Israel and Palestine: self and other, positive and negative; 2023
6 National opinion
FIRST DRAFT (25 pages)
Israel-Palestine attribute space
5.1 Israeli opinion … twelve days in
5.2 USA opinion, October 2023
5.3 UK opinion, October 2023
5.4 Israel
5.5 Palestine opinion
The previous section on world opinion reported the voting at the UN by individual governments. Necessarily a nation’s vote associates a nation with just one viewpoint. In contrast national opinion polls show that the people in each nation have a distribution of opinions. To what extent does a national government’s single UN vote reflect the national distribution of the people? Is the government’s single vote a one-sided or a middle representation of the national distribution?
As the previous section reports there is a distribution of votes at the UN. And each national government has a location in this world distribution. There is a further question of how the world distribution relates to any one nation’s distribution of people’s opinion.
Sections 5.4 and 5.5 look at the opinions in the two combatant nations, Israel and Palestine. In addition, Section 5.1 reports Israeli opinion on October 19th, just twelve days in. In terms of the world distribution the USA and to a lesser extent the UK are at an extreme (pro-Israel). Sections 5.2 and 5.3 report opinion in these two nations.
There have been a variety of opinion surveys since 7th October. For example:
“Israeli Public Opinion
Surveys: IDI is conducting regular polling since the outset of the war, taking the pulse of Israelis to better understand how the see the conflict proceeding, which institutions they trust most, and how they view the performance of the military and the government.”
However this chapter discusses just five surveys: three surveys in Israel, USA and UK almost three weeks into the war; and two surveys in Israel and Palestine, almost seven weeks in.
What was national opinion like three weeks after the October 7th attack? Here we consider just one side of the conflict, namely Israel, and its two primary supporters, USA and the UK (see previous chapter).
Israel. Two or three weeks after the attack Israeli opinion swung from favouring an immediate attack on Gaza to holding off on the Gaza ground offensive. Support for prime minister Netanyahu and his party fell substantially.
USA. Three weeks in. Given just the two options, most people side with Israel rather than Hamas. However looking to the long term, two thirds support the two-state solution, the rest being split between a one-state Israel and a one-state Palestine - the support for the former is somewhat greater than support for the latter. The comparison is not the same in the two questions: the first compares Israel with Hamas and the second compares Israel with Palestine. There is an equation expressing how net support for Israel depends on age.
UK. There is one-sided sympathy and there is two-sided sympathy. Some sympathise more with Israel; some sympathise more with Palestine; some sympathise with both equally; and some don’t know. On the one hand, there is about 25% for each of the four options. On the other hand, the two-sided sympathy percentage is almost as much as the combined total of the two groups displaying one-sided sympathy.
The respondents gave their social background. This enables us to identify twenty groups. In seventeen of the groups two-sided sympathy is greater than either of the one-sided sympathies. The three exceptions are: amongst Conservatives and Leavers sympathy with Israel is (just) greater than two-sided sympathy; and amongst 18-24 year olds, sympathy with Palestine is much greater than two-sided sympathy.
Israel-Palestine attribute space
In the USA survey each survey question refers to an attribute variable. Each answer option refers to a value of that variable. Underlying the surface variable and value, there may be a deeper conceptualisation.
.1 Whom do you side with?
. Palestine Israel
.2 Whom do you have more sympathy with?
. Palestine both equally Israel
The second question has a deeper conceptualisation. Underlying the question variable (let us call it q), there are two underlying variables, x and y.
Variable x is the amount of sympathy you have with Palestine:
. antipathy 0 sympathy with Palestine
Variable y is the amount of sympathy you have with Israel:
. antipathy 0 sympathy with Israel
The question variable q is the difference between these two underlying variables:
. q = y - x
Underlying the one-dimensional question space is an underlying two-dimensional space. The surface options correspond to regions of this latter space.
Variable x is the amount of sympathy you have with Palestine:
. y, sympathy with Israel
. | = equal
. prefer Israel | =
. | =
.x, antipathy to Palestine |= x, sympathy with Palestine
. = |
. = | prefer Palestine
. = equal |
. y, antipathy to Israel
5.1 Israeli opinion … twelve days in
Twelve days after the attack …
Regarding the war in Gaza, 65% of Israelis support a ground offensive in the Strip, while 21% oppose it.
Additionally, 51% back a large-scale military operation on the northern front following increasing skirmishes with Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon, while 30% want a limited operation.
Asked who they would vote for had elections been held today, the poll again gives abysmal grades to the current coalition — 43 seats compared to their current 64 — with Gantz’s party soaring to 40 seats from its current 12.
Also, 80% want Netanyahu to take responsibility publicly for security failures.
The Times of Israel, October 20; poll by Lazar Institute and Panel4All on 18/19 October; N=510:
… a week later. A small-sample poll finds “49% support holding off on Gaza ground offensive” against 25%+ wanting an offensive “immediately” (October 27) – whereas a week earlier there had been 65% support for a major ground offensive:
Haaretz, poll by Maariv: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-27/ty-article/israeli-poll-finds-49-support-holding-off-on-gaza-ground-offensive/0000018b-6faa-d1da-a1bb-6fba47b00000
5.2 USA opinion, October 2023
… one-sided now, two-sided in the long-term
Three weeks in. Given just the two options, most people side with Israel rather than Hamas. However looking to the long term, two thirds support the two-state solution, the rest being split between a one-state Israel and a one-state Palestine - the support for the former is somewhat greater than support for the latter.
The comparison is not the same in the two questions: the first compares Israel with Hamas and the second compares Israel with Palestine.
“In general in this conflict do you side more with Israel or Hamas?”
Israel 86%; Hamas 14%.
“Do you think that the long-term answer to the Israel-Palestine dispute is for …
Arab states to absorb the Palestinians 23%
There to be two states: Israel and Palestine 65%
Israel to be ended and given to Hamas and the Palestinians 15%
This Harvard-CAPS-Harris poll provides a thorough study of USA opinion about the Israel-Hamas conflict (18th-19th October 2023):
“Strong majorities of Americans support Israel against Hamas and US policy on Israel … 48% of 18-24 year olds side more with Hamas; war views defined by generation … Biden approval rises on Israel response”:
…
AMERICANS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORT ISRAEL AND ITS RIGHT TO RESPOND TO HAMAS ATTACKS
· 84% of voters side more with Israel than with Hamas (ages 18-24: 52%; ages 65+: 95%).
