Here is an article from Gallup Polls about American opinions or lack of opinions on Gaza related issues.
Americans’ Support for Israel Unchanged Since Gaza Conflict
Most Americans sympathize with Israel, view it favorably
PRINCETON, NJ -- The Obama administration has signaled it will be more energetic than its predecessor in brokering a Mideast peace, with the appointment of a special envoy and with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit to the region this week. While their government may be steering a new course, Americans' views toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict haven't changed: nearly 6 in 10 (59%) say their sympathies in the conflict lie more with the Israelis; just 18% side with the Palestinians.
According to Gallup's annual World Affairs survey, updated Feb. 9-12, 2009, about a quarter of Americans are partial to neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians. This includes 9% saying they favor neither side, 4% saying they favor both equally, and 10% with no opinion. The 59% favoring Israel this year is identical to what Gallup found in February 2008, and similar to the annual reading each year since 2006.
Additionally, the new poll finds 63% of Americans holding a favorable view of Israel, including 21% holding a very favorable view of that country. Only 29% have an unfavorable view of Israel, including just 8% "very unfavorable."
Favorability toward Israel was slightly higher a year ago at this time, when 71% viewed it favorably. Israel's military incursion into Gaza in December and January that killed more than 1,000 civilians and resulted in a major humanitarian crisis may have dampened American favorability toward that country slightly. However, today's rating of Israel is identical to the average favorability score for Israel since January 2000.
By contrast, the Palestinian Authority is seen in a mostly negative light, with only 15% viewing it positively and 73% negatively. And, among those holding strong views, the balance of opinion is even more negative: just 1% have a very favorable view vs. 30% very unfavorable.
Favorability toward the Palestinian Authority has varied some since 2000, ranging from 11% to 27%, but has registered close to 15% for each of the past three years.
Aid for Gaza
The issue at hand this week in the Middle East is international funding for humanitarian and economic aid to the war-torn Gaza Strip.
Attending a Gaza aid conference in Egypt on Monday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States will provide $900 million in aid to the Palestinians, but specified that only $300 million would be directed toward Gaza and that all of it would be channeled through the U.S.-backed Palestinian Authority led by President Abbas in the West Bank, not the Hamas-led government in Gaza.
This isolation of Hamas in U.S. aid to the Palestinians would seem to be consistent with the American public's general opposition to providing the Hamas government with any financial assistance, even if it were to formally recognize Israel. According to a Gallup Poll conducted shortly after the Hamas party won the January 2006 Palestinian elections, only 35% favored providing aid to the Palestinian Authority under Hamas leadership under any conditions (5% unconditionally and 30% if Hamas were to recognize Israel), while 57% said the United States should not provide that government with any aid.
Two of the more prominent participants in the Gaza aid conference are Egypt, the host country, and Saudi Arabia, which has pledged $1 billion of the $5 billion raised. Egypt is nearly as highly ranked as Israel, according to the two countries' overall favorable ratings among Americans (59% for Egypt vs. 63% for Israel), although far fewer have a "very favorable" view of Egypt than of Israel (8% vs. 21%, respectively).
Americans view Saudi Arabia far less well, with only 31% favorable and 60% unfavorable. Opinion of Saudi Arabia fell sharply between February 2001 and February 2002 -- spanning the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, which involved several Saudi-born hijackers -- and has yet to recover.
Bottom Line
President Barack Obama's desire to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on his watch -- something Clinton reiterated this week -- may put him at odds with the newly elected leadership of Israel, but not necessarily with the American public. In 2002, Gallup found 48% of Americans in favor of an independent Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and only 27% opposed. Support rose to 74% under the provision that the Palestinian government demonstrated it could stop suicide bombings in Israel.
At the same time, Clinton's recent assurance that U.S. support for Israel is "unshakable, durable, [and] fundamental" is consistent with Israel's broadly positive image in the United States, as well as with Israel's solid advantage over the Palestinians in American "sympathies."
Survey Methods
Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,022 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 9-12, 2009. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
The first question I had was: What happened in 2005 (when Israeli support went down and Palestinian went up) and what happened 1991 (when Israeli support spiked Palestinian support decreased). So I did some Googling and found some vague answers: in 2005, the Palestinian Authority was in control of Gaza and in Sept. all Israeli troops and settlers ceased to be in the area. In 1991, there was the Madrid Conference. Neither of these events really unveil the reasoning behind disruption in the pattern of American opinion. I do not know enough to speculate further.
