PSR's Domestic Politics Unit seeks to examine the Palestinian domestic scene and the process of governance. It focuses on the different facets of state building and political change. Issues of interest include institution building, security sector reform transition to democracy, clean government, civics, political trends, and political alignment. DPU seeks to develop various quantitative political indicators with a special focus on developing a Palestinian democracy index, a security sector index, as well as trends in political affiliation and the domestic balance of power. 

Hamas:

 

Results of PSR Exit Polls For Palestinian PLC Elections: On the Election Day for the Second Palestinian Parliament: A Crumpling Peace Process and a Greater Public Complaint of Corruption and Chaos Gave Hamas a limited Advantage Over Fateh, but Fragmentation within Fateh Turned that Advantage into an Overwhelming Victory 

15 February 2006 

Main Findings: 

The results of the exit poll clearly show that Hamas’ victory in the legislative elections was due to three factors:

(1) The peace process is no longer at the top of people’s priorities: Findings show that only a small minority of voters considered the peace process to be a top Palestinian priority. Voters saw the peace process deadlocked with little or no chance for revitalization. The only sign of hope was the Israeli unilateral disengagement, as reflected in the dismantlement of all settlements in the Gaza Strip and few in the West Bank, a step the public viewed as victory for armed struggle and gave Hamas most of the credit for.  A negotiated peace process was the centerpiece of Fateh’s national agenda; therefore, the collapse of diplomacy dealt a heavy blow to the national movement. Despite the widespread belief among voters that Fateh is the most able to reach a peace agreement with Israel, the retreat in the status of the peace process in their hierarchy of priorities translated into a big loss for Fateh. This outcome should not however be interpreted as indicating a decline in the level of support for Israeli-Palestinian peace. Indeed, exit poll results clearly indicate that a clear majority of Fateh supporters as well as the combined voters of all other nationalist lists as well as one third of Hamas voters support the basic elements of the peace process such as the two state solution, the implementation of the Road Map, and the collection of arms from all armed militias and groups.

(2) State-building failures: findings depict a widespread voter disillusionment with PA governance particularly in areas of fighting corruption and enforcing law and order. These two issues were the top priorities for the public. Moreover, voters have lost confidence in the ability of Fateh to lead state building in these two areas. The success of Hams in elevating the status of corruption and lawlessness to top priorities constituted a magnificent achievement insuring its victory in the elections.

(3) But Hamas’ success would have remained relatively small had it not been for Fateh’s widespread fragmentation in the electoral districts. In fact, Hamas in did not succeed in winning the support of the majority of the voters. To the contrary, the majority vote went to Fateh and other nationalist-secularist groups, which together won 56% of the popular vote versus Hamas’ 44%. The advantage Hamas had over Fateh remained limited to three percentage points, with Fateh receiving 41% of the popular vote. Fateh’s fragmentation, displayed clearly in the large number of “independent” Fateh candidates gave Hamas an overwhelming victory despite the fact that its candidates won the district vote by an average not exceeding 41% to Fateh’s 34% with Fateh’s “independents” and other candidates winning an average of 25% in the districts. What insured Hamas’ great victory in the electoral districts was the fact that for each Hamas candidate there were 6 opposing candidates leading to a significant waste of the nationalist vote. Has Fateh been able to maintain a decent level of cohesion and discipline, for example by convincing its “independent” candidates to stop their futile race, its average district vote would have risen to 39% which would have increased its total district seats by 16 more seats to a total of 33.

 

(1) Area, District, and Place of Residence and Electoral Behavior

  • The competition between Fateh and Hamas is more intense in the West Bank where the two are equally strong, but Hamas is stronger in the Gaza Strip.
  • Competition between Fateh and Hamas is tough in refugee camps but Hamas has the advantage in cities and Fateh has the advantage in rural areas. The combined strength of all other lists is greater in refugee camps and weaker in rural areas.

 

Voting Outcome Based on Area, District, and Place of Residence

 

Voting Hamas

Voting Fateh

Voting Others

Area

Hamas receives higher support in the Gaza Strip compared to the West Bank (48% vs. 41%)

Fateh receives approximately the same levels of support in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (43% vs. 42%)

Other lists receive considerably lower support in the Gaza Strip compared to the West Bank(9% vs. 18%)

District

Hamas has the advantage over Fateh in eight districts: Gaza City, followed by Nablus,Jerusalem, North Gaza, Tulkarm, Hebron,Ramallah, and Salfit

 

 

 

Fateh has the advantage over Hamas in the other eight districts: Qalqilia, followed byJericho, Rafah, Bethlehem, Jenin, Deir alBalah, Khanyounis, and Toubas 

All the other lists combined didn’t have the advantage in any of the districts. The highest percentage of votes received was recorded inRamallah, followed by Salfit, Bethlehem,Toubas, Tulkarm, Jerusalem, Jericho, Jenin,Qalqilia, Jabalia, Hebron, Nablus, Rafah, GazaCity, Khanyounis and Deir al Balah.

Place of Residence

Hamas received greater support in cities (49%), and refugee camps (48%), and limited support in rural areas (36%)

Fateh received limited support in cities (37%), and greater support in Refugee camps (44%) and villages (46%)

Support for the other lists combined in cities reached (13%), going down to 8% in refugee camps and increasing to 18% in rural areas

 

 

(2) Voters’ Demographics and Electoral Behavior

  • There are no major differences based on gender in the vote for Fateh and Hamas, but the other lists are strong among men compared to women.
  • Support for Hamas increases among the old and the middle aged and decreases among the youth. By contrast, support for Fateh increases among the youth and decreases among the old and the middle aged. The other lists find the least support among the youth.
  • The competition between Fateh and Hams is toughest among voters with high and medium levels of education where the two have equal strength. Hamas is stronger than Fateh among the illiterates.
  • Hamas defeats Fateh among merchants, professionals and laborers and Fateh defeats Hamas among the unemployed. The competition is tough between the two sides over the vote of students and employees. The other lists find more support among merchants and less support among the unemployed.
  • Competition is also tough among voters from the public sector where the two sides receive equal votes but Hamas defeats Fateh among those working in the private sector.
  • There are no important differences in support for Fateh and Hamas based on levels of income.

 

Voting Outcome Based on Selected Demographic Factors

 

Voting Hamas

Voting Fateh

Voting Others

Gender

Hamas received slightly more votes from women than men (44% vs. 42%)

Fateh too received slightly more votes from women than men (45% vs. 42%)

Other lists received less votes from women than men (12% vs. 16%)

Refugee status

Hamas received more votes from refugees than from non-refugees (46% vs. 42%)

Fateh received an equal percentage of vote form refugees and non-refugees (43% vs. 42%)

Other lists received less votes from refugees compared to non-refugees (11% vs. 16%)

Age:

Young: 18-33 years

Middle age: 34-47 years

Old: over 47 years

Support for Hamas increases among the old reaching 52% and decreases to 47% among the middle aged, and decreases further to 42% among the young

Support decreases considerably among the old (31%) and increases to 37% among the middle aged and increases further to 46% among the young

Support for other lists increases among the old and the middle aged (17%) and decreases among the young (13%)

Education

Support for Hamas increases among the illiterates (50%), and drops to 43% among those with 6-12 years of education, and remains at the same level (44%) among those with two or more years of college education

Support for Fateh drops considerably among the illiterates (34%) and increases to 43% among those with 6-12 years of education, and remains at the same level (42%) among those with two or more years of college education

These are no important differences in support for the other lists based on educational attainment

Profession

Support for Hamas increases among merchants (49%), followed by housewives (47%), professionals (46%), laborers (45%), students (42%), and employees and the unemployed (41% each)

Support for Fateh decreases considerably among merchants (28%) and increases among professionals (36%), laborers (37%), housewives (42%), students and employees (44% each) and the unemployed (51%)

Support for the other lists increases among merchants (23%), laborers and professionals (18% each), students and employees (14% each), housewives (12% each) and the unemployed (9%)

Work Sector

Support for Hamas is greater among those working in the private sector than those working in the public sector (45% vs. 42%)

Support for Fateh is weaker among those working in the private sector compared to those working in the public sector (37% vs. 43%)

Support for the other lists is slightly greater among those working in the private sector compared to those working in the public sector (18% vs. 16%)

Marital Status

Support for Hamas increases among the married compared to the unmarried (46% vs. 41%)

Support for Fateh drops among the married compared to the unmarried (40% vs. 46%)

There are no important difference in support for other lists based on marital status

Religion

Support for Hamas among Palestinian Muslims is naturally higher than among Palestinian Christians (45% vs. 5%)

Support fro Fateh among Palestinian Muslims is higher than among Christians (42% vs. 31%)

Support for the other lists drops among Muslims compared to Christians (13% vs. 46%)

Income :

Low Income: less than NIS 1200

Mid Income: NIS 1201-2400

High Income: more than NIS 2400

Support for Hamas increases among low income voters (46%) and decreases among mid income voters (44%) and decreases further among high income voters (40%)

There are no important differences in support for Fateh based on income levels

Support for other lists drops among low income voters (12%) and increase among mid income voters (15%) and high income voters (17%)

 

 

(3) Religiosity and Electoral Behavior

Religiosity has been measured by asking voters to identify whether they see themselves as “religious”, “somewhat religious” or “not religious”. A second question asked about voters’ readiness to purchase a lottery ticket if possible. The findings clearly show that Hamas’s voters are more religious than Fateh’s and that Fateh’s strength resides mostly among those who identify themselves as “somewhat religious” or “not religious.” Similarly,Hamas wins the vote of most of those who refuse to purchase a lottery ticket and receives little support from those who are willing to purchase a ticket. Support for Fateh goes in the opposite direction: it increases among those willing to purchase a ticket and decreases considerably among those unwilling to purchase one. Support for the other lists decreases considerably among those refusing to purchase a lottery ticket and increases among those willing to buy one.