· 88% of voters think Israel has the responsibility to protect its citizens by retaliating against Hamas (ages 18-24: 65%; ages 65+: 97%).
· 84% of voters believe Israel has the right to defend itself by launching air strikes in heavily populated Palestinian areas with warnings to those citizens (ages 18-24: 62%; ages 65+: 93%).
· 70% of voters think Israel should eliminate Hamas, not end its campaign against Hamas now (ages 18-24: 48%; ages 65+: 82%).
· 63% of voters believe it was right for Israel to cut off power, water and food to Gaza until its hostages are returned (ages 18-24: 41%; ages 65+: 70%).
· 61% of voters say there is no moral equivalency between Hamas' murders and Israel's actions (ages 18-24: 36% – the majority believe both sides have equally just causes; ages 65+: 80%).
SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS OF YOUNG VOTERS HAVE THEIR OWN FACTS, DENY ATROCITIES COMMITTED
· 17% of voters think it is a false story that Hamas terrorists killed 1200 Israeli civilians by shooting, raping and beheading people (ages 18-24: 32%; ages 65+: 10%).
· 46% of voters say that Israel, not Hamas, rules Gaza (ages 18-24: 53%; ages 65+: 32%).
· 33% of voters think the explosion at a Gaza hospital explosion was caused by an Israeli airstrike rather than a terrorist rocket that went off-course (ages 18-24: 45%; ages 65+: 13%).
…
[https://harvardharrispoll.com/.]
The Jewish News Syndicate (JNS) reported the poll in the following way:
https://www.jns.org/poll-young-us-voters-likelier-to-blame-israel-tend-to-trend-pro-hamas/
Charts and tables – for all topics, not just Israel-Hamas - are given in the following link. The Israel-Hamas slides are numbered 38 to 57; US responsibility is 58 to 63; and Iran is 64 to 66.
https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/HHP_Oct23_KeyResults.pdf
The two-state solution
“Do you think the long-term answer to the Israel-Palestinian dispute is for …? Arab states to absorb the Palestinians (only one state Israel); there to be two states, Israel and Palestine; Israel to be ended and given to Hamas and the Palestinians (only one state Palestine)?”
The responses were 23%, 63% and 15%. Thus, almost two thirds support the two-state solution which can be regarded here as the middle option.
Postulating an underlying scale from -1 to 0 to +1, and midpoint option means of -0.5, 0 and +0.5, the overall mean response is 0.04. The middle response, the two-state option is the mean.
The two-state proportion – a possible opinion distribution in the USA
“The responses were 23%, 63% and 15%.”
The 63% would like there to be two states, but what proportion should go to Israel and what proportion should go to Palestine? One possibility is that implied by the Oslo Accords.
The opinion equation for age
An opinion in The Times, citing the above survey:
“US campuses are becoming hotbeds of hate. Once supporters of Israel, American students now major in pro-Palestinian views that can tip into outright anti-semitism.” Gerard Baker. The Times, October 27, 27.
The next three paragraphs are about modelling – and are not important for the overall flow of the argument in this report. I have a taste for modelling and I like there to be an equation and I like to think about an underlying scale!
“In general in this conflict do you side more with Israel or Hamas?”
In the 18-24 age group the percentage saying Israel is 52% and saying Hamas is 48% - in other words this youngest age group is evenly divided.
Going through the age groups the Israel percentage rises throughout:
52, 71, 78, 88, 91, and 95.
In the middle age range 25-44 it is 71% and 78%. In the older age range 45-65+ it is between 88% and 95%.
[The differences are 19, 7, 10, 3 and 5 and so some non-linear equation may be appropriate.]
Going through the age groups the net Israel percentage rises throughout. The actual results can be compared with a linear equation:
Age group 0 1 2 3 4 5
Results 4 42 56 76 82 90 the net Israel percentage
Equation 30 42 54 66 78 90
The equation is
net Israel percentage = 30 + 12 (age group)
The survey only asked for a binary response. Postulating an underlying scale from -1 to +1, and midpoint option means of -0.5 and +0.5, the overall mean response is 0.34, in other words siding with Israel to a fair extent.
(The calculations are: 84%-16%=68%. Half of 68% is 34%. As a decimal, 0.34.)
The equation is
net Israel mean = 0.15 + 0.06 (age group)
5.3 UK opinion, October 2023
… one-sided and two-sided sympathy
Three weeks in. In the UK, there is one-sided sympathy and there is two-sided sympathy. Some sympathise more with Israel; some sympathise more with Palestine; some sympathise with both equally; and some don’t know. On the one hand, there is about the same 25% for each of the four options. On the other hand, the two-sided sympathy percentage is almost as much as the combined total of the two groups displaying one-sided sympathy. The percentage greater sympathy for Israel is almost equal to the percentage greater sympathy for Palestine.
Table “Which side in the Israel-Palestine conflict do you sympathize with more?”
More sympathy for Israel 19% (25%) (d=-6%)
Both equally 32% (25%) (d=+7%)
More sympathy for Palestine 18% (25%) (d=-7%)
(Don’t know) 30% (25%) (d=+5%)
(October 25-26, 2023)
https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/Internal_IsraelPalestine_231026_W.pdf
The respondents gave their social background. This enables us to identify twenty groups. The group responses are summarised in the Table below and given in full in the next again table.
Table “Which side in the Israel-Palestine conflict do you sympathize with more?”
More sympathy for Israel (across groups: 5%-36%; aged 18-24, 5%; Cons, 36%) 19%
Both equally (across groups: 20%-45%; aged 18-24, 20%; LibDem, 45%) 32%
More sympathy for Palestine (across groups: 6-37; aged 18-24, 37; Cons, 6) 18%
(Don’t know) (across groups: 22-40; London, 22; Wales, 40) 30%
In seventeen of the groups two-sided sympathy is greater than either of the one-sided sympathies. The three exceptions are: amongst Conservatives and Leavers sympathy with Israel is (just) greater than two-sided sympathy; and amongst 18-24 year olds, sympathy with Palestine is much greater than two-sided sympathy.