According to the polls, Israel is still seen positively by most Americans. More Americans feel the "other" category (both, niether, or no opinion) more than the support Palestinians. However, many Americans also support an independent Palestianian state (and more so if they stop suicide bombings).
I think most of these graphs show that the basic trend of American support of Isreal is embedded in social thought. I would say today, many people do not know the details or a very thurough history of the Gaza conflict and so they feel what they think an American is supposed to. Supporting Isreal is a demonstration of patriotic loyalty becasue: 1. America and Isreal are friends and 2. Hamas supports Palestine, and America isn't friends with terrorists or their friends. This is the age old problem of imagined communities and constructed identities on the basis of ignorance about "the other." We allow our uninformed selves to make judgements on situations that we know little about because we have been conditioned to keep our friends close and the others at bay, with questioning or challenging the information we have or the sources we get it from.
Posts
When I first read the post and saw the results, I must admit that I was not overly surprised, except with the most recent results.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that support for Israel did not dwindle at all, despite the happenings in Gaza, makes it clear how strong ideas of "the other" and just "imaginative geographies" truly are. I am sure that many Americans connect Palestine with Hamas, and Hamas with terrorism, and terrorism with 9/11, therefore: Palestine is connected to 9/11. I am sure that many people in Europe think so too (I've met many of them). It is especially hard to find a balanced account of events, since practically all media is biased. One watches only CNN or BBC, which have their own (pro-Israeli, generally) points of view, and no one else is taken into consideration. Al Jazeera, for example, which could represent a counter-argument is not taken into account because of their "affiliation" with terrorism. Whether that is true or not I do not know, but I know that it is largely ignored outside of the Muslim world. The image of Muslims being "different" and that the Israelis are "Western" definitely have their say in the opinion of people.
I would like to raise the issue of the validity of the Gallup polls. What disturbed me the most is that they never explained how they selected their "respondents" and where they came from, or their background, which plays a crucial role in opinion-building. Plus, their results have been proven rather unreliable with the fact that in a month's time from May to June 2002, the difference in opinion over the creation of a independent Palestinian state was so vast! From the original 48% favouring the independence in May to 74% in June. What had happened in that month to change the percentage that significantly? The only thing that I could find is the signing of the "road map for peace" a day later, June 24th, 2002. That seemed to be a time where there was thought about the possibility of actually ending the conflict and the creation of a Palestinian state. Unfortunately, it did not last for long.
Either way, I found it very interesting to see how the American public thought about Palestine and Israel (despite the source being very dubious). That would explain why U.S. foreign policy has been so firmly pro-Israel and why Israel could (and still can) get away with pretty much anything without any significant consequences.
Another quick note - check out this link: http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=348984&story_id=12953839
ReplyDeleteIt talks about the numbers from Rasmussen, which are very much different than the ones from Gallup. They say that around 44% Americans saw Israel favourably, while 41% saw it unfavourably.
I think this ties up well with my idea that the Gallup (and Rasmussen, for that matter) polls are rather partial and not 'definite' sources to follow.
Either way, the link came from Andra on the post that I put up, so I thought it would be good to share it!
The reason why American foreign policy is so firmly pro-Israel is partially because of the strong connection to the United States as well as the idea that Israel has a special place in the Middle East as a (largely) democratic nation that holds elections that are not corrupt or tampered with (of course they only include Israeli citizens so Palestinians may not wish to vote). In our increasingly bipolar culture there is a greater support for those who qualify as "us" over those that are considered "them". It is easy to see how those who are whiter, have more similarities culturally, and in most cases are more similar ideologically, can be seen more favorably than "Arabs". I do not find it surprising that the public opinion of Israel has not dropped. As long as there are ANY instances of terrorist activities targeting Israelis, they will be seen as victims. It does not matter how much violence is done by either side, as long as it is there and noticed by the media, people will continue to hold on to their opinions.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is not exactly the same as connecting Hizbullah with Lebanon, the connection between Hamas and Palestine is not really a stretch. In fact, Hamas is the ruling party in Gaza as of a few years back. Mahmoud Abbas's authority has increasingly been mitigated as Hamas has continued fighting with Israel (and vice versa). His Fatah party which had been trying to work towards peace, has been pushed to the side by the more militant Hamas. It is very important to distinguish between Hamas which supports this violence and Fatah which is much more moderate and willing to negotiate with the Israelis. Recently Abbas has opposed foreign (outside Israel/Palestine) attempts to continue violence towards Israel http://www.iranfocus.com/en/terrorism/abbas-warns-iran-not-to-interfere-17317.html as he is trying to regain control of the PA.