 

Voting Outcome Based on Level of Religiosity

 

Voting Hamas

Voting Fateh

Voting Others

Religiosity based on self identification: “religious”, “somewhat religious”, and “not religious”

Support for Hamas increases among “religious” voters (52%) and decreases among the “somewhat religious” (38%) and among the “not religious” (19%)

Support for Fateh decreases among “religious” voters (40%), and increases among the “somewhat religious” (44%) and among the “not religious” (49%)

Support for the other lists decreases among “religious” voters (8%) and increases among the “somewhat religious” voters (19%) and among the “not religious” (32%)

Position on Lottery 

Support for Hamas increases among those voters most opposed to buying lottery tickets and decreases considerably among those most willing to buy lottery tickets (63% vs. 20%)

Support for Fateh drops considerably among those voters most opposed to buying lottery tickets and increases among those most willing to buy lottery tickets (28% vs. 62%)

Support for other lists decreases considerably among those voters most opposed to buying lottery tickets and increases among those most willing to buy lottery tickets (9% vs. 18%)

 

When we combine the two religiosity questions, the picture becomes clearer: support for Hamas increases dramatically among those who identify themselves as “religious” and refusing to purchase a lottery ticket; it increases a little among the “somewhat religious” who also refuse to purchase a ticket. By contrast, support for Fateh remains relatively high among all voters willing to purchase a ticket regardless of how religious they are. Voters of the other lists show the same tendency as Hamas’ but in the opposite direction. Other lists are stronger in particular among the “not religious” and the “somewhat religious” who are willing to purchase a lottery ticket. 

 

(4) Political Sympathies and Electoral Behavior

Findings show that Hamas received the vote of the overwhelming majority of those sympathetic to that movement as well as those sympathizing with Islamic Jihad and those who identify themselves as “independent Islamists.”Hamas received a little over one third of the vote of those identifying themselves as “independent nationalists.” Fateh received the vote of those sympathizing with it as will a about one fifth of those identifying themselves as “independent nationalists.” Other lists received the support of those sympathizing with the PFLP, People’s Party, DFLP, al Mubadara al Wataniyya, and those identifying themselves as “independent nationalists.”

 

Voting Outcome Based on Political Sympathies

 

Voting Hamas

Voting Fateh

Voting Others

Political Sympathies

Support for Hamas comes essentially from four groups of sympathizers: Hamas (93%), Islamic Jihad (73%), Independent Islamists (72%) and Independent Nationalists (35%)

Support for Fateh comes essentially form two groups of sympathizers: Fateh (88%) and Independent Nationalists (21%)

Support for other lists comes essentially from those sympathizing with the PFLP, People’s Party, DFLP,  al Mubadara al Wataniyya, and Independent Nationalists

 

 

(5) The Peace Process and Electoral Behavior

Five variables were used to measure views on the peace process: how voters identify themselves (supporter, opponents, and neither supporter nor opponent), the place of the peace process in voters’ hierarchy of priorities, collection of arms from armed groups, implementation of the Road Map, and recognition of the state of Israel as a Jewish state within the context of a two-state solution. Findings show that Fateh’s strength lies with those who support the peace process while Hamas’ lies with those opposed to it and among those who are uncertain about where they stand on the peace process. Other lists are popular among all three groups although it is stronger among those who support the peace process and the uncertain. Findings also show that 69% of those who place the peace process at the top of their priorities voted for Fateh while only 19% voted for Hamas. But findings show that only 9% placed the peace process at the top of the list of priorities which, needless to say, explains the devastating blow Fateh received on election day.

 

Voting Outcome Based on Self Identification Regarding the Peace Process

 

Voting Hamas

Voting Fateh

Voting Others

Position of the peace process based on self identification:

“Support”, “oppose”, “neither support nor oppose”

Support for Hamas increases considerably among those opposed to the peace process (79%) and drops among those who neither support nor oppose the peace process (54%) and drops considerably among those who support the peace process (29%)

Support for Fateh drops considerably among those opposed to the peace process (9%) and increases among those who neither support nor oppose the peace process (31%) and increases further among those who support the peace process (56%)

Support for the other lists drops somewhat among those who oppose to the peace process (12%) and increases a little among those who neither support nor oppose and among those who support the peace process (15%)

 

 

Palestinian vote for Hamas on the day of elections should not however be interpreted as a vote against the peace process. About 60% of all voters identified themselves as supporters of the peace process while only 17% saw themselves as opposed to it and 23% saw themselves somewhere in the middle between opposition and support. Moreover, the vote does not mean that all those who voted for Hamas are opposed to the peace process. To the contrary, findings show that 40% of Hamas voters in fact support the peace process and only 30% oppose it. Moreover, abut one third of Hamas voters support collection of arms, the implementation of the Road Map, and the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state in a two-state context. Findings clearly show that a majority of Fateh and the combined voters of other lists support all there elements of the peace process (see table below).

 

Voting Outcome Based on Position on Various Issues of the Peace Process

 

Voting Hamas

Voting Fateh

Voting Others

Supporters the peace process

40%

79%

62%

Support collecting arms from armed factions

32%

65%

57%

Support the implementation of the Road Map

32%

70%

50%

Support mutual recognition of Israel as a Jewish State and Palestine as a Palestinian state in a two-state context

34%

60%

63%

 

 

(6) Corruption and Lawlessness and Electoral Behavior

Findings clearly show that what damaged Fateh’s electoral chances was the decision by a large percentage of voters (25%) to make the ability of the list or faction to fight corruption the most important consideration when voting for the various lists. What made things worse for Fateh was the belief of an additional large percentage of voters (37%) that addressing lawlessness and chaos is the central issue that determines people’s vote. The fact that 75% stated that they personally do not feel safe and secure in their homes only made things worse for Fateh. 

This is how Hamas benefited from this:

71% of those who considered corruption the most important consideration in voting voted for Hamas and only 19% for Fateh and 11% for the other lists.

Support for Hamas among those least safe and secure reached 56% and for Fateh 31%. By contrast, vote for Hamas among the most safe and secure dropped to 35% while increasing to 53% in the case of Fateh. Other lists benefited also from the absence of safety and security as the percentage of support for these lists increased among the least safe and secure and decreased among the most safe and secure.

 

Voting Outcome Based on Feelings of Safety and Security

 

Voting Hamas

Voting Fateh

Voting Others

Feelings of personal safety and security

Support for Hamas increases those least safe and secure (56%) and decreases among those most safe and secure (35%)

Support for Fateh drops among those least safe and secure (31%) and increases among the most safe and secure (53%)

Support for other lists increases among those least safe and secure and decreases among those most safe and secure

 

 

(7) Optimism and Pessimism and Electoral Behavior

Findings show that optimism and pessimism were also instrumental in helping Hamas win the elections: most optimists voted for Fateh while most pessimists voted for Hamas. The optimists are those who believed that in the near future violence will stop and the two sides will return to negotiations while pessimists are those who expected more violence and no return to negotiations. Those who expected to see a continuation of violence and a return to negotiations stood in the middle. The level of optimism did not exceed 28%, those in the middle stood at 40%, pessimism at 22%, and 9% could not identify their mood. Hamas did very well among the pessimists and managed to do better than Fateh among those in the middle.

 

Voting and Optimism and Pessimism

 

Voting Hamas

Voting Fateh

Voting Others

Optimists

26%

59%

15%

In-between Optimism and Pessimism

47%

38%

16%

Pessimists

64%

25%

11%

 

 

(8) Role of the New PLC in Policy Making 

Most voters want to give the newly elected PLC more power than the president: 55% preferred to see the PLC more powerful while only 11% want to give the PLC less power than the president and 28% want to give both equal powers. In making a choice regarding what institution should have the power to make the most vital decisions for the Palestinian people, a majority of 55% prefer the PLC over all the others, with only 16% preferring the presidency, 7% the PLO National Council, 6% the PLO Executive Committee, 7% the Cabinet and the Prime Minister, and 9% made no clear preference.

