As part of a continuing effort to determine the attitudes of the
Palestinian and Israeli Jewish public on the potential for a
non-violent Intifada, Search for Common Ground, an American and
Belgian NGO, commissioned the Program on International Policy
Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland to conduct surveys
of each population group. The first poll was released in August
2000. The Jerusalem Media & Communications Center surveyed 599
Palestinians in face-to-face interviews over four days in November
2000. The interviews took place throughout the West Bank and Gaza,
and included both urban and rural residents. The B.L. and Lucille
Cohen Institute for Public Opinion Research of Tel Aviv University,
polled the opinions of 508 Israeli Jews from November 24-26, 2002,
by telephone. What follows is a summary of the study's most
important findings.
Mistrust Blocks Willingness to Stop Violence as Part of
Settlement Process Based on 1967 Borders
Palestinian respondents were first asked: "If Israel would agree to
allow the establishment of a Palestinian state within the West
Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, evacuate most of the settlements and
negotiate in good faith on other final status issues, on condition
that there was a period without violence against Israel, would you
favor stopping violence for this period or would you favor
continuing the violence?"
Forty-two percent said they would be willing to stop, while 48
percent would favor continuing the violence. Those who wanted to
continue the violence were then asked,
"Is this because you do not believe that Israel would really agree
to the establishment of a Palestinian state on terms acceptable to
Palestinians, or because you favor continuing the violent struggle
with the goal of gaining all of the territory of historic
Palestine?"
Of this group, 62 percent (30 percent of the whole sample) said the
reason they did not favor stopping the violence was that they did
not believe Israel would really agree to the establishment of such
a Palestinian state. Only 37 percent of this group (18 percent of
the total sample) said they favored continuing the violent struggle
with the goal of gaining all of the territory of historic
Palestine.
Thus, it appears that, overall, 72 percent of the total sample
would be ready to renounce violence in support of a two-state
settlement if they were confident Israel would make the necessary
concessions.
The response to this question does not clarify what terms would be
acceptable to Palestinians, as it specified there would be
negotiations on "final status issues," such as the right of return.
The poll does suggest, however, that in terms of territory, a
majority of Palestinians would accept a settlement based on 1967
borders.
In response to a presentation of more limited Israeli concessions
with Israel committing to, "withdraw its forces to where they were
before the start of the current Intifada, refrain from all violence
against Palestinian civilians, and enter into negotiations on a
peace agreement," only 36 percent of Palestinians polled favored
"committing to stop violence against Israeli civilians."
Support for Non-Violent Demonstrations Against Curfews
Palestinians showed tremendous interest and support for the recent
non-violent demonstrations and mass violations of the
Israeli-imposed curfews. In sharp contrast to the Israeli public,
an overwhelming majority of Palestinians (80 percent) said they
followed the news about these actions very (47 percent) or somewhat
(33 percent) closely. Only 18 percent said they followed it not
very closely (12 percent) or not at all closely (six
percent).
Forty percent of respondents said there have been such
demonstrations in their own towns. Of these, 54 percent said they
had participated. Overall, slightly more than 50 percent said they
would be willing to participate in such actions, while another
third would support others doing so. A slight majority regarded
such demonstrations as at least as effective as violence and if
conducted on a large scale, this figure grows to 70 percent.
An overwhelming 91 percent of those polled said they regarded the
Palestinians killed by IDF forces in the recent demonstrations as
martyrs. Of these, 51 percent considered them to be martyrs equal
to (42 percent) or more important (9 percent) than a suicide
bomber. Thirty-two percent regard them differently, while 16
percent did not answer.
Just over 50 percent said they regarded the recent non-violent
demonstrations as equally effective (32 percent) or more effective
(19 percent) than "violence...as a means of resisting the
occupation." However, 42 percent regarded them as less effective.
Those who said they were less effective were then asked to,
"imagine that the numbers of Palestinians participating in such
large-scale non-violent demonstrations in violation of the curfew
expanded until large numbers in every Palestinian town were
resisting in this way at once." Of those asked this further
question, half changed their position and said the demonstrations
would be effective.
Support for Large-Scale Defiance of Curfews
When asked whether, "large numbers of Palestinians should regularly
refuse to abide by the curfew and go about their lives," 58 percent
said they should. Thirty-five percent felt such large-scale
defiance of curfews would be "too dangerous." Asked if there was
"an effort to organize large-scale refusals to abide by the curfew
in your town," 45 percent of those polled said they would
participate, including 32 percent who would "participate and
encourage others to participate." A further 31 percent would
"support others doing it" but would not participate. Just 14
percent said they would not support it.
Attitudes About Violent and Non-violent Methods
In late summer 2002, some Fateh leaders made a public call for
non-violent rather than violent forms of resistance and requested
that Hamas halt suicide attacks on Israeli civilians, a development
much discussed in the media at the time. Consistent with their
refusal to renounce violence as long as they do not believe the
Israelis are ready to make concessions in negotiations, 57 percent
said they opposed the Fateh leaders' call, and were divided about
whether it was even significant.
Asked if, "in the future, would you like to see the Intifada put
more emphasis on violent or non-violent methods of resistance?" 44
percent said both, while 25 percent opted for more emphasis on
violent methods and 19 percent for non-violent ones.
Non-violent methods were strongly endorsed and scored higher than
suicide bombings. "Mass protest demonstrations" got a mean score of
8.1 and "mass defiance of curfews" (a method not previously asked
about) received a mean score of 7.5.