Consider now the net percentage, the difference between Israel sympathy and Palestine sympathy. It is possible for this net percentage to vary between the extremes of -100% and +100%. In the whole sample (All) the net percentage is 1%, almost zero. Across the twenty groups the net percentage is not at all extreme: it varies between -32% (young 18-24 year olds) and +30% (Conservatives). So there is no social group that is overwhelmingly ‘for’ one of the sides as opposed to ‘for’ the other side.
In eleven groups the net percentage is between -8% and +8%; in three further groups it is between -11% and +10%; in four further groups it is between -22% and +24%; and in two further groups it is between -32% and +30%. So most groups are fairly equally balanced between those ‘for’ Israel and those ‘for’ Palestine.
LibDems (45%) and Remainers (40%) have the highest two-sided sympathy – the young 18-24 year olds (20%), and to a lesser extent Scotland (27%) have the least two-sided sympathy.
Wales and the young 18-24 year olds have the most ‘don’t knows’, but other groups also have high ‘don’t knows’. Over 65 year olds, men and Londoners have least ‘don’t knows’.
Even for the two groups at opposite ends of the table below, there is a modicum of overlap: there is a 6.8% chance of a random Conservative and a random young 18-24 year old agreeing that they have sympathy for both Israel and Palestine.
The columns in the table
.(i) the groups
.(ii) net percentage, Israel sympathy minus Palestine sympathy, (iii) - (iv)
.(iii) Israel sympathy percentage
.(iv) sympathy for both
.(v) Palestine sympathy percentage
.(vi) don’t know
Table Percentage sympathy for Israel, for Palestine, and for both; net for Israel
The groups are ordered by decreasing net percentage
. net symp symp symp
. Is-Pa Israel both Palest don’t know
Cons 30 36 34 6 24
Leave 24 33 30 9 28
65+ 23 34 37 11 18*
50-64 10 23 36 13 28
South- 8 24 32 16 28
C2DE 8 21 32 13 34
Midlds 8 20 32 12 36
Male 5 25 32 20 22
Scot 3 23 *27 20 29
Engl 1 19 33 18 29
All 1 19 32 18 30
Wales 1 12 37 11 40*
North -2 17 33 19 31
Female -2 14 33 16 37
ABC1 -4 18 33 22 27
25-49 -8 13 31 21 36
Remn -11 13 40* 24 23
LibD -12 10 45* 22 23
Londn -21 12 33 33 22
Lab -22 8 36 30 27
18-24 -32 5 *20 37 38*
5.4 Palestine opinion, November 7th 2023
The survey by Arab World for Research and Development, Ramallah …
… the response in The Times: an article, opinion pieces and letters
The special questions for Gaza
My commentary and further analysis
A Palestine opinion scale? … the modal options
A scale of modal options … a continuum of modal groups
The distribution of modal percentages
The modal Palestinian
Opinion formation
The survey by Arab World for Research and Development, Ramallah …
“From October 31 to November 7, Arab World for Research and Development (AWRAD) surveyed 668 Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, during the fourth week of the ongoing Gaza War.
• 98% stated that they will never forget and will never forgive what Israel did and is continuing to do during this war.
• 65% perceived the present war as a conflict targeting all Palestinians, while only 18% viewed it as a war between Israel and Hamas. Other respondents believed: it is a war between Israel and Muslims (5%); it is a war between Israel and Arabs (2%); or it is a conflict between the West and the Arab-Muslim world (10%).
• Reasons cited for the October 7 attacks included: responding to oppression, particularly attacks on Al Aqsa (35%), and addressing broader issues such as freeing Palestine, ending the occupation, and stopping settlements (33%). Breaking the blockade of Gaza was cited as the main reason by 21% of respondents.
• A small percentage (6%) reported that the main reasons behind the war are related to regional interests. This includes serving the interests of Iran (5%) and stopping the ongoing peace and normalization process with Israel (1%).
• As illustrated below, the majority of (59%) strongly supported or (16%) supported to some extent the October 7 attacks carried by the Hamas-led factions, while 16% supported to some extent. 11% reported that they neither supported nor opposed the attack, while 13% expressed opposition to the attacks. Strong support for the attacks was notably higher among Palestinians in the West Bank (68%) as compared to Gaza (47%).
At the time of the poll, more than 10,000 Palestinians in Gaza and 185 in the West Bank had been killed, with 27,000 injured in Gaza and 2,500 in the West Bank. Additionally, 2,700 people were reported missing in Gaza, while 2,500 had been arrested in the West Bank. During the survey, a significant number of residents in northern Gaza had been forcibly displaced or were in the process of moving south. The UN estimates that in the period the survey was conducted more than 1.5 million people, out of a total population of 2.3 million, were displaced. The Israeli ground invasion, initiated on October 28, persisted throughout the implementation of the survey …
… The team conducted the survey through tablet-assisted, face-to-face interviews across the West Bank and in shelters and households in the three “southern” Gaza governorates (Deir Al Balah, Khan Younis, and Rafah) where people were presently residing. The poll’s sample includes all socioeconomic groups, ensuring equal representation of adult men and women, and is proportionately distributed across the West Bank and Gaza. With a 95% confidence interval, the margin of error for the poll is (±) 4% …”
Institution: https://www.awrad.org/
… the response in The Times: an article, opinion pieces and letters
On Monday 20 November, The Times reported on an opinion poll of Palestinians. The next day a piece by Melanie Phillips cited the survey findings. On Wednesday there was a letter response to Phillips; and also a piece by Daniel Finkelstein. There followed four letters on Thursday, one on Friday and four on Saturday.
“Palestinians strongly back Hamas attack.” The Times, November 20, 2023, 28.
“Western opinion is naïve about hatred of Israel. The truth is neither a majority of Palestinians nor any leader wants to live in peace with Jews. … The PA consistently pump out Nazi-style demonisation of Jews.”
Melanie Phillips. The Times, November 21, 2023, 24.
“Israelis and Palestinians must start to listen. Dialogue towards a peaceful solution can only begin when both sides are able to acknowledge each other’s arguments. … The Israeli narrative that Palestinians left voluntarily is incorrect … The settlement policy is clearly a strategic and moral mistake.”
Daniel Finkelstein. The Times, November 22, 2023, 25.