 

Voters’ Views Regarding the Role of Selected Political Institutions in Making Vital Palestinian Decisions

 

 

These results show that 78% prefer to place vital decisions in the hands of PA institutions and only 13% prefer to place them in the hands of the PLO. It is worth remembering that 35% of the voters on the day of the presidential elections on 9 January 2005 preferred to place vital decisions in the hands of the president while only 30% wanted to place them in the hands of the PLC and 12% in the hands of the cabinet and prime minister, 8% in the hands of the PLO Executive Committee and 7% in the hands of the PLO National Council.

 

Comparison between the Views of the Votes on the Day of the Presidential Elections (in January 2005) and the Views of the Voters on the Day of the PLC Elections (in January 2006) Regarding the Role of Selected PA and PLO Institution in Making Vital Decisions

 

These results reflect clear voters’ disillusionment with the PLO’s ability to make vital decisions and a similar disillusionment with the President’s ability and the ability of the prime minister to make decisions while simultaneously hoping that the newly elected PLC will succeed in playing such a role. It is clear that the majority of voters, including those who voted for Hamas, did not expect Hamas to be in a position to be able to form the cabinet and appoint a Hamas Prime Minister.

 

(9) Voters’ Choices for Prime Minister

Voters were asked to express their preferences for a prime minister and were given a list of five possible candidates, the first representing the old guard (Nabil Sha’ath), the second representing the young guard in the West Bank (Marwan Barghouti), the third representing the young guard in the Gaza Strip (Mohammad Dahlan), the fourth representing Hamas (Mahmud Zahhar), and the fifth representing the others (Mustapha Barghouti). Findings show Zahhar and Marwan Barghouti receiving almost equal number of votes. But they also show that the combined strength of the three Fateh candidates (54%) is much greater than that of Hamas candidate. Moreover, findings show that the overwhelming majority of those voting for Fateh candidates prefer those speaking on behalf of the young rather than the old guard (50% for Marwan Barghouti and Dahlan vs.  4% for Sha’ath).

 

Voters’ Preference for the Next Prime Minister

Results of PSR’s PLC Exit Poll

25 January 2006

 

 

Total%

West Bank %

Gaza Strip%

3) Do you believe that the election process has been fair or unfair?

1) Certainly fair

31.7

27.0

38.6

2) Fair

60.5

64.3

54.8

3) Unfair

3.7

4.2

2.8

4) Certainly unfair

0.7

0.7

0.7

5) DK/NA

3.0

3.8

3.5

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

04) From among the following factors, which one was the first most important in selecting your electoral list?

1) The political party to which the list belonged

19.0

20.8

16.4

2) The ability of  the list to reach a peace agreement with Israel

9.4

9.2

9.7

3) The ability of the list to fight corruption

24.6

21.8

28.8

4) The ability to keep the intifada continuing

4.8

4.5

5.2

5) The ability of the list to improve economic conditions

11.3

10.7

12.0

6) The ability of  the list  to impose law and order

9.0

9.1

8.8

7) The ability of  the list  to maintain national unity

11.4

12.5

9.7

8) His ability to protect the rights of the refugees in the negotiations with Israel

6.1

6.3

5.9

9) others (specify ---------------- )

2.8

2.9

2.6

10) DK/NA

1.6

2.1

0.9

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

5) From among the following factors, which one was the first most important in selecting your candidate in your district?

1) The political party to which the list belonged

20.4

21.5

18.8

2) The ability of  the list to reach a peace agreement with Israel

7.5

7.8

7.2

3) The ability of the list to fight corruption

22.8

21.9

24.8

4) The ability to keep the intifada continuing

4.2

3.6

5.1

5) The ability of the list to improve economic conditions

13.8

12.2

16.6

6) The ability of  the list  to impose law and order

10.3

9.9

10.9

7) The ability of  the list  to maintain national unity

11.9

13.5

9.4

8) His ability to protect the rights of the refugees in the negotiations with Israel

5.4

5.2

5.6

9) others (specify ---------------- )

2.6

2.7

2.3

 10) No Opinion/Don’t know

1.2

1.6

0.6

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

6) Now, after you have voted in the PLC elections, whom do you prefer to see a Prime Minister?

1) Marwan Barghouti

29.3

35.6

20.0

2) Mahmoud Zahhar

30.0

28.7

32.0

3) Mohammad Dahlan

11.9

2.4

26.1

4) Nabil Sha’ath

3.5

4.3

2.3

5) Mustafa Barghouti

8.4

8.5

8.3

6) Others (Specify ___________)

6.1

7.5

3.9

7) No Opinion/Don’t know

10.8

13.0

7.5

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

07) The following is a list of problems confronting the Palestinians today, tell us which one is the most important problem?

1) spread of unemployment and poverty

26.6

24.2

30.1

2) The continuation of the occupation and its daily practices

26.5

34.6

14.4

3) internal anarchy

14.4

10.7

19.8

4) The spread of corruption and lack of internal reforms

29.3

27.3

32.3

5) Others (specify--- )

2.4

2.4

2.3

6) DK/NA

0.9

0.8

1.0

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

08) On this day of elections, I believe that the more critical factor that determined voters’ preferences has been:

1) insure the continuation of the intifada and the armed confrontations

8.3

8.5

8.0

2) economic issues such as poverty and unemployment

14.2

14.3

14.1

3) corruption and mismanagement

17.8

18.0

17.5

4) the peace process and negotiations

17.8

20.2

14.3

5) dealing with chaos and lawlessness and enforcing law and order

36.8

32.8

42.7

6) Others (specify--- )

3.0

3.2

2.6

7) DK/NA

2.1

3.1

0.7

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

09) In your view, the elected PLC should enjoy

1) Same powers as those of President Mahmud Abbas

28.1

30.8

24.1

2) Greater powers than those of President Mahmud Abbas

54.1

50.4

59.7

3) Less powers than those of President Mahmud Abbas

11.3

11.2

11.3

4) DK/NA

6.5

7.6

4.9

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

10) Who among the electoral lists are most able to carry out the following tasks:

10-1 Improve Palestinian economic conditions

1) Hamas or Islamic Jihad

40.9

37.8

45.4

2) Fateh

44.9

44.6

45.4

3) Left (PFLP, DFLP, Mubadara, People’s Party)

5.3

6.0

4.2

4) Newly established groups including independents

4.5

5.7

2.7

5) Others (Specify __________)

4.4

5.8

2.3

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

10-2) Fight corruption and carry out political reforms

1) Hamas or Islamic Jihad

49.8

47.2

53.7

2) Fateh

37.2

36.4

38.4

3) Left (PFLP, DFLP, Mubadara, People’s Party)

5.6

6.9

3.6

4) Newly established groups including independents

3.7

4.3

2.8

5) Others (Specify __________)

3.7

5.2

1.5

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

10-3) Moving  the peace process forward

1) Hamas or Islamic Jihad

26.5

22.9

31.7

2) Fateh

61.2

62.4

59.4

3) Left (PFLP, DFLP, Mubadara, People’s Party)

4.5

5.7

2.8

4) Newly established groups including independents

2.6

2.3

3.0

5) Others (Specify __________)

5.2

6.8

3.0

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

10-4) Insure the continuation of the armed intifada

1) Hamas or Islamic Jihad

60.0

58.1

62.9

2) Fateh

30.6

30.0

31.5

3) Left (PFLP, DFLP, Mubadara, People’s Party)

3.4

3.7

2.8

4) Newly established groups including independents

1.6

1.9

1.2

5) Others (Specify __________)

4.4

6.3

1.6

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

10-5) Protect national unity

1) Hamas or Islamic Jihad

40.4

38.1

43.7

2) Fateh

44.9

45.3

44.3

3) Left (PFLP, DFLP, Mubadara, People’s Party)

5.3

6.2

4.0

4) Newly established groups including independents

3.9

3.2

5.1

5) Others (Specify __________)

5.5

7.2

2.9

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

10-6) Protect refugees’ right of return in negotiations

1) Hamas or Islamic Jehad

42.2

41.1

43.7

2) Fateh

44.9

43.2

47.4

3) Left (PFLP, DFLP, Mubadara, People’s Party)

6.1

6.9

5.0

4) Newly established groups including independents

2.0

2.3

1.5

5) Others (Specify __________)

4.8

6.5

2.4

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

10-7) Enforce law and order in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

1) Hamas or Islamic Jehad

41.5

38.1

46.6

2) Fateh

46.0

46.8

44.8

3) Left (PFLP, DFLP, Mubadara, People’s Party)

4.7

5.2

3.9

4) Newly established groups including independents

2.8

3.2

2.3

5) Others (Specify __________)

4.9

6.7

2.4

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

11)  In your view, fateful decisions should be in the hands of (select one only)

1) The PA Legislative Council

55.2

52.4

59.4

2) The President of the PA

16.2

18.3

13.2

3) The PLO National Council

6.7

6.3

7.3

4) The PLO Executive Committee

6.1

5.6

6.8

5) The PA prime minister and cabinet

7.2

7.1

7.3

6) None of the above

5.1

6.5

3.1

7) DK/NA

3.5

3.8

3.0

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

12) We would like to ask you about your expectations from the PLC you had just elected. Do you want it to

1) implement the Road Map Plan

50.5

46.8

56.0

2) not to implement the Road Map Plan

39.1

41.7

35.2

3) DK/ NA

10.3

11.4

8.8

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

13) And with regard to the arms in the hands of the armed factions, do you want it to:

1) to pass laws to collect arms from all armed groups whereby the PA security services would be the only armed force in PA areas?