As far as the polls are concerned you have to notice how the Gallup Poll leaves 4 possible responses while the Rasmussen has only 3. Gallup has Israel, Palestine, both or neither while Rasmussen has Israel, Palestine or undecided. Because of this I think it is unfair to compare them at face value. I agree with your hesitance to accept the polls because of how they do not (ever) describe more than the number of people and (in the simplest way possible) how they were contacted. The only time I have ever seen a poll with enough detail so that it can be critiqued was in an academic paper, so there is no real chance that it will be in mainstream media.
this would be an example of negative press for Hamas which legitimizes Israel's actions in some ways. It is not terrorism, but it undermines the integrity of the organization.
ReplyDeleteLet me know if the link does not work!
http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy.macalester.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T5964099779&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T5964098517&cisb=22_T5964105274&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&selRCNodeID=52&nodeStateId=101en_US,1&docsInCategory=38&csi=6742&docNo=2
We (the US) have also historically supported Israel because they always supported us. Most of the Arab (and Persian) states in the region flirted with, if not fully supported, the USSR at some point during the cold war. Israel never wavered in their committment to capitalism and US (despite their socialist farms!). Our policy officials have long memories when it comes to this kind of thing. The idea that you're with us or against us did not get 'made up' by GWBush, he was just the first to say it out loud and so boldly.
ReplyDeleteThis special relationship that Israel enjoys with the US has become foundational to how the US public responds to Israel. That US policy and political speech has been aligned with Israel from its foundation links opinion towards it in a very self-reflective way. When there are conflicts in the Middle East, the US identifies with the plight of Israelis and not of Arabs. That there are noticeable increases in US sympathies towards Israel in 1991, 2001, and 2003 should tell us something about how the US sees itself and Israel in the context of the "clash of civilizations". While the US public has gotten whipped into military fervor directed towards Arab regimes (Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again) the tide of pro-Western defense lifts the ideological boat of Israel's operations. This is an oversimplification of how American observers see themselves and Israel, but that is just what polls communicate. They show how shifts in biases are connected to surges in fear and identifying against Arab politics. This can also be reflected in US presidential approval ratings to a degree.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting that Gregory in "The Colonial Present" talked about the idea of the Palestinians being seen as terrorists if they try forcefully opposing Israel's occupation.
ReplyDeleteAnd since the media presents it that way, at least most of the time, it is no wonder that there is an overwhelming anti-Palestinian sentiment. Knowing from personal experience, my people have tried achieving their independence through a war and it failed because of the media treatment we received and through the creation of "imaginary geographies" about us. I can see the same thing happening in Palestine. And as Gregory pointed it out in his book, wouldn't you resort to violence if your country was occupied for over 30 years and diplomacy has not brought you much closer to independence. To an extent, I can see why the Palestinians are going for violence (the Intifada, for example), but I still do not justify the terrorism happening. Nevertheless, I can understand the reasons for it and I feel that as long as people do not understand why there would be terrorists there, we will not be able to help them.
It is interesting how there are so few nonviolent independence movements. As you mentioned the point about Gregory and his belief that violent opposition is inevitable, I immediately thought of India and their struggle against colonial rule. So many other independence movements immediately resort to violence where it has become almost expected that this is how it happens. Is there a future of nonviolence for independence? Other than the drive-by shooting that happened days ago in Northern Ireland, this independence movement has abandoned violence and seems to be doing quite well. I am not sure however if Israel/Palestine will ever become non-violent. I saw this because of how diverse the range of opinions are, how small the area is, and because of how a respected international body (the UN) created the state of Israel.
ReplyDelete