Letters to the editor
Wednesday 22, 28
… equally appalling …
Lord Green … Chairman Medical Aid for Palestine 2001-2003; former British Ambassador to Syria and Saudi Arabia.
Thursday 23, 32
Finkelstein’s measured account … Oslo, Yasser Arafat, Netanyahu …
… Hamas not representative of mainstream Palestinians.
Sir Tony Benton
Previous proposals were all heavily under Israeli control.
James Fox
Phillips and Finkelstein could not be more different in tone and substance. …
No-one prepared to live at peace with Israelis? … the need for dialogue?
Clare MacInnes
… hampered by entrenched and polarised viewpoints … from the river to the sea … can be accomplished without removing Israel.
Michael Scholes
Friday 24, 30
Finkelstein is a welcome contrast to Phillips. … closed minds … a case one might be more open to …
Richard Kinchen, British ambassador to Lebanon, 2000-2003.
Saturday 25, 28
“Ulster-style path to peace in Middle East”
Victory for Hamas would be the elimination of the state of Israel and the death of every Jew.
Jonathan Dickson
I suspect that most people support not one or other but both Israel and the Palestinians … A two-party state is the only hope for long term peace and only Israel can lead the way there.
Peter Kemp
A reply to Sir Tony Benton … the recent poll suggests Hamas is pretty mainstream Palestinian.
Tony Varney
A reply to Michael Scholes … The Arab world rejected the 1947 plan … the phrase means the destruction of Israel.
John Levy
The special questions for Gaza
Table 31: To date: Has your residence been demolished as a result of this current war? Table 32: To date: Has any immediate family member (grandparent, father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter) of yours been martyred?
Table 33: Do you trust the instructions provided by Israel (through paper or electronic publications or phone communications)
Table 34: If you were instructed to evacuate your current area, do you know to which destination you would go?
Table 35: For you, is there any safe place for you and your family in the Gaza Strip? Table 36: Displacement
My commentary and further analysis
The sample was 668 people, 58% from the West Bank and 42% from Gaza. On the West Bank 63% were earners and 37% non-earners (student, housewife, unemployed, retired). In Gaza these percentages were reversed: 30% were earners and 70%
non-earners.
The substance of the questions is itself interesting. It reveals an agenda of issues amongst Palestinians which is I feel different from the agenda of issues in Israel or in the West. In many tables the West Bank and the Gaza percentages are – loosely speaking - similar.
A Palestine opinion scale? … the modal options
There are standard procedures for constructing proper measurement scales. The information here is insufficient to do this. Instead the following offers a rough-and-ready approach.
In what follows we look at each question and identify the option which has the highest percentage, in other words the modal option.
Let us consider two questions which have extreme modal options, one modal option with a very high percentage and the other modal option with a very low percentage (at least it is very low, relative to the others).
.(1) “Considering the ongoing events, to a great extent, I feel a sense of pride as a Palestinian.”
This modal option has a very high percentage. It refers to pride as a Palestinian, with 94% choosing it. This is perhaps not surprising: most people are proud to be members of their country. One might think it an ‘easy’ option to choose – so the percentage is high.
.(2) “I expect strongly this war to end by victory achieving the liberation of Gaza from the Israeli invasion.”
This modal option has a very low percentage (much less than 94%). It refers to expecting victory, with 41% choosing it. This lower percentage is perhaps not surprising: given the destruction in Gaza, victory seems unlikely. One might think it a ‘difficult’ option to choose – so the percentage is lower.
Let us now consider a couple of middling options, middling in the sense of having a percentage between 41% and 94%.
.(3) “I support the solution of establishing one state or two states in the following format: A Palestinian state from the river to the sea.”
This ‘middling high’ modal option refers to support for “A Palestinian state from the river to the sea”, with 75% choosing it. This middling high percentage is, let me argue, not surprising: to many in the West, particularly to Jews, the slogan is anathema, but to Palestinians it may well be a long-established vague aspiration (I offer this tentatively). One might think it a ‘middling easy’ option to choose – so the percentage is middling high.
.(4) “I extremely support the military operation carried out by the Palestinian resistance led by Hamas on October 7th.”
This is a ‘middling low’ option and refers to support for October 7th, with 59% choosing it (see paragraph below). This middling low percentage is, (let me try to find an argument), not surprising: in comparison with the previous middling high option, it is maybe lower because it is specific and it involves military violence. One might think it a ‘middling difficult’ option to choose – so the percentage is middling low.
But, how can 59% be middling low? I have called it middling low because I am judging it relative to the range of percentages, 41% to 94%. A thought must be how can 59% support the atrocities of October 7th? One point is that they were not asked about atrocities they were asked about “the military operation” carried out by “the Palestinian resistance”.
Another point is that their information about October 7th may be limited and selective. (Looking back I see that the front page photograph in The Observer of October 8th showed Palestinian militia standing on top of a captured Israeli tank, waving Palestinians flags.) See the section on opinion formation below.
Finally, alas, if there are people with a mind to commit atrocities, then there are people ‘back home’ with a mind to support it.
A scale of modal options …
Taking the four modal options discussed above we can put them on a scale:
. victory Oct 7 river-sea pride
. 40 60 80 100
. ‘difficult’ ‘easy’
In a similar way one can look at the other questions and their modal options and the corresponding percentages. Ordering the options by their percentages one then obtains a quite detailed opinion scale. Note though that it has not been obtained using the standard procedures. See the section below on ‘The modal Palestinian’.
One general point is that the questions in the scale may be measuring different things. So what might it be a scale of? It is at least a scale of the amount of agreement with the options. Perhaps it is a scale of pro-self sentiment, ranging from strong pro-self sentiment (low percentages) to weak pro-self sentiment (high percentages)? … according to a certain conception of self.
A point to carry on to the next section: the percentage for the modal option depends on the ‘easiness’ of the option.
… a continuum of modal groups
Corresponding to the scale of modal options there is a continuum of modal groups of people – the group who chose the modal option. We can label each group by its percentage. A group which chooses a difficult option might be said to be ‘strong’; and a group which chooses an easy option might be said to be ‘weak’:
. 41-group 59-group 75-group 94-group
. 40 60 80 100
. ‘strong’ ‘weak’
Continuing the point from the previous section: the percentage for the modal option depends on the ‘easiness’ of the option and is an expression of the ‘weakness’ of that modal group.