48.6

46.1

52.3

2) to pass laws to keep arms of the armed factions in the hands of the armed factions

26.2

27.0

24.9

3) not to interfere in the issue of the arms of the factions

21.3

22.0

20.4

4) DK/NA

3.9

4.9

2.4

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

14)  There is a proposal that after the establishment of an independent Palestinian state and the settlement of all issues in dispute, including the refugees and Jerusalem issues, there will be a mutual recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people and Palestine as the state of the Palestinian people. Do you agree or disagree to this proposal.

1) Definitely agree

18.5

16.7

21.0

2) Agree

30.7

34.1

25.7

3) Disagree

26.8

26.8

26.7

4) Definitely disagree

21.0

19.1

23.7

5) DK/NA

3.1

3.3

2.8

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

15) What do you expect to happen to the Israelis and Palestinians now after Israel evacuated all settlements in the Gaza Strip and four in the West Bank and after setting the date of January 25 for Palestinian parliamentary elections.

1) Negotiations will resume soon enough and armed confrontations will stop

28.3

26.6

30.8

2) Negotiations will resume but some armed attacks will continue

40.1

41.6

37.9

3) Armed confrontations will not stop and the two sides will not return to negotiations

22.3

22.7

21.8

4) DK/NA

9.3

9.1

9.5

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

16) Would you say that these days your security and safety, and that of your family, is assured or not assured?

1) Completely assured

4.0

3.1

5.3

2) Assured

20.2

19.4

21.3

3) Not assured  

53.7

58.4

46.8

4) Not assured at all 

21.4

18.5

25.7

5) DK/NA

0.7

0.6

0.9

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

17) Generally, do you see yourself as,

1) religious

46.5

41.5

53.8

2) somewhat religious

47.5

51.1

42.1

3) not religious

4.8

6.2

2.6

4) DK/NA

1.3

1.1

1.5

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

18) Generally, do you see yourself as,

1) Supportive of the peace process

59.1

58.8

59.6

2) Opposed to the peace process

16.9

15.5

19.1

3) Between support and opposition

22.5

24.1

20.2

4) DK/NA

1.4

1.6

1.1

 

Total%

West Bank %

    Gaza Strip%

19) Which of the following factions and parties do you support:

1) PPP

1.1

1.1

1.1

2) PFLP

4.4

4.5

4.2

3) Fateh

42.1

41.1

43.7

4) Hamas

38.6

35.4

43.2

5) DFLP

1.2

1.6

0.6

6) Islamic Jihad

0.9

1.3

0.5

7) Fida

0.2

0.2

0.2

8) Independent Islamists

2.1

2.5

1.4

9) National initiative (almubadara)

1.4

2.0

0.5

9) Independent nationalists

2.6

3.4

1.4

10) None of the above

4.3

5.5

2.6

11) Others (specify ---- )

1.1

1.4

0.6

 

 


 

Wide public support for Hamas’ offensive on October the 7th, but the vast majority denies that Hamas has committed atrocities against Israeli civilians. The war increases Hamas’ popularity and greatly weakens the standing of the PA and its leadership; nonetheless, the majority of the Palestinians remains unsupportive of Hamas. Support for armed struggle rises, particularly in the West Bank and in response to settlers’ violence, but support for the two-state solution rises somewhat. The overwhelming majority condemns the positions taken by the US and the main European powers during the war and express the belief that they have lost their moral compass 
22 November-2 December 2023

 

These are the results of the latest poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip between 22 November and 2 December 2023. The period leading up to the poll witnessed the launch of Hamas’ October the 7th offensive against Israeli towns and military bases bordering the Gaza Strip and the Israeli launch of the current ground invasion of the Gaza Strip. Video images circulating in the international and Israeli media show that some Hamas fighters have committed attacks against Israeli civilians, including women and children, and took many of them hostages. International and Palestinian reports reported that thousands of Palestinians, mostly women and children, were killed by Israeli arial and tank bombardment. Israeli attacks targeted Palestinian hospitals, public buildings, and most other civilian infrastructure including tens of thousands of homes, with many neighborhoods leveled completely to the ground. In the meanwhile, in the West Bank, the Israeli army blocked or restricted Palestinian access to main roads while settler attacks increased against vulnerable towns and villages in various parts of the B and C areas.

To ensure the safety of our field researchers in the Gaza Strip, interviews with the residents were conducted during the ceasefire, which saw Palestinian women and children released from Israeli prisons in exchange for women and children held by Hamas.

The sample size of this poll is 1231 adults, of whom 750 were interviewed face to face in the West Bank and 481 in the Gaza Strip in 121 randomly selected locations. The sample is representative of the residents of the two areas. Due to the war in the Gaza Strip, we conducted interviews in the central and southern regions inside the selected sample homes, with the exception of one displaced area, where residents were interviewed in the shelter area where they had taken refuge. As for the northern Gaza Strip, residents were interviewed in 24 shelter locations, of which 20 belonged to UNRWA and 4 to governmental institutions. A total of 250 interviews were conducted in these shelters, and another 21 were conducted in the homes of relatives and friends of displaced people from the north. Despite the large representative sample, the margin of error for this poll is +/-4. The increase in the margin of error is due to the lack of precision regarding the number of residents who stayed in their homes, or in shelters, in the northern parts of the Gaza Strip which we did not sample.

For further details, contact PSR director, Dr. Khalil Shikaki, or Walid Ladadweh at tel. 02-296 4933 or email pcpsr@pcpsr.org

Main Findings:

Most of the questions asked in this last quarter of 2023 revolved around the October 7 offensive and the subsequent Israel-Hamas war and ground invasion of the Gaza Strip. It also covered the debate about the future of the Gaza Strip after the war and the Palestinian perception of the positions of the various relevant countries and actors. Findings indicate that a majority of the respondents believe that Hamas' decision to carry out the offensive is correct, and believe that the attack came in response to “settler attacks on Al-Aqsa Mosque and West Bank residents, and for the release of Palestinian prisoners.” It is worth noting that there are significant differences between the attitudes of the residents of the West Bank compared to those of the Gaza Strip, in terms of the “correctness” of the Hamas' decision (and other matters), as the attitudes of Gazans tend to show a greater degree of skepticism about that decision. It is clear from the findings that believing in the “correctness” of Hamas' decision does not mean support for all acts that might have been committed by Hamas fighters on October 7. The overwhelming majority of respondents say that they have not seen videos from international or social media showing atrocities committed by Hamas members against Israeli civilians that day, such as the killing of women and children in their homes. Indeed, more than 90% believe that Hamas fighters did not commit the atrocities contained in these videos. When asked what is or is not allowed in war, under international humanitarian law, the findings indicate that the vast majority believes that attacking or killing civilians in their homes is not permissible. The majority (except in the Gaza Strip) also believe that taking civilians as hostages or prisoners of war is also not permissible.

The findings also indicate that the majority believes that Israel will not succeed in eradicating Hamas, or in causing a second Palestinian Nakba, or in expelling the residents of the Gaza Strip. Indeed, a large majority believes that Hamas will emerge victorious from this war. A majority also says Hamas will resume control over the Gaza Strip after the war. The findings also indicate significant opposition to the deployment of an Arab security force in the Gaza Strip, even if its purpose is to provide support to the Palestinian Authority.  The majority also opposes a role for Arab states in delivering services to the Gaza Strip, but this majority is far less than the majority that opposes an Arab security presence.

The findings indicate that the Palestinians are questioning the moral commitment of the US, and other West European countries, to the ethical values embodied in the international humanitarian law. They show widespread conviction that the positions of the United States and the major Western powers show total disregard to international humanitarian law and that their talk of a two-state solution is not serious. All or most Palestinians say they are dissatisfied with the positions of the United States, Germany, Britain, France, the United Nations, and even Russia in this war. Also, the overwhelming majority is dissatisfied with the performance of Arab or regional countries or parties such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt and Jordan, while the percentage of satisfaction with the performance of Turkey and Iran is somewhat high, and a majority says that it is satisfied with the performance of Yemen, Qatar and Hezbollah. Dissatisfaction with Palestinian actors increases significantly when asked about the PA prime minister, the PA president, the PA, and Fatah. A majority of the public is satisfied only with the performance of Hamas, Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyyah.

