Peace Index - 2003
|Road Map Index||Oslo Index||General Peace Index|
Do you believe or not believe that in the coming years there will be peace between Israel and the Arabs? (Jews)
|Certain there will be peace||6.5||6.3||x||x||x||x||4.3|
|Think there will be peace||18.9||22.4||x||x||x||x||28.2|
|In the middle||12.2||12.7||x||x||x||x||13.3|
|Think there will not be peace||27.2||25.0||x||x||x||x||21.0|
|Certain there will not be peace||32.3||32.3||x||x||x||x||31.4|
|Don't know/no opinion||2.9||1.4||x||x||x||x||1.7|
In general, do you consider yourself a supporter or opponent of the peace process between Israel and the Arabs?
|In the middle||11.8||12.3||x||x||x||10.3|
|Don't know/no opinion||1.7||1.6||x||x||x||1.7|
What is your opinion on the agreement that was signed in Oslo between Israel and the PLO (Agreement of Principles)?
|Heavily in favor||5.1||9.5||6.8||8.2||7.4||10.8||9.3||7.0||9.8||7.8||12.3||10.2|
|Somewhat in favor||15.0||14.0||14.9||14.9||17.5||15.3||15.5||15.2||14.2||13.1||15.0||12.2|
|In the middle||22.3||18.6||19.9||21.4||21.1||22.1||19.9||18.6||17.8||16.7||14.1||18.6|
|Somewhat [Considerably] opposed||14.0||15.6||14.1||15.7||16.5||12.7||15.1||12.3||14.0||14.9||12.7||10.4|
|Don't know/no opinion||10.6||12.3||11.4||11.8||9.1||13.7||11.9||11.9||12.3||13.0||14.6||12.0|
Do you believe or not believe that the Oslo Agreement between Israel and the PLO will bring about peace between Israel and the Palestinians in the coming years?
|In the middle||15.7||9.9||10.6||12.9||12.7||14.1||14.2||11.5||11.0||10.7||9.2||10.0|
|Somewhat don't believe||17.1||16.2||19.7||22.9||18.5||18.1||18.0||17.0||17.1||16.9||13.3||15.4|
|Certainly don't believe||46.6||47.6||49.8||40.6||42.7||41.0||40.1||55.1||50.7||51.3||52.2||51.2|
|Don't know/no opinion||8.2||10.1||8.2||8.6||8.5||10.2||10.4||7.2||8.1||10.1||9.0||10.2|
Do you think there will be peace between Israel and Syria in the coming years?
|In the middle||19.1||x||x|
|Somewhat don't believe||23.3||x||x|
|Certainly don't believe||22.2||x||x|
|Don't know/no opinion||5.4||x||x|
And what is your position regarding signing a full peace agreement with Syria in return for a full withdrawal from the Golan Heights?
|In the middle||13.1|
|Somewhat don't believe||16.3|
|Certainly don't believe||46.2|
|Don't know/no opinion||2.7|
What is your position regarding the carrying out of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority?
|Do not know||3.8||2.5||5.1||2.9||3.2|
Do you believe or not believe that negotiations between Israel and the PLO will bring about peace between Israel and the Palestinians in the coming years?
|December 2003||October 2003||September 2003||August 2003||July 2003|
|Considerably do not believe||21.5||25.8||23.4||28.9||22.7|
|Completely do not believe||39.2||34.9||36.2||37.3||26.0|
|Do not know||2.1||3.1||2.7||3.1||3.0|
Questions from October 2003 Poll
Recently a plan for an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement known as the "Document of Geneva Understandings" was presented. Have you heard of the plan?
|Not certain/ don't know||0.2|
Asked to those who said yes:
Do you know who the key Israeli people behind the plan are?
The Document of Geneva Understandings is a peace agreement developed by a group of Members of Knesset, and public figures from the Left along with their Palestinian counterparts. There are those who maintain that every group of citizens can launch such an initiative such as the Geneva Initiative since Israel is a democracy, as long as they do not violate the law. Others assert that the management of negotiations and drafting of proposals for peace agreements is within the exclusive authority of the elected government and that such initiatives undermine the standing of the elected government, even if the action is legal.