The distribution of modal percentages
I have identified forty-eight modal groups. Their percentages are fairly evenly spread across the range of 31 to 97. Thus it is not the case that there is one unified view of the situation, treating all the aspects in the same way – rather it is the case that some aspects are easier and other aspects are more difficult.
.No. of groups four ten three seven nine eight seven
% support 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
. ‘strong’ ‘weak’
Note:
The questions can be grouped – see later section. Here are the modal percentages for the questions in the different groups of questions.
main set 35 41 41 59 64 72 72 75 83 86 93 94 96
decreased opinion 68 71 73 80 87 90
very positive actors 48 49 60 71
somewhat positive actors 36 37
very negative actors 42 46 47 47 49 50 64 69 71 73 74 81 87 89 96 97 97
West reasons 39 48 54 64 66 80
The modal Palestinian
The “modal Palestinian” here refers to the set of modal options for the questions in the questionnaire. For example 96% chose the option “not at all” to the question on forgiveness. This was the option with the highest percentage response – the modal option for that question. All respondents are included, male and female, West Bank and Gaza. These modal options are now given below ordered by the percentage choosing that option.
.* Indicates more than two options offered
The main set of questions
*96 He thinks people around him will not at all forgive what Israel did in this war some day
*94 Considering the ongoing events, to a great extent, he feels a sense of pride as a Palestinian.
*93 He thinks people around him will not at all forget what Israel did in this war some day
*86 His main source of information on the ongoing events in Palestine is social media
*83 On this day of the war, he is very supportive of a ceasefire that includes a mutual cessation of hostilities.
*75 He supports the solution of establishing one state or two states in the following format: A Palestinian state from the river to the sea.
*72 He would like a national unity government as his preferred government after the war is finished in Gaza Strip
*72 He does not at all trust the instructions provided by Israel (through paper or electronic publications or phone communications)
*64 He believes that the current conflict in Gaza is primarily between Israel and Palestinians, in general.
*59 He extremely supports the military operation carried out by the Palestinian resistance led by Hamas on October 7th
*41 He expects strongly this war to end by victory achieving the liberation of Gaza from the Israeli invasion.
*41 In light of the demonstrations in support of the Palestinians, he feels hopeful about the future of humanity.
*35 In his opinion, the main reason for the operation launched by the Palestinian resistance on 7th October was to stop the violations of Aqsa.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-65184207
Questions about increase or decrease
90 His conviction in the possibility of coexistence between the Palestinian and Israeli peoples has decreased
87 His conviction in the possibility of achieving a peaceful solution with Israel has decreased
80 Now, his commitment to the dream of achieving the Palestinian state has increased.
73 He believes that Palestine will emerge victorious from this war
71 His commitment to a solution based on the restoration of historical Palestine as a final resolution has increased.
68 His support for the two-state solution (Palestinian state and Israeli state) as a final solution has decreased
Questions about actors
.* In his view the role of the following parties is
very positive
71 Al Kassam (military wing of Hamas)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izz_ad-Din_al-Qassam_Brigades
60 Islamic Jihad
https://ecfr.eu/special/mapping_palestinian_politics/palestinian_islamic_jihad/
49 Al Aqsa Brigade
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Aqsa_Martyrs%27_Brigades
48 Hamas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas
…
somewhat positive
+37? Arabic media 56; 37
+36? Hizballah 46%; 44%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah
…
somewhat negative
None
…
very negative
--42? Russia 43;34
--46 Fateh 27%; 18%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatah
--47 IRedC 27;28
--47? China 35; 33
--49 Turkey 36; 31
--50 Iran 33; 33
--64 PA 12%; 8%
--69 UN 14;15
--71Western media 6;13
--73 Egypt 11;19
--74 Jordan 12;13
--81 EU 3;8
--87 KSA 4;1
--89 UAE 3;2
--96 UK 1;2
--97 Israel 0%; 1%
--97 USA 0;1
Questions about the West
**The US and Western countries expressed a clear support for Israel in its confrontation with Palestinian resistance. He agrees that, to a large extent, they did so
80 Due to their political and economic interests in the region
66 Due to the influence of the Israeli lobby inside these countries
Opinion formation
“… consistently pump out Nazi-style demonisation of Jews.”
Melanie Phillips. The Times, November 21, 2023, 24. (See earlier).
In view of Phillips’ concern, it is of interest to look at the responses to the questions about the media.
What is the main source of information on the ongoing events in Palestine?
. WB Gaza All
Local TV 35 6 23 (Palestine TV 55%)
Arabic TV 81 47 67 (Al Jazirah 92%)
International TV 4 1 3 (BBC 39%; CNN 39%)
Social media 88 82 86 (Telegram 48%; Facebook 31%) `
Family and friends 62 79 69
Other 2 41 18 (radio 56%; … Radio Al Aqsa 17%)
WB: West Bank
The role of Arabic media is viewed as neutral, a net percentage of 0%; (West Bank +14%, net; Gaza -20%, net).
The role of Western media is viewed as very negative, a net percentage of -76%; (West Bank -82%, net; Gaza -68%, net).
Here is Al-Manar TV on Saturday/Sunday October 7th / 8th 2023:
https://english.almanar.com.lb/1917115
Al-Manar TV:
https://english.almanar.com.lb/
Here is Times of Israel, Tuesday 10th October
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-october-10-2023/ …
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/un-180000-gazans-have-fled-their-homes/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/sirens-sound-in-towns-near-gaza-border/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-tells-gazans-to-flee-to-egypt-while-they-still-can/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israeli-strikes-in-gaza-enter-4th-day/
The Times of Israel
https://www.timesofisrael.com/
The Times, 13th October
“Isis comparisons may push terrorists to free prisoners.” 13, 6
“Invasion is a trap, warns ex-MI6 chief.” 13, 6
“Former generals doubt Israel can destroy Hamas.” 13, 6
5.4 Israel opinion, November 20th 2023
The population of Israel includes Jews and those who are not Jews. The Jews vary in the strictness of their adherence to the Jewish religion. This religious variation relates to variation in political opinion concerning religion, in security and on the familiar left-right political continuum. Some issues highlight these sources of variation while other issues do not. An issue which very strongly highlights these issues is a proprosed amendment to the Nation-State Law, to safeguard equality for non-Jewish citizens. For convenience let us postulate an L-R continuum which incorporates all these various aspects.