Findings indicate that the ongoing war between Hamas and Israel in the Gaza Strip has had a significant impact on a range of internal Palestinian issues and on Palestinian-Israeli relations. The most important of these effects can be summarized in the following changes:

  • Support for Hamas has more than tripled in the West Bank compared to three months ago. In the Gaza Strip, support for Hamas increased but not significantly. Despite the increase in its popularity, the majority in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip does not support Hamas. It is worth noting that support for Hamas usually rises temporarily during or immediately after a war and then returns to the previous level several months after the end of the war.
  • Support for President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fateh party drops significantly. The same is true for the trust in the PA as a whole, as demand for its dissolution rises to nearly 60%, the highest percentage ever recorded in PSR polls. Demand for Abbas's resignation is rising to around 90 percent, and even higher in the West Bank. Despite the decline in support for Fatah and Abbas, the most popular Palestinian figure remains Marwan Barghouti, a Fatah leader. Barghouti is still able to beat Hamas’ candidate Ismail Haniyeh or any other.
  • Support for armed struggle rises ten percentage points compared to three months ago, with more than 60% saying it is the best means of ending the Israeli occupation; in the West Bank, the percentage rises further to close to 70%. Moreover, a majority in the West Bank believes that the formation of armed groups in communities subject to settler attacks is the most effective means of combating settler terrorism against towns and villages in the West Bank.
  • Despite the above-mentioned reference to the lack of confidence in the seriousness of US and European talk about reviving the two-state solution and despite the increase in support for armed struggle, support for the two-state solution has not dropped in this poll. To the contrary, support for this solution has increased slightly in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. This increase seems to come especially from those who believe that the US and European talk about the two-state solution is indeed serious.
     (1) October the 7th and the War in Gaza:

     

    • 72% of the public believe that Hamas' decision to launch the October 7 attack was correct
    • A majority of 53% believes that Israel's war objective is to destroy the Gaza Strip and kill or expel its residents, and 42% believe it is to take revenge on Hamas and the resistance and destroy them. But a majority believes that Israel will fail to achieve these goals.
    • 56% have no food and water to sustain them for a day or two, and 64% say a family member was killed or wounded during the war. 
    • 85% have not seen videos showing atrocities committed by Hamas against Israeli civilians on October 7, and only 7% say Hamas committed atrocities against Israeli civilians.
    • 70% of West Bankers and half of Gazans expect Hamas to emerge victorious
    • 75% of West Bankers and 38% of Gazans prefer Hamas to remain in control of the Gaza Strip after the war. 
    • Expression of satisfaction with Palestinian, Arab, and international actors during the war shows dissatisfaction, or very little satisfaction, towards the Palestinian Authority and its leadership, towards Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and towards the United States, Germany, Britain, France and the United Nations.

    1. Hamas’ decision to launch the October the 7th offensive:

    We asked respondents to speculate about Hamas’ reasons for waging its October the 7th offensive: a response to attacks on al Aqsa and to release prisoners as Hamas claimed or an Iranian plot to thwart Arab normalization with Israel. The overwhelming majority (81%; 89% in the West Bank and 69% in the Gaza Strip) said it was a “response to settler attacks on Al-Aqsa Mosque and on Palestinian citizens and for the release of prisoners from Israeli prisons;” while only 14% (5% in the West Bank and 27% in the Gaza Strip) thought it was an Iranian plot. 

    We asked the respondents what they thought of Hamas’ decision to launch the October the 7th offensive given its outcome so far, a vast majority (72%) said it was a correct decision and 22% (12% in the West Bank and 37% in the Gaza Strip) said it was incorrect. The belief that Hamas' decision was right is higher in the West Bank (82%) compared to the Gaza Strip (57%), among men (75%) compared to women (69%), among the religious and the somewhat religious (76% and 71% respectively) compared to the non-religious (42%). It also increases among supporters of Hamas (92%) compared to supporters of Fateh and other forces (55% and 45% respectively).

    2. The Israeli objectives in the Gaza war:

    Asked about its assessment of Israel’s objectives in the current war, the majority (53%) says it is to destroy the Gaza Strip and kill or expel its population; 42% (50% in the Gaza Strip and 37% in the West Bank) think the goal is to exact revenge against Hamas and the resistance and destroy them completely.  When asked if Israel will succeed in causing a second Nakba for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, as some Israeli minister called for, 73% (83% in the West Bank and 59% in the Gaza Strip) said it will not and 24% (14% in the West Bank and 40% in the Gaza Strip) said it will succeed.   But the vast majority (70%) thinks Israel will fail in achieving its goal in eradicating Hamas and the resistance while only 8% think it will succeed, and 21% think it will only weaken Hamas and the resistance. West Bankers are more certain than Gazans that Israel will fail, 87% and 44% respectively. Moreover, only 1% of West Bankers think Israeli will succeed in eradicating Hamas compared to 17% in the Gaza Strip.  Similarly, the overwhelming majority (85%; 96% in the West Bank and 70% in the Gaza Strip) thinks that Israel will not succeed in expelling Gazans out of the Strip; Only 13% (3% in the West Bank and 29% in the Gaza Strip) think it will succeed.

    3. Humanitarian conditions in the Gaza Strip:

    Only 44% of Gazans say they have enough food and water for a day or two and 56% say they do not.  When they need food or water, only one third of Gazans say they can reach a place where they can have access to assistance while two thirds say they cannot.  Almost two thirds (64%) of Gazan respondents say a member of their family have been killed or injured during the current war in Gaza; 36% say none of their family members have been killed or injured.

    A majority (52%) blames Israel for the current suffering of Gazans in the current war while 26% place the blame on the US; only 11% (6% in the West Bank and 19% in the Gaza Strip) place the blame on Hamas; and 9% blame the PA.

    We asked the respondents whether they support or oppose the release, now before the end of the war, of the detained Israeli women and children among the civilians in the hands of the resistance groups, in return for the release of Palestinian women and children in the Israeli prisons. The overwhelming majority (85%; 92% in the West Bank and 75% in the Gaza Strip) supported the exchange while only 13% (7% in the West Bank and 22% in the Gaza Strip) opposed it.

    A majority of 71% of the Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip believe Gazans who left their homes during the war to safer areas will be able to return to these homes once the war stops. West Bankers are much more optimistic than Gazans, 83% and 53% respectively.

    4. War crimes and atrocities:

    We offered the public a list of acts or measures and asked respondents whether they are permitted under international law. The majority (84%) said it allows taking soldiers prisoners. But the vast majority (78%) said it does not allow attacks on or the killing of civilians women and children in their homes; 77% said it does not allow the bombing of hospitals; 76% said it does not allow cutting electricity and water from the civilian population; and 52% said it does not allow taking civilians as prisoners of war.  The belief that international law does not allow the killing of civilians, women and children, in their homes is higher in the West Bank (84%) compared to the Gaza Strip (68%), and among supporters of Hamas (80%) compared to supporters of Fateh and other forces (75% and 74% respectively).

     

    While 95% think Israel has committed war crimes during the current war, only 10% think Hamas also committed such crimes; 4% think Israel has not committed such crimes and 89% think Hamas did not commit war crimes during the current war.  85% say they did not see videos, shown by international news outlets, showing acts committed by Hamas against Israeli civilians, such as the killing of women and children in their homes; only 14% saw these videos.  The percentage of those who say they have seen these videos is higher in the Gaza Strip (25%) compared to the West Bank (7%), among the non-religious (31%) compared to the religious (15%), and among supporters of other forces and supporters of Fateh (21% and 20% respectively) compared to supporters of Hamas (12%).

    When asked if Hamas did commit these atrocities, the overwhelming majority said no, it did not and only 7% said it did. Those who say that Hamas did not commit the atrocities seen in the videos are higher in the West Bank (97%) compared to the Gaza Strip (83%), among the religious and the somewhat religious (91% and 92% respectively), compared to the non-religious (75%) and among supporters of Hamas (97%) compared to supporters of Fateh and other forces (85% and 81% respectively). Belief that Hamas fighters have committed atrocities against civilians is also higher among those who did watch videos showing such atrocities (31%) compared to those who did not (3%). In the Gaza Strip, 41% of those who watched the videos believe that Hamas did commit these atrocities while only 8% of those who did not watch these videos believe that Hamas committed atrocities.

    5. When will the war stop and who will win?

    Half of the public (45% in the West Bank and 54% in the Gaza Strip) expect to see a ceasefire in Gaza in the upcoming weeks while a quarter (21% in the West Bank and 32% in the Gaza Strip) expect the war to continue for weeks and months. One fifth (28% in the West Bank and 9% in the Gaza Strip) expect Israel to “unilaterally end the war and begin to withdraw under the pressure from the resistance.” Only 2% expect that “Hamas and other resistance forces in Gaza will stop the fighting and withdraw to safer areas in the Gaza Strip.”