Which of the two views do you agree more with?
|Can make initiatives||28.2|
|Only government should||64.7|
I will now present to you a list of the central personalities who were involved in the Geneva initiative. For each individual to what extent they can represent Israel's national interests where 5 is excellently and 1 is not at all;
|Not at all||28.4|
|Not at all||28.4|
|Not at all||51.3|
|Not at all||33.1|
|Not at all||22.4|
[IMRA: MK Yahalom quoted a law that termed engaging in activity to transfer land under Israeli sovereignty as "treason" subject to the death penalty.]
MK Shaul Yahalom of the NRP, claims that from the standpoint of the law, participation in the Geneva initiative was treason with a punishment of life imprisonment or the death penalty. There are those who said in response that in light of the murder of Rabin that he should not have said such a thing in public and that if participation in the "Geneva Initiative" was a violation of the law that the legal system would have already taken care of the matter.
Was it proper for MK Yahalom to say such a thing?
Base on what has been reported in the media about the "Geneva Initiative", do you support or oppose it?
To what extent does the "Geneva Initiative" have a chance of being implemented?
[IMRA: Unfortunately, the following questions ignore the alternative of Palestinian autonomy proposed as an alternative that avoids the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state on the one hand and a binational state on the other. Instead we are left with a series of questions that tend to force respondents to a certain line of thought.]
In light of the difficulties that the peace process based on two states for two peoples, today there are those proposing a binational state as the solution, namely, a state covering all of the Land of Israel within which Jews and Palestinians have equal representation in the central institutions of the state without any connection to the relative sizes of the two
populations. Do you think that Jews and Palestinians could possibly live as citizens with equal rights in such a binational state?
Is it possible to ensure the security of the Jewish population in such a binational state?
Is it possible to ensure the realization of the national identity of the Jewish population in a binational state?
[IMRA: The final outcome in Oslo was left wide open.]
In the Oslo Agreement the solution proposed to the conflict was "two states for two peoples". There are those who claim that if a solution cannot be found on this basis and Israeli rule over the territories continues the Palestinians will over the course of years turn from a minority to a majority and that, effectively, a "binational state" will be created where
the majority does not have civil right. To what extent do you fear such a development?
|Not at all||15.1|
Today, which of the two solutions do you favor more: the solution of "two states for two peoples" or the solution of a "binational state"?
|Both to the same extent||0.4|
Do you believe that the unilateral erection of a fence, wall or the other physical means of separation by Israel can prevent or at least significantly reduce terror attacks?
|Not prevent or significantly reduce||16.5|
In principle do you support the erection of the separation fence?
As you know, there is a dispute over the route of the separation fence between those who support a separation fence in accordance with the Green Line and whose who maintain that the Green Line does not have to be the exclusive element in setting the location of the fence, but instead that is should be based on security and other considerations of the Government of Israel. Which position do you agree more with?
|Oppose fence in principle||4.2|
Questions from September 2003 Poll
Do you think that the chances of advancing the peace process are greater or less with the establishment of a new Palestinian government headed by Abu Ala, who enjoys the support of Arafat, than the chances of advancing the process during the period of the previous government headed by Abu Mazen, who did not enjoy Arafat's support?
Do you support or oppose targeted killings?
|Do not know||6.9|
[Only for those who oppose]: There are today two arguments against targeted killing
First: It is immoral since it is execution without trial and the chance of hurting civilians.
Second: Targeted killings only increase the desire of the Palestinians for revenge and each killing leads to a chain reaction of violence and increases the number of Israeli victims.
Which position best reflects why you oppose targeted killing
Can citizens who think that the government's pollicies regarding the peace process hurt the national interests of Israel:
Protest within the framework of the law, for example: organize mass rallies and protest with a license?
Engage in nonviolent civil disobedience. For example, protest without a license, don't pay taxes, refuse to serve in the army?