A majority of Palestinians continued to say they believe that
violence against Israelis makes the Israelis more ready to
compromise, but that Israeli violence has the opposite effect on
Palestinians.
78 percent said in a separate question that when Israelis use armed
force that harms Palestinian civilians, this "leads to an
increase...in Palestinian violence against Israelis."
Israeli Findings
Israeli Jewish respondents were first asked, "If the Palestinians
committed to stop using violence against Israel and stopped all
violence for an extended period, would you favor or oppose Israel
allowing the establishment of a Palestinian state outside the 1967
borders, except for some agreed-upon land swaps?" A slight majority
said they would favor allowing such a state while 42 percent were
opposed.
Those who opposed this idea were then asked if they were opposed
because they did not believe that the Palestinians would ever truly
forgo the use of violence, or because they thought Israel must
continue holding on to the Palestinian territories?
Fifty-one percent of this group said they did not believe the
Palestinians would ever truly forgo the use of violence. Perhaps
most significant, only 45 percent of this group said they felt that
Israel must continue to hold on to the territories. Thus it appears
that 71 percent of the total sample would agree to the
establishment of a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders if they
were confident the Palestinians would forgo the use of
violence.
Consistent with this widespread lack of confidence in the
Palestinians, when Israelis were asked, "What percentage of the
Palestinian people do you think support the idea of using only
non-violent methods in the Intifada?" the mean estimate was just 29
percent.
Israelis Unaware of Non-Violent Developments, but Support IDF
Restraint
Israelis have surprisingly little awareness of recent non-violent
demonstrations in violation of the curfew, and a majority tended to
interpret these negatively as a challenge to Israeli authority,
rather than as the emergence of a non-violent movement. Though many
Israelis appeared to doubt that a genuine non-violent movement will
emerge, a majority supported the idea of Israel showing restraint
towards non-violent demonstrations as a way of encouraging such a
trend.
Only one in 10 Israelis is aware of recent non-violent mass
demonstrations in the Palestinian territories. Asked, "How much
have you seen, heard or read about the large-scale demonstrations
in a number of Palestinian cities that have been non-violent but in
violation of the curfew?" only two percent said they had heard "a
lot," seven percent had heard "some," 28 percent "not very much"
and a striking 62 percent "nothing at all."
Forty-five percent tended to interpret the non-violent
demonstrations negatively, "because they show continuing resistance
to Israeli authority," rather than as the emergence of a
non-violent movement. About a third saw the demonstrations as "a
positive development, because they show a movement away from
violent forms of protest." Fourteen percent did not answer and the
remaining five percent saw them as both positive and
negative.
Consistent with this lack of awareness, when respondents were told
that, "some Fateh leaders have recently been calling for
non-violent rather than violent forms of resistance and have
requested that Hamas halt suicide attacks on Israeli civilians,"
only 39 percent saw this as an important development ("very" - 12
percent, "somewhat" - 26 percent). The remainder saw it as not very
(24 percent) or not at all (36 percent) important.
Israelis strongly doubted a "significant Palestinian movement
committed to non-violent action only will emerge." An overwhelming
84 percent said such a development is unlikely.
On a positive note, Israelis strongly supported the idea of taking
a measured approach in reaction to non-violent demonstrations.
About two-thirds thought the IDF should "show restraint" in dealing
with non-violent demonstrations "to encourage a shift toward
non-violent forms of protest." Only 28 percent felt the IDF should
"crack down on the demonstrations because they are a challenge to
IDF authority."
This support for leniency may be influenced by the impact that a
non-violent movement would have in the eyes of the world. More than
70 percent said, "if the Palestinians increasingly emphasized
non-violent forms of protest and significantly reduced the amount
of violence ... this would lead the international community to put
more pressure on Israel to make compromises.
Erosion of Confidence in IDF Crackdown
A majority of Israeli Jews supported the IDF's crackdown in
response to Palestinian terrorism. Nearly two-thirds of respondents
felt the IDF has almost always acted appropriately in its
operations in the West Bank and Gaza. Just over 50 percent were
also willing to state unconditionally that the "IDF imposing
curfews on Palestinian towns over the past few months has been a
good practice."
However, Israeli Jews' confidence that the IDF will achieve its
goal appears to be eroding gradually. Asked, "How likely do you
think it is that these military actions will achieve their goal of
controlling Palestinian terrorism?" - with 0 being very unlikely
and 10 being very likely - the mean score was 5.7. In August 2002,
the mean score for the same question was 6.2.
Most significantly, a large majority of Israelis said they believe
that the crackdown is increasing rather than decreasing Palestinian
violence against Israelis. Sixty-four percent agreed that "when
Israelis use armed force that harms Palestinian civilians, this
leads to an increase" in Palestinian violence; 25 percent said this
made no difference, while only six percent said this leads to a
decrease. Asked about the imposition of curfews, without mention of
any related violence against Palestinians, 44 percent thought this
action had increased support for suicide bombing. Only 17 percent
believed it had reduced support for suicide bombing, while 34
percent said it "had no real effect."
Conclusion
The findings and comparison of these surveys, both with each other
and with those carried out three months earlier, indicate that
trust between the two groups is diminishing rapidly. Although both
sides recognize that non-violence could be a solution, there is
little confidence they could rely on the promises of the other. A
significant upswing in non-violent methods of protest could still
change these attitudes among Israelis, demonstrating that the
Palestinians are both willing and able to renounce violence while
maintaining their resistance to occupation. This would be a
significant step toward rebuilding trust between the sides and
diminishing the current levels of violence experienced on both
sides.