    While the vast majority of West Bankers (70%) thinks Hamas will emerge victorious in this war, only half of Gazans think the same. Similarly, while only 1% in the West Bank think Israel will emerge victorious, almost one third of Gazans (31%) think that; 14% (12% in the West Bank and 18% in the Gaza Strip) think neither one will emerge victorious. Belief that Hamas will emerge victorious from this war is also higher among the religious and the somewhat religious (72% and 70% respectively) compared to the non-religious (40%), and among supporters of Hamas (91%) compared to supporters of Fateh and other forces (50% and 41% respectively).

    6. Who will rule Gaza after the war?

    Almost two-thirds (64%) are opposed to the participation of the PA in meetings with the US, with the involvement of Arab countries such as Jordan and Egypt, in order to discuss the future of the Gaza Strip after the war stops. Only 33% (28% in the West Bank and 40% in the Gaza Strip) support PA participation in such meetings.  We asked the respondents to speculate about the party that will be in control of the Gaza Strip in the day after the end of the current war. Almost two thirds (64%; 73% in the West Bank and 51% in the Gaza Strip) said it will be Hamas; 11% selected a PA national unity government but without President Abbas; 7% selected the PA with Abbas; 4% selected Israel; 3% selected one or more Arab country; 2% selected a national unity government under Abbas leadership; and 1% selected the UN.

    When asked about their own preferences for the party that should be in control in the Gaza Strip after the war, 60% selected Hamas; 16% selected a PA national unity government without President Abbas; 7% selected the PA with Abbas; 3% selected one or more Arab countries; 3% selected a national unity government under Abbas, and 2% selected the Israeli army.  The percentage of those who prefer Hamas to remain in control of the Gaza Strip after the war increases in the West Bank (75%) compared to the Gaza Strip (38%), among men (64%) compared to women (57%), among the religious and the somewhat religious (61% and 62% respectively) compared to the non-religious (32%), and among supporters of Hamas (87%) compared to supporters of Fatah and other forces (32% and 26% respectively).

    72% (80% in the West Bank and 61% in the Gaza Strip) think Hamas will succeed in returning to rule over the Gaza Strip after the war despite Israel’s declared objective of eradicating that organization; 23% (15% in the West Bank and 36% in the Gaza Strip) do not think Hamas will succeed in resuming control over the Gaza Strip.  After the end of the war, and in the event that the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are unified under the control of the Palestinian Authority, only 28% (20% in the West Bank and 39% in the Gaza Strip) would support and 70% (77% in the West Bank and 60% in the Gaza Strip) would oppose the deployment of an Arab security contingent, from countries like Egypt or Jordan, in order to provide support for the PA and help it to maintain security. But in the event that this Arab presence, after the end of the war, is to provide basic, administrative, and health services to the Palestinian residents in support of the PA, support would increase to 45% (43% in the West Bank and 48% in the Gaza Strip) but 53% (54% in the West Bank and 51% in the Gaza Strip) would still oppose that presence.

    7. Satisfaction with relevant actors:

    The overwhelming majority of the Palestinians (87%) thinks that the response of the US and other major Western powers, such as the UK, France, and Germany, to the Israeli bombardment of the Gaza Strip indicates show disregard to international humanitarian law; only 10% (4% in the West Bank and 19% in the Gaza Strip) say the response indicates they are committed to that law.  The vast majority (70%) thinks the recent talk about two-state solution in the US and other Western countries is not serious; 27% think it is.

    We asked about public satisfaction with the role played during the war by various Palestinian, Arab/regional, and international actors:

    1. On the Palestinian side, satisfaction with the role of Hamas (72%; 85% in the West Bank and 52% in the Gaza Strip) was the highest followed by the role played by Yehia Sinwar (69%; 81% in the West Bank and 52% in the Gaza Strip), Ismail Haniyyeh (51%; 57% in the West Bank and 43% in the Gaza Strip), Fatah (22%; 23% in the West Bank and 21% in the Gaza Strip), the PA (14%; 10% in the West Bank and 21% in the Gaza Strip), Mahmoud Abbas (11%; 7% in the West Bank and 17% in the Gaza Strip), and Mohammad Shtayyeh (10%; 6% in the West Bank and 16% in the Gaza Strip). Satisfaction with Yahya Sinwar is higher in the West Bank (81%) compared to the Gaza Strip (52%), among men (74%) compared to women (64%), among the religious and the somewhat religious (76% and 67% respectively) compared to the non-religious (42%), and among supporters of Hamas (92%) compared to supporters of Fatah and third parties (53% and 40% respectively).

    1. For the Arab/regional actors, the highest level of satisfaction went to Yemen (80%; 89% in the West Bank and 68% in the Gaza Strip), followed by Qatar (56%), Hizballah (49%), Iran (35%), Turkey (34%), Jordan (24%), Egypt (23%), UAE (8), and finally Saudi Arabia (5%). The following figure shows the distribution of satisfaction over the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

    1. For the non-regional international actors, the highest level of satisfaction went to Russia (22%, 17% in the West Bank and 28% in the Gaza Strip), followed by China (20%), Germany (7%), UN (6%), France (5%), UK (4%), and the US (1%). The following figure shows the distribution of satisfaction over the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

       (2) Legislative and presidential elections:

       

      • In elections between Marwan Barghouti and Ismail Haniyeh, the former receives 51% and the latter 45%
      • 92% of West Bankers and 81% of Gazans want Abbas to resign
      • Support for Hamas increases in the West Bank from 12% three months ago to 44%; in the Gaza Strip support for Hamas rises from 38% three months ago to 42% today. Support for Fateh decreases in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip to 17% compared to 26% three months ago.
      • 54% believe that Hamas is the most deserving of representing and leading the Palestinian people and only 13% believe that Fateh, led by Mahmoud Abbas, is the most deserving.

      If new presidential elections were held today and only two candidates, Mahmoud Abbas and Ismail Haniyeh, the voter turnout would be only 53%, and among those who would participate, Abbas would receive 16% of the vote and Haniyeh 78% (compared to 58% for Haniyeh and 37% for Abbas three months ago). In the Gaza Strip, the vote for Abbas stands at 24% and for Haniyeh at 71%, while in the West Bank Abbas receives 10% and Haniyeh 82%.

      • If the presidential competition is between three, Marwan Barghouti, Abbas, and Haniyeh, participation would rise to 71% and among those voting, Barghouti receives 47%, Haniyeh 43%, and Abbas 7%. Three months ago, support for Barghouti stood at 49% and Haniyeh at 36%, and Abbas at 13%.

      • If the presidential competition is between two, Marwan Barghouti and Haniyeh, participation would rise to 69% and among those voting, Barghouti receives 51% and Haniyeh 45%. Three months ago, support for Barghouti stood at 60% and Haniyeh at 37%.

      • In a closed question, we asked the public to select the person they prefer to see as President Abbas's successor. The largest percentage (36%) said they prefer Marwan Barghouti; 19% preferred Ismail Haniyeh; 16% chose Yahya al Sinwar; 4% preferred Mohammed Dahlan, 3% preferred Khaled Meshaal, 2% chose Muhammad Shtayyeh, and 1% chose Hussein al-Sheikh; 18% said they did not know or chose someone else.
      • Level of satisfaction with the performance of president Abbas stands at 14% and dissatisfaction at 85%. Satisfaction with Abbas stands at 10% in the West Bank and 19% in the Gaza Strip.  Three months ago, satisfaction with Abbas stood at 22% and dissatisfaction at 76%.
      • 88% want Abbas to resign while 12% want him to remain in office. Three months ago, 78% said they want Abbas to resign. Demand for Abbas' resignation stands at 92% in the West Bank and 81% in the Gaza Strip.

       

      • When asked which political party or political trend they support, the largest percentage selected Hamas (43%), followed by Fatah (17%), while 12% selected other or third-party groups, and 28% said none of them or did not know. Three months ago, support for Hamas stood at 22% and Fatah at 26%. In the West Bank, support for Hamas today stands at 44% (compared to 12% three months ago), and for Fatah at 16% (compared to 26% three months ago). In the Gaza Strip, support for Hamas today stands at 42% (compared to 38% three months ago) and support for Fatah at 18% (compared to 25% three months ago).