Engage in violent civil disobedience. For example, physically oppose the evacuation of settlements:
Recently a notice was published signed by a group of Air Force pilot saying that for moral reasons they "refuse to take part in Air Force attacks within civilian population centers" [IMRA: Of those who signed, only 3 apparently actually still served in positions in which they might possibly receive such an order] Do you support or oppose the right of the pilots to refuse an order as part of their protest against the security policies of the government regarding the Palestinians?
|Do not know||5.9|
Do you think that the pilots who signed the notice did so mostly out of moral considerations or due mostly to their political convictions?
|Do not know||12.9|
What most closely defines you positions on matters of peace and security?
Of the following approaches on socio-economic matters which approach do you tend to favor more, socialist or capitalist?
|Very much socialist||16.0|
|Very much capitalist||9.5|
If the government decides to evacuate Jewish communities in the territories within the framework of the peace process and there is a group of soldiers who declare that they refuse to participate in the evacuation would you support or oppose their refusal?
|Do not know||10.5|
Should soldiers who refuse to carry out orders of any kind due to moral or ideological considerations be punished?
|Don't punish for both moral and ideological||16.5|
|Punish only for ideologically based refusal||8.7|
|Punish only for morally based refusal||3.6|
|Punish in both cases||58.6|
The position of the government is that Israel should not carry out negotiations with the Palestinians as long as the terror continues. In contrast there are those who claim that there is no chance that the terror will stop if there is not progress on the negotiating track and thus one should not wait for the terror to halt in order to engage in negotiations. Which position do you agree with more?
|Don't negotiate with terror||58.8|
|Don't wait for terror to stop||32.5|
Today, three years after the start of the second "Intifada", how is Israeli society handling it?
If the current condition of violence continues for a long time which of the two societies, Israeli or Palestinian, will be able to hold on longer in terms of its internal strength?
|September 2003||February 2002||August 2001|
With regards to the following three Palestinian leaders, to what extent would you say that they are terrorists or statesmen, with (1) a terrorist and (5) and statesman [(9) don't know]
|1 (Terrorist)||2||3||4||5 (Statesman)||9 (Don't Know)|
|Yasser Arafat (9/03)||82.7||7.2||4.4||1.3||1.7||2.7|
|Yasser Arafat (6/03)||73.7||11.9||10.8||1.4||1.0||1.2|
|Yasser Arafat (7/98)||28.4||13.1||28.6||13.2||12.7||4.0|
|1 (Terrorist)||2||3||4||5 (Statesman)||9 (Don't Know)|
|Abu Mazen (9/03)||20.2||7.2||28.2||17.5||18.3||8.4|
|Abu Mazen (6/03)||17.3||8.7||30.4||19.9||15.9||7.8|
|1 (Terrorist)||2||3||4||5 (Statesman)||9 (Don't Know)|
|Abu Ala (9/03)||26.7||16.4||25.6||8.4||6.6||16.4|
Questions from August 2003 Poll
I will present to you the basics of an American peace place between Israel and the Palestinians known as the "roadmap". The principles of the program are:
In the first stage the Palestinians choose a new leadership headed by a new leader, Abu Mazen, as has already taken place. The Palestinian leadership will unequivocally declare the right of Israel to exist, and take all measures for an end to terror and violence against Israel, included ending incitement against it.
In parallel, Israel will withdraw from areas it conquered as a result of the Intifada, remove all the illegal outposts, freeze settlement construction and stop military activities against the Palestinians.
In the second stage, at the start of 2004, a Palestinian state will be established in temporary borders. During the course of the year the Israelis and Palestinians would carry out negotiations for a final agreement, that would include the resolution of central issues such as the status of Jerusalem, the right of return of Palestinian refugees and the establishment
of an independent Palestinian state that would be at peace alongside Israel on the basis of the 1967 boundaries, with certain adjustments.
After the two stages, the goal is to reach an overall and final solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in 2005.
Do you support or oppose the plan under this framework?
|August 2003||June 2003||May 2003||April 2003|
The peace index project was conducted by the Tami Steinmetz Research Institute for Peace at Tel Aviv University, headed by Prof. Ephraim Ya'ar and Dr. Tamar Hermann.