Poll Shows Most Israelis and Palestinians Willing To Live Side By Side Peacefully - Or Does It?
Today, Haaretz is reporting the results of an independent poll suggesting that most Israelis and Palestinians are willing to live alongside each other peacefully in separate states - 74% of Palestinians and 78% of Israelis.
Dig a little deeper into the polling data, however, and the results are not nearly so encouraging as the organization that conducted the poll, One Voice Movement, would have us believe.
For example:
- With respect to final status, 59% of Palestinians polled deemed an Islamic Waqf from the Jordan River to the Sea as "essential," and an additional 12% as "desirable." 71% said "greater Palestine" from the Jordan to the Sea was essential and 11% found that option desirable. How these apparent preferences square with a two-state solution is left unsaid.
- In contrast, only 17% of Israelis deemed the "greater Israel" option "essential" while 47% found "greater Israel" to be "unacceptable."
- The numbers for acceptance of the 2-state solution are only arrived at through some creative math, adding up the 38% who say two states are "essential," 15% who find it "desirable," 10% who say it is "acceptable," and 11% "tolerable."
- The numbers of Israelis supporting the two-state solution are similar. 32% say "essential;" 13% "desirable;" 16% acceptable; and 17% "tolerable."
- A rebuke to those who favor a one-state solution: the shared state option was found "unacceptable" by 66% of both Israelis and Palestinians. On this, at least, both sides seem to agree.
- The numbers of pure rejectionists was around equal on both sides: 24% of Palestinians and 21% of Israelis deemed the two-state solution "unacceptable."
- Obviously, though, one has to look closer at what the two sides mean when they talk about a two-state solution. An overwhelming majority of Palestinians foresee a right of return and compensation for 1948 refugees and their descendants, while nearly as large a majority in Israel find that prospect unacceptable (indeed, such an absolute right of return would destroy the Jewish majority in Israel). Thus:
- 87% of Palestinians said the right of return and compensation were "essential," and an additional 5% "desirable." 48% deemed the right of return to Israel without compensation as "unacceptable." The option of limiting the number of refugees to Israel to family members and numbers agreed to by the two parties was deemed "unacceptable" by 75%.
- The only options that seem even close to passable are (1) Israli recognition of the suffering of Palestinians and resettlement of most refugees to the West Bank and Gaza with some to Israel, deemed "unacceptable" by only 24%, and (2) the UN closing the refugee camps and resettling refugees with compensation outside Israel, which was "unacceptable," to 51% of Palestinians, but at least tolerable to 47%.
- Israelis were only slightly more flexible on the right of return. A full 60% found "unacceptable" the option of Israeli recognition of the refugees' suffering and a return by most to the West Bank and Gaza with some returning to Israel. 77% found the right of return with compensation unacceptable as did 83% without compensation (one has to wonder why fewer were opposed to return with compensation than without). Only 14% opposed resettlement with compensation by the UN. A large marjority of Israelis would accept or tolerate the return of refugees to a Palestinian state.
- 93% of Palestinians said it was "essential" that Palestine have an army. 63% of Israelis said that was "unacceptable."
- On the issue of settlements, 98% of Palestinians said that it was "essential" that all settlers leave the West Bank and settlements demolished. Among Israelis, 53% said the removal of all settlers and demolishing of settlements was "unacceptable," while the remainder would seem to accept this option. 51% were opposed to dismantling most of the settlements, move settlers to large blocks and exchange land.
- Another curiosity: "The idea that settlers who choose to stay in Palestine/a future Palestine might like to take up Palestinian citizenship seems to be equally 'unacceptable' to both Palestinians at 61% and Israelis at 69% while having the option to choose citizenship is also rejected at 66% and 58% 'unacceptable' for Palestinians and Israelis respectively."
- On the issue of borders, 86% of Palestinians ('essential or desirable') would like Israel to withdraw to the 67 Border. 60% of Israelis consider this option 'unacceptable'. The potential for compromise would appear to be for Israel to withdraw to the 67 Border with adjustments through agreement of equivalent exchange of land. This option is 'unacceptable' to 30% of Palestinians and 39% of Israelis and 'essential or desirable' for 49% of Palestinians and 20% of Israelis with another 21% 'acceptable' and 11% 'tolerable.'
- On the issue of Jerusalem, the parties seem to be irreconcilably divided. 91% of Palestinians desribe all of Jerusalem being part of Palestine as "essential." 45% of Israelis say it is "essential" that all of Jerusalem remain in Israel with another 11% saying it is "desirable."
- With regards to the Old City the suggestion that it should be under international control was equally 'unacceptable' to both Israelis and Palestinians at 72% and 71% respectively. Similarly joint control of the Old City was not particularly attractive at 69% 'unacceptable' for Israelis and 59% 'unacceptable' for Palestinians. Similarly large majorities on both sides also opposed division of Jerusalem in various permutations.
- Asked to identify the problems with the peace process from a list of 20. The top five for Palestinians were 'The freedom of Palestinians from occupation/Israeli rule' 1st at 94% 'very significant' (15th on the Israeli list); 'The settlements' 2nd at 89% (13th on the Israeli list); 'The substandard living conditions of the people in Gaza' and 'The security wall' 3rd and 4th both at 88% 'very significant' (16th and 21st on the Israeli list) and 'The Independence of the Palestinian economy' 5th at 87% (17th on the Israeli list).