      • However, if new parliamentary elections were held today with the participation of all political forces that participated in the 2006 elections, only 69% say they would participate in them, and among these participants, Fateh receives 19%, Hamas' Change and Reform 51%, all other lists combined 4%, and 25% say they have not yet decided whom they will vote for. Three months ago, vote for Hamas stood at 34% and Fatah at 36%. Vote for Hamas in the Gaza Strip stands today at 52% (compared to 44% three months ago) and for Fateh at 21% (compared to 32% three months ago). In the West Bank, vote for Hamas stands at 50% (compared to 24% three months ago) and Fatah at 18% (compared to 40% three months ago).
      • 54% believe that Hamas is the most deserving of representing and leading the Palestinian people today while 13% believe that Fateh under the leadership of Abbas is more deserving; 26% believe both are unworthy of representation and leadership. Three months ago, 27% said Hamas is the most deserving, 24% said Fateh led by Abbas is the most deserving, and 44% said both are unworthy of representation and leadership.

        (3) Domestic conditions:

         

         

          • Only 14% of West Bankers feel safe and secure compared to 48% three months ago
          • 68% say the PA is a burden on the Palestinian people and 28% say it is an achievement

          The question about personal safety and security was asked in the West Bank only. The findings show that only 14% feel safe and secure while 86% feel unsafe and unsecure. Three months ago, the perception of safety stood at 48%.

          A majority of 68% believes that the PA has become a burden on the Palestinian people and only 28% believe it is an asset for the Palestinian people. Three months ago, 62% said the PA is a burden and 35% said it was an achievement.

          (4) Palestinian-Israeli Relations and the Peace process:

           

           

          • Support for the two-state solution rises from 32% three months ago to 34%
          • Support for armed struggle in the West Bank rises from 54% three months ago to 68% today
          • Support for the formation of armed groups in communities targeted by settlers rises from 47% three months ago to 56% today

          34% support and 64% oppose the idea of a two-state solution, which was presented to the public without providing details of the solution. Three months ago, support for this solution in a similar question stood at 32%.

          • Support for the two-state solution is linked to public assessment of the feasibility of such a solution and the chances for the establishment of a Palestinian state. Today, 65% believe the two-state solution is no longer practical due to settlement expansion but 32% believe it is still practical. Moreover, 66% believe that the chances for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel in the next five years are slim or nonextant, and 32% believe the chances are medium or high. Three months ago, 71% said that the two-state solution is no longer practical due to settlement expansion.
          • When asked about public support and opposition to specific policy measures to break the stalemate: 55% supported joining more international organizations; 39% supported resort to unarmed popular resistance; 69% supported a return to confrontations and armed intifada; 58% supported dissolving the PA; and 29% supported abandoning the two-state solution and demanding one state for Palestinians and Israelis. Three months ago, 58% supported a return to confrontations and armed intifada; 53% supported resort to unarmed popular resistance; 52% supported the dissolution of the PA; and 27% supported abandoning the two-state solution in favor of one state.

          When asked about the best way to end occupation and establish an independent state, the public was divided into three groups: a majority of 63% (68% in the West Bank and 56% in the Gaza Strip) said it was armed struggle; 20% said it was negotiations; and 13% said it was popular non-violent resistance. Three months ago, 53% said armed struggle was the best way, 24% said popular non-violent resistance, and 20% said negotiation was the best way. As shown in figure (X) below, West Bankers’ support for resort to arms increased 19 percentage points since the formation of the current far right Israel government and increased another 14 points during the past three months. 

          • In light of the increase in settler terrorist attacks against Palestinian towns and villages, we again asked West Bankers what means are most effective in combating this terrorism that are also the most feasible. The majority (56%, compared to 47% three months ago) chose the formation of armed groups by residents of the targeted areas in order to protect their areas; 15% (compared to 30% three months ago) chose to deploy Palestinian police forces in the targeted areas; 16% (compared to 10% three months ago) chose the demand that the Israeli army take measures to prevent settler terrorism; and only 8% (compared to 8% three months ago) chose to form unarmed groups of residents of the targeted areas to protect their areas.

          Figure (7) below, show the extent of the public distrust in the West Bank in the role of the Israeli army in protecting the vulnerable communities and that the trust of the public in the Palestinian police is much less than the trust it places in the armed groups and that trust in the PA police has declined in three months by half to reach the current 15%. It also show that a majority now supports the formation of armed groups as the most effective means of combating settler terror.

          (5) Most vital Palestinian goals and the most pressing problems confronting Palestinians today:

           

          • the areas occupied in 1967 and the establishment of a Palestinian state
          • A majority of 51% believes the most urgent problem today is the ongoing war in the Gaza Strip and 32% believe it is Israeli occupation.

          43% believe that the first most vital Palestinian goal should be to end Israeli occupation in the areas occupied in 1967 and build a Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital. By contrast, 36% believe the first most vital goal should be to obtain the right of return of refugees to their 1948 towns and villages, 11% believe that the first and most vital goal should be to build a pious or moral individual and a religious society, one that applies all Islamic teachings and 7% believes it should be to establish a democratic political system that respects freedoms and rights of Palestinians.

          When asked about the most pressing problem confronting the Palestinians today, the largest percentage (51%, 42% in the West Bank and 64% in the Gaza Strip) said it is the continued war in the Gaza Strip; (32%) said it is the Israeli occupation, while 7% said it is the split between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, 5% said it is unemployment, and 4% said it is corruption.

           

                ______________________________________

                This poll has been conducted in cooperation with the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung in Ramallah

                On The Eve of the Formation of the New Palestinian Government, Hamas’ Popularity Increases and Fateh’s Decreases, but a Majority of the Palestinians Wants the Continuation of the Peace Process and the Implementation of the Road Map and Supports a New Negotiated, rather than a Unilateral, Israeli Disengagement in the West Bank

                 

                16-18 March 2006

                These are the results of the latest poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip during March 16-18, 2006. The poll deals with Palestinian perceptions and the popularity of Fateh and Hamas in the post election period, attitudes towards the peace process after Hamas’ victory, attitudes regarding the Israeli raid on Jericho jail, and several domestic issues. Total size of the sample is 1270 adults interviewed face to face in the West Bank (809) and the Gaza Strip (463) in 127 randomly selected locations. Margin of error is 3%.  

                For further details, contact PSR director, Dr. Khalil Shikaki, or Walid Ladadweh at tel 02-296 4933 or email pcpsr@pcpsr.org.

                 

                Main Findings

                This poll was conducted less than two months after the Palestinian legislative elections which took place on 25 January 2006 in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip but before Hamas government was presented to the new PLC and gained its vote of confidence. At the time of the poll, the international community was threatening to suspend aid to the PA but no action had been taken at that time.

                The results indicate that despite threats of sanctions and despite public expectations that donors will indeed cut off support once a Hamas government is formed, support for Hamas has never been as high as it is today. In fact, support for Hamas today is higher than the support it received on the day of elections. By contrast, Fateh’s popularity decreased significantly compared to where it was before the elections. In fact, support for Fateh today is less than the support it had on the day of elections.

                These results indicate that Israeli and Western threats increase rather than decrease public support for Hamas. Support for Fateh is dropping as some Palestinians might be punishing it for the role it seems, in their eyes, to play in bringing about the downfall of Hamas and the undoing of its victory.  

                But the increased support for Hamas does not indicate increased support for its views on the peace process. To the contrary, Palestinian public opinion seems today more moderate and willing to compromise than it has been at any time before. Despite public objection to a  Hamas’ recognition of Israel in response to international pressure, a majority wants Hamas to negotiate with Israel and to implement the Road Map. More importantly, a majority supports the two-state solution and in this context supports a mutual recognition of Israelas the state for the Jewish people in exchange for an Israeli recognition of Palestine as the state for the Palestinian people.

                 

                (1) Hamas and Fateh in the Post Legislative Elections’ Environment

                • Hamas’ popularity continues to increase: 47% would vote for Hamas and 39% for Fateh if new elections are held today
                • Two main reasons are given by the public for Hamas’ victory: the desire to have an authority that would implement Islamic Sharia code and the desire to have an authority that would fight corruption
                • Fateh’s loss is attributed by the public to three main factors: the voters’ desire to punish it for corruption, its divisions and fragmentation, and its failure to enforce law and order
                • Majority expects Hamas’ success in government, donors’ suspension of aid, and Hamas’ success in finding alternative sources of support
                • Majority opposes a Hamas recognition of Israel in compliance with donors’ demands

                 

                In the estimate of 37% of the respondents, Hamas won the January parliamentary elections because voters wanted first and foremost an Islamist authority that implements the Sharia code. But 36% believe that voters wanted instead a clean government that fights corruption, 9% believe that voters wanted a strong authority that can put an end to anarchy and enforce law and order, and 7% believe that voters wanted a fighting authority that resists occupation. In the estimate of 52% of the respondents, Fateh lost the elections because voters wanted first and foremost to punish it for the spread of corruption in the PA. But 19% attribute the loss to Fateh’s divisions and lack of leadership, 17% to its failure to put an end to anarchy, and 5% to the failure of the peace process.