. “L” “R”
The IDI survey
The Israel Democracy Institute has carried out a series of surveys about the war in Gaza. Here we look only at their fifth ‘War in Gaza’ survey. It was carried out on 19-20 November 2023; and the report came out on 24 November.
Israel Democracy Institute: https://en.idi.org.il/
Israel at War: https://en.idi.org.il/tags-en/51054
Report: https://en.idi.org.il/articles/51616
Download data: at the foot of the report.
Press release: at the foot of the report.
The headline for the report refers to “Jewish and Arab Israelis”:
“Overwhelming majority of Jewish and Arab Israelis:
The release of all hostages is a goal of importance.
IDI's fifth ‘War in Gaza’ survey finds that among Jewish Israelis, toppling Hamas and releasing the hostages are pivotal war-goals. The majority of respondents do not think that the government currently has a clear action for the day after the fighting ends …
… and there is rising support (56%) for an amendment to the Nation-State Law, to safeguard equality for non-Jewish citizens.”
The Nation-State Law: self and other
As noted above sn issue which very strongly highlights these issues is then amendment to the Nation-State Law, to safeguard equality for non-Jewish citizens.
The question on the Nation-State Law is of interest in terms of the self and the other. The support for the amendment shows a gradient of support across the political spectrum:
81% support by Arabs; 86% support by the Left (Jews); 75% support by the Centre (Jews); [56% support by Jews generally]; and 32% support by the Right (Jews).
On a methodological note, these percentages are surface one-sided percentages, and in my view are misleading. The 56% gives the impression of support, ignoring the fact that 33% disagree.
I believe that net aggregate percentages give a more balanced view. The net percentage support amongst Arabs is +75%; amongst Jews is +14%; and overall is +24%. (Scale: -100% to +100%).
However the best measure in my view is the mean score on the underlying continuum. This gives: mean support amongst Arabs of 53; mean support amongst Jews, 9; and mean support overall, 16. (Scale: -100 to +100).
Thus, taking Jews as the self, the self is only very slightly in favour of equality for the other. Taking Arabs as the self, the self is very much in favour of their equality with the other. Jews, themselves are distributed along a continuum, less supportive of the other as one goes from Left to Centre to Right.
Net percentages for all the sample
The question on the Nation-State Law is question 13 in the survey. Questions 5 to 8 concerned the importance of suggested goals of the war. Question 9 asked about the most important goal. As noted in the IDI headline the release of the hostages was the most important. Also important was “restoring deterrence” and toppling Hamas, and the goal of “distancing Gaza” was fourth in importance. Questions 1 to 4 asked for performance ratings for the government on a variety of issues. Questions 10 to 16 asked about a variety of issues. The details of some of these questions will be discussed later. The table below gives the responses to the sixteen questions in the IDI survey in Israel – including sub-questions for Question 9.
The table gives the net percentage and the corrected net percentage. The net percentage can vary between -100 and + 100 – as can the corrected net percentage.
Technical Note. The figures given in the IDI report are what I refer to as surface one-sided aggregate percentages. I prefer to use net percentages which avoid one-sidedness. Net percentages still suffer from being aggregates but have the merit of being easy to calculate. The fundamental measure is the mean on the underlying scale. As a rule of thumb the mean depends on the number n of options in the question. The mean is some number r times the net percentage. (r=((n-1)/n). This allows a corrected net percentage to be given.
Table Net percentages for all the sample
Question number net percent corrected spread
. net percent (notional)
. v=5 options etc
The goals of the war, importance:
7 Releasing hostages 84.5 v 68
5 Restoring deterrence 80.9 v 65
6 Toppling Hamas 74.8 v 60
8 Distancing Gaza 63.3 v 51
Most important goal:
9.7 Releasing hostages (48.9)
9.5 Restoring deterrence (10.3)
9.6 Toppling Hamas (31.8)
9.8 Distancing Gaza (3.3)
. Don’t know (5.7)
. (100)
Performance ratings:
3 Brothers in Arms 36.0 v 31 ***
1 Nat Insurance Institute 15.8 v 13 *
2 The education system -2.5 v -2
4 Treatment of evacuees -18.0 v -14 *
Other:
12 Issuing firearms 31.5 iii 21 **
13 Amend Nation-State Law 23.9 iv 18 *
14 Halt judicial reforms … 34.6 ii 17.3 *
15 Ganz remains 17.9 ii 8.95
11 The northern front 16.4 ii 8.2
16 Israel, United States 0.7 ii 0.35
10 clear government’s plan -34.4 iv -26 **
Between-group differences: Jews and Arabs
The table gives the net percentages for Jews and for Arabs; and it gives the difference between the Jew and Arab net percentages.
Table Net percentages for Jews and for Arabs; and the difference between the Jew and Arab net percentages
. Jew Arab difference, J-A
The goals of the war
5. Restoring deterrence 87.5 48 39.5
6. Toppling Hamas 92.3 -13 105.3
7. Releasing hostages 91.3 49.6 41.7
8. Distancing Gaza 80.2 -22.6 102.8
Most important goal?:
9.5. Restoring deterrence 8.2 20.9 -12.7
9.6. Toppling Hamas 36.5 8.1 28.4
9.7. Releasing hostages 48.8 49 -0.2
9.8. Distancing Gaza 2.7 6.3 -3.6
10 government’s plan -28.3 -43.6 15.3
11 The northern front 29.5 -49.4 78.9
16 Israel, United States -11.8 55.5 -67.3
Performance ratings for (1-4)
1. Nat Insurance Institute 18 5.1 12.9
2. The education system 0.3 -6.7 7.0
3. Brothers in Arms 43.1 -1.3 44.4
4. Treatment of evacuees -16.2 -26.9 10.7
12 Issuing firearms -43.4 28.2 -71.6
13 Amend Nation-State Law 13.9 77.6 -63.7
14 Halt judicial reforms … 28.8 63.5 -34.7
15 Ganz remains 29.2 -38.6 67.8
Note: the net percentage can vary between -100 and + 100; and the difference between the two net percentages can vary between -200 and + 200.
