Regular readers will know that I follow closely polls of both U.S. and Israeli opinion. Though their wonkiness may put off some readers, I think they’re an important indicator of changing attitudes among the populace of both countries and indicate which directions policy may go. So I hope you’ll pay this one some attention.
Prof. Shibley Telhami has released his annual poll (poll numbers and questions found here) of U.S. attitudes toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There are several results that surely will shock and horrify the Israel Lobby, even if they discount Telhamy as biased (he is Palestinian-American). The results may even shock some peace activists who didn’t realize American attitudes on the conflict were changing this markedly.
To the question, would you prefer the U.S. to advocate a two-state, one-state, status quo, or annexation (without Palestinian citizenship) as the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: 35% said they preferred a one-state solution; 36% preferred a two-state solution; 11% preferred the status quo (Occupation); and 8% annexing the Territories. Among young people, support for one-state climbs to 42%.
40% of those polled support imposing U.S. sanctions on Israel if it continues to expand West Bank settlements. 56% of Democrats agree with this view. My only critique of the formulation of this question is that it was preceded by a statement that settlements were opposed by “most” of the international community and every U.S. administration. While these statements are true, I believe it slants the respondent toward a position opposing settlements. I would rather have left those statements out to see what the average person believes about settlements without information that might be seen as coaching. I also would’ve preferred to see a question specifically mentioning BDS to see how many Americans knew what it was and what it stood for, and whether they agreed with its aims. My guess is that support would be lower than that displayed for the more open-ended question actually asked.
Nevertheless, Democrats who are beating the drums for the anti-BDS bill proposed by Sen. Ben Cardin should understand that the movement is gaining ground around the world; and that while it may have minority support in America, that this support is rising and will continue to rise. If the bill passes, not only will its supporters have to weather certain legal challenges which would likely find it unconstitutional, but support for the legislation will eventually evaporate; just as support for anti-gay legislation and opposition to gay marriage were once mainstream opinions and are no longer.
When asked how much influence Israel had on U.S. Middle East policy, 55% of Democrats said “too much” compared to 19% for Republicans. Among young people a plurality, 44% felt that Israeli had too much influence. Among American Jews polled, 37% said Israel had too much influence. Even though this was a minority (54% said the level of influence was “right”), it’s extraordinary that this number of Jews have broken ranks from the former consensus view that Israel can’t possibly have too much influence on U.S. policy.
Respondents were asked which party to the conflict the Trump administration should favor, if any. 57% of Republicans wanted him to lean toward Israel while only 7% of Democrats agreed. 36% of Republicans wanted the administration to be even-handed as did 82% of Democrats.
When I read the questions, they seem skewed in order to get a response that is less than favourable to Israel.
I’m referring to the tone, the order of the questions, the difficulty to read and comprehend the questions and, of course, their wording.
I’m sure another pollster, using a different questionnaire, but that essentially addresses the same policy concerns, could poll the same group get a more favourable response to Israel.
Easy peasy.
@ Fast Lane: Shibley Telhami has been doing polling for 30 years at the University of Maryland. and your bona fides and expertise in the field are precisely what?
I’ve been reading, following analyzing and writing about polls on this subject fur 15 years. Those are my bona fides.
Other than the single question i commented on the other questions were totally objective and not leading or biased. This is a complicated subject. Questions have to be somewhat involved in.order to give the respondent enough information to answer properly.
“I’ve been reading, following analyzing and writing about polls on this subject fur (sic) 15 years.”
Than you know that, polls, can be slippery things.
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/poll-results-americans-favor-israel-at-highest-rates-since-1990s-1.5905998
@ Fast Lane: No, polls aren’t’ ‘slippery’ unless the people producing them are. Different polls ask different questions or different respondents and get different results. The Gallup poll to which you refer was created by a GOP oriented polling operation and it has been for decades. Its polling on all political subjects shows this bias. That doesn’t mean it’s illegitimate. It just means that it’s likely an outlier poll in measuring the real numbers on the subject.
You also neglected to mention the Pew poll on similar issues which offered results far less favorable to Israel. Pew is acknowledged by most to be a more reliable polling operation than Gallup.
That was your last comment in this thread.
What about ComRes? According to “a sweeping new survey by CNN” conducted by ComRes, Europe is deeply anti-semitic.
Hmm, actually, the survey looks different on their own website than the headlines generated by CNN.
@ Elisabeth: God, these articles on anti-Semitism in Europe are so full of crap. They slap together a few anecdotes and create a trend. Send me a link & I’ll take a look.
