@ John f: Of course you wouldn’t. Reading comprehension not your strong suit.
The only difference between Ilan Pappe & you is he has a PhD, an academic position & is honest about his ideology & how it colors his perceptions. You pretend not to have an ideology & that your views are driven purely by facts.
Don’t argue with me about what is or isn’t off topic. I’m the arbiter of that, not you.
John F: Palestinians have much more reason to distrust Israel than the other way around.
That still doesn’t change the fact that this shows that Israelis believe in peace, but don’t believe there is a partner to have peace with. Like one person in a quarrel with another who would in theory gladly accept a contract to settle the dispute but just knows that that person will break the contract.
@John F: Israelis SAY they believe in peace. But they do nothing to achieve it. That’s a game, not a serious, credible position. That means Israelis don’t really believe in peace.
They do nothing? What about the Sinai? Gaza? 98% of Palestinian population centers in the West Bank? To which the response was thousands of rockets (Gaza) and the 2nd Intifada (West Bank) And I see you also demand Israel return the Golan as well. To whom? Al-Qaeda?
The “polls game” is mental masturbation, if you will forgive my metaphor.
A poll may be an interesting launching point for discussion of ideas and trends, but we all know how results can change dramatically depending on circumstances or how the poll is constructed or conducted.
Furthermore, each side of an argument will use a poll that is convenient to support her point of view, and dismiss any other as biased or invalid. As you know, Richard, plenty of polls have been conducted supposedly demonstrating malevolent views of the Palestinians or Muslims, which, like this one, have to be seen in context and not blown out of proportion.
The moods of populations can change very quickly, depending upon the political environment and events.
While undoubtedly, views have hardened on both sides, I don’t believe that it is irreversible.