… a Jew-Arab-in-Israel scale
“Overwhelming majority of Jewish and Arab Israelis:
The release of all hostages is a goal of importance”
The headline suggests agreement between Jews and Arabs. We now consider the amount of agreement between Jews and Arabs.
Arabs are on the left of Israel’s political spectrum. So the difference between Arabs and Jews in Israel may relate to the difference between the Jews on the Left and Jews on the Right.
Issues on a Jew-Arab (in Israel) scale
We can take the issues in the above table and order them according to the difference between Jews and Arabs. In this way we locate the issues on a Jew-Arab (in Israel) scale.
If Jews and Arabs were maximally opposed to one another then the difference would be 200. So the results are all well below that.
In the middle of the table are seven items with a fair amount of agreement between Jews and Arabs: the differences are only between -25 and +25.
Above and below this are items with a fair amount of disagreement: one item between -50 and -25; and four items between 25 and 50.
At the top are four items where there is strong disagreement – between 50 and 105.
At the bottom are three items where there is strong disagreement – between -100 and -50.
Table Issues on a Jew-Arab (in Israel) scale
Net percentages for Jews and for Arabs; and the difference between the Jew and Arab net percentages
. Jew Arab difference, J-A
6. Toppling Hamas 92.3 -13 105.3 J: against Hamas
8. Distancing Gaza 80.2 -22.6 102.8 [J: for the south]
11 The northern front 29.5 -49.4 78.9 J: against Hezbollah
15 Ganz remains 29.2 -38.6 67.8 [J: for government]
3. Brothers in Arms 43.1 -1.3 44.4
7. Releasing hostages 91.3 49.6 41.7
5. Restoring deterrence 87.5 48 39.5
9.6. Toppling Hamas 36.5 8.1 28.4 J: against Hamas
10 government’s plan -28.3 -43.6 15.3
1. Nat Insurance Institute 18 5.1 12.9
4. Treatment of evacuees -16.2 -26.9 10.7
2. The education system 0.3 -6.7 7.0
9.7. Releasing hostages 48.8 49 -0.2
9.8. Distancing Gaza 2.7 6.3 -3.6
9.5. Restoring deterrence 8.2 20.9 -12.7
14 Halt judicial reforms … 28.8 63.5 -34.7
13 Amend Nation-State Law 13.9 77.6 -63.7 A: for non-Jew
16 Israel, United States -11.8 55.5 -67.3 A: for USA
12 Issuing firearms -43.4 28.2 -71.6 A: for stopping firearms
Brothers in Arms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brothers_in_Arms_(organization)
Understanding Israel’s Nation State Law
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/understanding-israel-s-nation-state-law
… measures of agreement/disagreement: differences in the net percentages
If Jews and Arabs were maximally opposed to one another then the difference would be 200. So the results are all well below that.
In the middle of the table are seven items with a fair amount of agreement between Jews and Arabs: the differences are only between -25 and +25.
Above and below this are items with a fair amount of disagreement: one item between -50 and -25; and four items between 25 and 50.
At the top are four items where there is strong disagreement – between 50 and 105.
At the bottom are three items where there is strong disagreement – between -100 and -50.
If Jews and Arabs were maximally opposed to one another then the difference would be 200. So the results are all well below that. The next section will introduce another approach to the amount of agreement between Jews and Arab in Israel.
Within-group differences … distributions and summarising statistics
The previous section has looked at the net percentage for each question – one simple number to summarise the distribution of responses to that question. There is a danger though that we think of the one number as being what everybody thinks – whereas people have widely varying views about each question. The aim of this section is to remind ourselves of this. We shall look at the distributions for three questions.
Consider first the question about the education system. Looking at the above table, there doesn’t seem much to say about the responses. There is hardly any difference between the Jew net percentage and the Arab net percentage – both net percentages are close to zero.
In fact though people have widely different views about the education system. Their views are spread pretty evenly across the full range of options – not so different from that for a uniform distribution, where each option across the full range has the same percentage. It is not quite a uniform distribution. The middle option ‘3’ is the mode – a mode with a percentage which is not much bigger than the other percentages.
…
2. The education system
. Jews Arabs General Public
1 = Very poor
1 13.3 18.6 14.2
2 17.6 23.2 18.5
3 28.3 24.8 27.7
4 21.7 18.1 21.1
5 9.5 6.8 9.1
5 = Excellent
. 9.6 8.5 9.4
Don’t know
Total 100 100 100
Next consider the question about the importance of toppling Hamas, the question with the largest difference between Jews and Arabs. The two distributions are very different. Almost all Jews think it very important whereas for Arabs there is an almost uniform distribution – an even spread across the full range of options.
6. Toppling the Hamas regime in Gaza and destroying its political and military infrastructures:
. Jews Arabs General Public
1 = Not at all important
1 0.7 17.1 3.4
2 0.7 24.9 4.7
3 2.6 16.6 4.9
4 7.0 10.2 7.5
5 86.7 18.8 75.4
5 = Very important
. 2.3 12.4 4.1
Don’t know
Total 100 100 100
Finally consider the question about amending the Nation-State Law. This question has
the largest (negative) difference between Jews and Arabs. The two distributions are very different. Almost all Arabs strongly agree whereas for Jews there is an almost uniform distribution – an even spread across the full range of options. So it is the reverse of the previous question.
13.To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “The Nation-State Law should be amended so that it includes the principle of
full equality for non-Jewish citizens of the state.”
. Jews Arabs General Public
Strongly agree 29.4 71.9 36.4
Somewhat agree 22.2 9.1 20.0
Somewhat disagree 19.6 3.9 17.0
Strongly disagree 18.1 2.5 15.5
Don’t know 10.7 12.6 11.1
Total 100 100 100
… measures of between-group agreement/disagreement:
pairing and random encounters
One way of thinking about the amount of agreement is to consider pairing off Jews and Arabs in such a way as to maximise the number of pairs who are in agreement. Looking at the three above tables we obtain:
13.3+17.6+24.8+18.1+6.8+8.5 = 88.3% pairs in agreement about Education
0.7+0.7+2.6+7.0+18.8+2.3 = 31.5% pairs in agreement about Hamas
29.4+9.1+3.9+2.5+10.7 = 53.1% pairs in agreement about the Nation-State Law
Another way of thinking about the amount of agreement is to consider random encounters: what is the probability that a random encounter between a Jew and an Arab will produce a pair who agree? Between two Jews? Between two Arabs?