- The top five problems for the Israelis were 'Terror has reinforced the conflict' 1st at 65% 'very significant' (15th on the Palestinian list) followed by 'Maintaining a Jewish majority in Israel' 2nd at 62% (16th on the Palestinian list) then 'Incitement to hatred' 3rd at 52% 'very significant' (20th on the Palestinian list); 'Agreements not implemented for lack of trust between Palestinians and Israelis' was 4th at 48% (12th on the Palestinian list) and 'The problem has become global' 5th at 42% 'very significant'.
I'm not sure it's as stark as you say it is.
According to the group, the point of the poll was to show not only 'most preferred' solutions but to show 'possible' solutions.
71% of Palestinians may say that a Palestinian state on all of historic Palestine is 'essential,' but 74% of those same Palestinians find a two state solution to be somewhere in between 'tolerable' to 'essential' -- in other words, it might not be their ideal solution, but it's one they are willing to live with.
Isn't that what a two state solution is for most Israelis and Palestinians - certainly not ideal, certainly a painful compromise, certainly not perceived as historically just ... but perhaps livable?
It seems to me that it is still good news that a majority on each side find it to be at least tolerable, after the year we've had.
April 22, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
This says there is opening and shows that it is the Leaders/Govn'ts that are the continual cause of unrest...
Look at BiBi, lieberman, Olmert, Abbas, and the rest...All stirring the pot, all about power and NOT about the people...Just like the republicans in this country!
April 22, 2009 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
AG - Thanks for going thru all the work of sorting out the pieces of the survey. I tried doing that this morning but my eyes started glazing over with all the contradictions in the data. I'll have to look at the numbers you have laid out to see if I can understand the implications of this poll, if any.
April 22, 2009 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm hesitant to draw too many conclusions from the data. There seem to be numerous contradictions, some reason for optimism, and some for despondency - big surprise there.
It is fair to say, though, that the two parties seem to mean different things when they talk about a two-state solution. Both sides remain fairly diametrically opposed on the key issues of refugees and Jerusalem. Still, ep2175 and Doob make a fair point: the mere fact that both sides are at least willing to tolerate two states side by side after the recent events is positive. If that principle is truly accepted, the rest of the painful compromises might be achieved.
April 22, 2009 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for bringing the survey to our attention, AG, but I must admit I agree with jdledell that the report seems full of contradictions and quite difficult to interpret.
One thing to point out --- you say:
Also on final status, 71% of Palestinians answered that "Palestinians only" for greater Palestine was essential.
I think you may have misinterpreted the report here. If I read the (admittedly confusing) report correctly, the words "Palestinians only" refer to the question being asked of Palestinians only (i.e., it wasn't asked of Israelis). Palestinians liked the idea of a state that extended across all of "historic Palestine" but they weren't necessarily saying this state should include only Palestinians.
April 22, 2009 10:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're right. "Palestinians only" referred to whom the question was posed - careless mistake on my part. I've corrected above. The contradictions - a large majority seeming to require an Islamic Waqf while at the same time finding the two state solution at least tolerable - are confusing. But the numbers on the critical issues of refugees and Jerusalem are stark.
April 22, 2009 11:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. I think the refugee issue is a huge barrier to a solution (even more so than Jerusalem, which is also a significant barrier). I think very few people in the West truly understand the Palestinian viewpoint. The fundamental position of the Palestinians has always been twofold: (1) refugees should be allowed to return to their homes and (2) the partition of Palestinine was unjust. The creation of a Palestinian state has never been a primary objective of the Palestinians. In fact, the idea of a separate Palestinian state is a Western idea (as, in fact, is the whole concept of the modern nation-state), which the Palestinians did not embrace until the 1980s. And in embracing a two-state solution, they were embracing something a bit different from what the West was envisioning when it talked about two-states. The West envisioned two states as a solution to both the political problem of securing Palestinian self-determination and of the refugee problem. In the Palestinian view, however, the refugee problem and the problem of political self-determination are separate issues. Creating a Palestinian state gives Palestinians political self-determination, but in the Palestinian view, does nothing to address the individual rights of refugees to return to their homes. International law tends to recognize this right and the Palestinians are not likely to relinquish it without greater compensation or concessions from Israel than are normally discussed.
I think the Palestinians might be willing to give up their right of return, but only if the deal they are offered is attractive enough. One of the reasons two-state solutions continually fail is that the deal offered the Palestinians is simply to create a "state" on the fragmented territory in which they currently dwell. Typically, the Israelis insist on maintaining significant control (of airspace, water rights, etc.) over this territory. And of course, the refugee issue is addressed at most by some small amount of compensation for those displaced. From a Palestinian view, such a "state" does little to change their current situation. The refugee situation remains the same; Palestinian territory remains small and fragmented; and Israel continues to be in a position to exert significant control over Palestine. In fact, agreeing to such a state feels like a trap to the Palestinians--if they agree to it they risk making their current undesirable situation permanent. Given that the states offered them don't really change anything, most Palestinians are willing to hold out longer in hopes that something better--that represents real change--will come their way.
I'm not sure they will ever get anything better, but I also think they are acting rationally when they refuse to agree to a "state" that doesn't really change their current situation much but that may make that situation more permanent.
April 23, 2009 7:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know "more permanent" is like "more pregnant." But the battery on my computer was dying and I had no time to edit. Please excuse the poor grammar . . .
April 23, 2009 7:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for mining the data, Armchair.
I wish the polling in both communities had involved larger samples, so we didn't have margins of error in the 5% range.
As it stands, though, we peaceniks clearly have a long way to go.
April 23, 2009 5:02 AM | Reply | Permalink