UPDATE: I just took a quick glance through the CNN article and I find that the headline is completely misleading. The poll found a wide variety of results but didn’t find any overwhelming consistent evidence of anti-Semitism, except perhaps in Hungary which, given Orban’s rise, isn’t terribly surprising. There were results of answers to specific questions that raised concerns. But nothing stands out as a red flag to me that there is a rising tide or alarming phenomenon of anti-Semitism in Europe.
The fact alone that CNN changed outcomes is telling. They ‘abbreviated’
“One in five (20%) adults say Jewish people have too much influence in media across the world compared to other people” to
“One in five said they have too much influence in the media”.
Well, the poll also found that 39% of ‘Europeans’ have negative views on Roma, 37% on Muslims, and only 10% on Jews. Nevertheless , I have not found even ONE headline screaming about prejudice against Roma or Muslims. Across the net, it was all about anti-Semitism. May I conclude that Jews have MORE influence in media across the world than Roma and Muslims?
What bothers me also, is that they seem to have middeled outcomes in countries like Hungary with western Europe. (Netherlands was excluded altogether from the poll. The last survey I know about, found 5% anti-Semitism over here, so maybe we would have dragged the desired outcome down too much.)
https://www.comresglobal.com/polls/cnn-anti-semitism-in-europe-poll-2018/
http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2018/11/europe/antisemitism-poll-2018-intl/
@ Elisabeth: You should write to Comres and complain. Since they did the poll for CNN & it was their client they may not be inclined to take your concern seriously. But you should raise it with them.
Why don’t both sides of the map above include Gaza Strip?
Yeah why is Gaza always left out of the discussion?
They deserve equal rights too.
@ Ginger Bread: This graphic was created for Tablet Magazine. If you knew Tablet’s politics you’d know why they omitted Gaza. Your criticism is valid.
@Richard Silverstein
Ugh! Tablet is awful.
Personally, I try to stay out of the 1-state vs 2-state business. Mainly because it IS none of our business (unless we’re actual Palestinians). I feel it’s up to us to support the Palestinians in whatever they choose to do, and and are able to do. I understand the arguments on both sides. But my point is that the Palestinians themselves are not monolithic. They too have their own divides (most of which were artificially created). If the Palestinians have anything approaching a unified political approach, it is one headed either by the imprisoned Marwan Barghouthi or by the democratically-elected Hamas majority in 2006, which is still the nearest they’ve come to a truly democratic, representative government. Abbas was the stumbling block then (aided and supported by Israel and the US, of course), and he remains the probable biggest stumbling block now, perhaps bigger than the Israelis themselves. They, of course, deliberately foment this divisiveness, which benefits them. But the bottom line is that the 2-state approach has international law firmly on its side, and that MUST be used to advance EITHER approach! If we choose to impose our own solutions upon them, that is just perpetuating the evils of imperialism, colonialism and, as Edward Said termed it, Orientalism.
@ Tom: I agree with you completely. That’s why I rarely weigh in strongly on one side or the other. However, I do think that Israel’s bad faith approach over the decades militates against 2 states being viable. But I don’t think it’s my place to argue decisively for that approach as opposed to two states. But I certainly will support the right of those Palestinians who support one state to do so (unless it involved ethnic cleansing of Israeli Jews from what has become their homeland).
One has to seriously wonder how “Israel’s bad faith approach over the decades” could “militate against a two-state solution” whereas the Palestinian’s presumed “good faith approach” would entitle them to think a one-state solution is within their rights.
Do you listen to your own reasoning?
@The Donald: you’ve completely misunderstood my point and the existing Palestinian position on the issue: the PA and even most of the Israeli Palestinian political parties support a 2-state solution despite Israeli rejectionism. Support for one state is largely in the Diaspora; among foreign pro Palestine activists, political leaders and academics; and among left wing groups inside Israel.
Also, this has little to do with ‘rights.’ It has to do with feasible solutions. If Israel rejects 2 states and the world rejects the current 1 state (Israel, no Palestine), then the only remaining solution is a single unitary state.
[comment deleted: Go now and read the comment rules and do not publish another comment till you have done so. This comment was off-topic. Publish comments that only deal directly with the subject of the post. If I wanted to discuss the Peel Commission I would write a post about it. But I didn’t. Making your comment way off topic.]
[Comment deleted: I own the blog. I make the editorial decisions. Don’t like ’em? Go elsewhere. Simple as that. If you continue complaining about this you will lose your commenting privileges.]
So what will this joint state be called?
“Freedonia” would be a good name.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4OJGdtRx10
I prefer Canaan