In general, if there is an even distribution across n options, then the probability of agreement in random encounter is 1/n.
The table shows that the 1/n model words well, except for high agreement for Jews meeting about Hamas and except for high agreement for Arabs meeting about the Nation State Law.
The probability of agreement in random encounters between
. JA JJ AA 1/n2
Education 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.17
Hamas 0.18 0.76 0.18 0.17
Nation State Law 0.26 0.22 0.54 0.25
… a brief note on the modes
[incomplete]
In questions where the options can be put in an order, two issues arise: is there more than one mode?; and, is the mode in the middle or at the extreme? One might expect that if the net percentage is in the middle, then the mode is in the middle; and if the net percentage is at an extreme then the mode is at an extreme. Of course where there are just two options, both options can be considered extreme and so the mode is necessarily at an extreme.
Question 9 had unordered options
Questions 11, 14, 15 and 16 had two options.
Questions 12 had three options. They had interior modes and extreme modes.
eme
Questions 10 and 13 had four options. They had interior modes and extreme modes.
mem, eee
Questions 1 to 8 had five options. They had interior modes and extreme modes.
mmm, mmm, eb.m.eb, mb.eb.mb, eee, e.mb.e, eee, ee.be, unordered, mem,
Note: The number of options in each of the questions was:
Q1-4 Grade of functioning 5
Q5-8 Importance 5
Q9 nominal 4
Q10 certainty 4
1Q11 binary
Q12 stringency 3
Q13 strength of agreement 4
Q14 halt binary
Q15 remain binary
Q16 alone or binary
Opinion formation
“Hamas planned ‘even more devastating attack’ on October 7.” Dec 5 2023: 30.
Haaretz
5.x Methodology for Israel opinion
… method: from surface options to underlying continuum
Some of the questions offer two options, some three, some four and some five. It is all somewhat arbitrary and can make it difficult to compare question statistics. Moreover it is perhaps more precise to think of people’s opinions as being on a continuum. We suppose that a person’s opinion takes some value in the interval from -1 to +1. Depending on the number of options in a question, this is divided into subintervals as follows:
Two options [-1,0] [0,1]
Three options [-1,-0.33] [-0.33,0.33] [0.33,1]
Four options [-1,-0.5] [-0.5,0] [0,0.5] [0.5,1]
Five options [-1,-0.6] [-0.6,-0.2] [-0.2,0.2] [0.2,0.6] [0.6,1]
The mid-points of these intervals are:
Two options -0.5 0.5
Three options -0.67 0 0.67
Four options -0.75 -0.25 0.25 0.75
Five options -0.8 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8
… method: from surface percentages to underlying means
A person has an opinion x and selects an option depending on which interval x belongs to. In this way the set of people select options, giving rise to a percentage for each option – a ‘surface percentage’.
These surface percentages can then be combined with the midpoints in order to estimate the mean score on the underlying continuum.
Example
Question 13 on the Nation State Law had four options: ‘strongly disagree’, ‘somewhat disagree’, ‘somewhat agree’ and ‘strongly agree’. It was reported above that the percentages for the General Public were 15.5, 17.0, 20.0 and 36.4, on these four options respectively. We noted above that the midpoints for four option questions were:
Four options -0.75 -0.25 0.25 0.75
We calculate the mean score by multiplying the midpoint scores by the percentages:
. [ (-0.75)(15.5) + (-0.25)(17.0) + (0.25)(20.0) + (0.75)(36.4) ] / 100
This gives the mean score: 0.16. (rounding down from 0.16425).
The mean score is a bit lower than the midpoint of ‘somewhat agree’.
The calculation can be carried out by Excel:
Put 15.5, 17.0, 20.0 and 36.4 into cells A1 to D1.
In cell E1, put
=((-0.75)*A1+(-0.25)*B1+(0.25)*C1+(0.75)*D1)/100
The underlying means
We now give the underlying means for the three questions discussed above.
The table shows that the 1/n model words well, except for high agreement for Jews meeting about Hamas and except for high agreement for Arabs meeting about the Nation State Law.
The probability of agreement in random encounters between
. J A GP
2 Education -0.01 -0.11 -0.03
6 Hamas 0.71 -0.05 0.59
13 Nation State Law 0.09 0.53 0.16
=((-0.75)*A1+(-0.25)*B1+(0.25)*C1+(0.75)*D1)/100
Means and net percentages
6. Toppling Hamas 92.3 -13 105.3
13 Amend Nation-State Law 13.9 77.6 -63.7
2. The education system 0.3 -6.7 7.0
Np -6.7 -13 -2.5 0.3 13.9 23.9 77.7 74.8 92.3
M -0.11 -0.05 -0.03 -0.01 0.09 0.16 0.53 0.59 0.71
100m/np 1.64 0.38 1.2 3.33 0.65 0.67 0.68 0.79 0.77
100m-np 5.3 -8 0.05 -1.3
The standard deviation
How much do people vary in their answer to a question? Statisticians think in terms of whether the answers differ (or ‘deviate’) from the mean. One of the measures they use is the standard deviation. this is the square root of another measure, the variance.
We calculate the standard deviation as follows –
.() Consider the mean. It is 0.16425
.(1) by taking the square of the mean: A=0.02698
.(2) by multiplying the square of the midpoint scores by the percentages:
B=[ ((-0.75)(-0.75)(15.5) + (-0.25)(-0.25)(17.0) + (0.25)(0.25)(20.0)
+ (0.75) (0.75)(36.4)) / 100
.(3) by subtracting A from B … B-A=0.54 (rounding from 0.5367)
This gives the mean score: 0.16. (rounding down from 0.16425).
The mean score is a bit lower than the midpoint of ‘somewhat agree’.
The calculation can be carried out by Excel:
Put 15.5, 17.0, 20.0 and 36.4 into cells A1 to D1.
In cell E1, put
=((-0.75)*A1+(-0.25)*B1+(0.25)*C1+(0.75)*D1)/100