                If new elections are to take place today, 47% of those who would participate say they would vote for Hamas, 39% for Fateh, and 8% for the four other factions represented in the current PLC. When asked about their actual vote in the last parliamentary elections in January, 46% said they voted for Hamas, 44% for Fateh, and 8% for the four other factions. (Actual official results were 44% for Hamas, 41% for Fateh, and 12% for the four other winning factions.) 

                Support for Hamas increases in the Gaza Strip (51%) compared to the West Bank (45%). By contrast, support for Fateh increases in the West Bank (40%) compared to the Gaza Strip (37%). Support for Hamas increases in cities (52% compared to 36% for Fateh) and refugee camps (47% compared to 37% for Fateh). The two factions receive equal support in rural areas. Support for Hamas increases among women (51% compared to 36% for Fateh) and decreases among men (43% for Hamas compared to 41% for Fateh). It also increases among refugees (49% for Hamas compared to 37% for Fateh) and decreases among non refugees (45% for Hamas compared to 41% for Fateh). It also increases among the illiterates (57% for Hamas compared to 33% for Fateh), students (48% for Hamas compared to 37% for Fateh), housewives (51% for Hamas compared to 35% for Fateh), religious respondents (54% for Hamas compared to 35% for Fateh), and among those opposed to the peace process (68% for Hamas and 16% for Fateh).

                A majority of 70% expects Hamas to succeed in leading and managing the affairs of the PA while 22% expect the opposite. A similar percentage (69%) is not worried about its personal freedom after Hamas’ victory and 30% are worried. The large percentage of those expecting a Hamas success is somewhat surprising given the fact that a similar percentage (68%) believe that the PA can not manage without donor support and that 50% of the respondents believe that aid will indeed be suspended as long as Hamas does not meet donors’ conditions. Despite the strong moderate peace tendencies of the respondents in this poll, a majority of 59% nonetheless believes that Hamas should not recognize the state of Israel in compliance with donors’ demands while 37% believe it should.

                 

                (2) The Peace Process in the Post Hamas’ Victory

                • 75% want Hamas to negotiate peace with Israel
                • Majority supports the implementation of the Road Map and a majority supports a mutual recognition of Israel as the state for the Jewish people under conditions of peace and the establishment of a Palestinian state in a two-state solution
                • Sharp divisions over collection of arms from armed groups but an overwhelming majority supports the integration of armed groups into PA security services
                • About three quarters welcome a negotiated Israeli disengagement from the West Bank while only 23% would support the disengagement if it was unilateral
                • 80% would support a declaration of Palestinian statehood if it comes as an outcome of negotiations with Israel and 59% would support it if it was unilaterally declared by the PA

                Despite Hamas’ electoral victory and despite the added increase in its popularity after the elections, public support for the peace process is on the rise. Public willingness to compromise has increased significantly during the last few months with about three quarters of the Palestinians wanting Hamas to conduct peace negotiations with Israel and only 22% opposing it. A majority of 64% says it supports the peace process while only 14% says it is opposed to it. These percentages stood at 59% and 17% respectively in our exit poll on the day of elections last January. A majority of 53%, compared to 51% in the exit poll) wants the Hamas government to implement the Road Map and 40% oppose that.

                But perhaps the most moderate and surprising attitude is the one toward the two state solution and mutual recognition of identity. In this poll, 66% said they would support, and 32% would oppose, the recognition of Israel as the state for the Jewish people in the context of peace based on a two-state solution and an Israeli recognition of Palestine as the state for the Palestinian people. Support for this solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict stood at 57% and opposition at 41% last December. On the day of elections, only 49% supported this solution and 48% opposed it. As in our December poll, three quarters would support reconciliation between the two peoples under conditions of peace and the establishment of a Palestinian state recognized by Israel.

                But divisions remain over how to handle the issue of arms collection. About half (49%) wants the new government to collect the arms of the various armed groups while 21% wants it to do nothing about those arms and 27% prefer to see the new parliament enacting a law that would allow armed groups to keep their arms. Identical results were registered on the day of elections.

                Findings show that about three quarters of the respondents (73%) prefer to see a new Israeli disengagement from the West Bank carried out through negotiations while only 23% prefer to see it accomplished unilaterally. Moreover, the poll found that a majority (59%) believes that unilateral steps reduce the chances of eventually reaching permanent settlement to the conflict. Despite this, 59% would support a Palestinian unilateral step such as a PA unilateral declaration of statehood while 37% would oppose that. If the statehood declaration is the outcome of negotiations with Israel, a larger percentage (80%) would support it and only 17% would oppose it.

                 

                (3) Jericho Jail Raid

                • A semi consensus that both the US and the UK are implicated in the Israeli raid on the Jericho jail
                • 51% support non-violent reactions to protest the US and UK involvement but 46% support in various degrees other steps such as kidnappings or armed attacks

                Findings show an almost total consensus among the Palestinians (93%) that the US and UK are implicated with Israel in the raid on the Jericho jail which took place few days before the poll was conducted. The raid and the arrest of Ahmad Sa’adat and his colleagues from the PFLP was followed by various types of reaction including demonstrations, attacks and burning of offices and other facilities belonging to the two countries, and kidnapping of foreigners. Findings show that 51% of the respondents supported only peaceful reaction or no reaction at all. Other types of reaction were supported to various degrees. For example, 9% supported attacks on and burning of offices and installations, 12% supported also the kidnapping of foreigners, and 25% supported also armed attacks against nationals from those two countries.

                 

                (4) Domestic Issues

                • Poverty and unemployment is the most serious problem confronting Palestinians today followed by Israeli occupation and PA corruption
                • Three quarters do not feel safe or secure in the PA
                • 91% believe corruption exists in the PA but two thirds believe it will decrease in the future
                • Large percentage wants to give greater jurisdiction to the new legislative council than the president
                • If new presidential elections are held today, 37% would vote for Mahmud Abbas, 25% for Mahmud Zahhar, and 15% for Mustafa Barghouti from among a closed list
                • If elections are held today for a vice president, 30% would vote for Ismail Haniyyeh, 20% for Marwan Barghouti, 11% for Mahmud Zahhar, 8% for Mohammad Dahlan, 7% for Farouq Qaddoumi, and 6% each for Saeb Erikat and Mustafa Barghouti
                • Support for Fateh drops considerably from 45% in our December 2005 poll to 34% in this poll. Support for Hamas increases from 28% to 37% and for the Islamists in general from 35% to 43% during the same period.

                The period in the post Hamas’ victory is witnessing a significant change in public priorities. Concern is growing over economic issues such as poverty and unemployment with 44% of the respondents viewing it as the most important problem confronting the Palestinians today while only 25% views the continued occupation as the most important problem and 24% views corruption as the most important problem. On the day of elections only 27% identified poverty and unemployment as the most important problem with corruption coming first with 29% and occupation coming second, like poverty and unemployment, with 27%.

                Findings also show that three quarters of the Palestinians do not feel safe in their homes. This finding is identical with that we found on the day of elections. Absence of safety is felt more strongly in the West Bank, which is under semi full Israeli control, reaching 79% compared to 68% in the Gaza Strip, which is under semi full Palestinian control.

                The poll shows that Hamas’ victory has also affected public perception regarding the future of corruption in the PA. While 91% believe that corruption exists in PA institutions (the highest level registered since the formation of the PA), findings show that 65% believe that this corruption will decrease in the future. This is the first time that a majority indicated its belief that corruption will decrease in the future. Last December, only 34% believed that corruption will decrease in the future.  

                But Hamas’ victory caused no change in public perception regarding the status of Palestinian democracy. Positive evaluation of democracy under the PA reached 34% in this poll compared to an almost identical result (35%) last December.

                Despite the fact that 61% of the public are satisfied (and 37% are dissatisfied) with the performance of President Mahmud Abbas, only a small minority of 19% wants to give him more powers than those of the newly-elected PLC. On the other hand, 44% want to give the PLC greater powers than those enjoyed by the president and 32% want both to have equal powers.

                Despite this result, the popularity of Fateh’s Abbas (37%) remains higher than that of Mahmud Zahhar of Hamas (25%) and Mustafa Barghouti of other groups (15%). This came in a response to a closed question with respondents asked to choose one of the three. In another closed question on a vote for a vice president, Ismail Haniyyah, the current prime minister, emerged as the most popular with 30% followed by Marwan Barghouti with 20%, Mahmud Zahhar with 11%, Mohammad Dahlan (8%), Farouq Qaddoumi (7%) and Saeb Erikat and Mustafa Barghouti (6% each).

                Findings show that support for Fateh has dropped significantly compared to last December while support for Hamas has increased during the same period. Support for Fateh stood at 45% three months ago dropping to 34% in this poll. Hamas’ popularity reached 28% last December rising to 37% in this poll. Support for the Islamists in general (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and independent Islamists) increased from 35% to 43% during the same period. .... Full Report

                SPSS Data File: 

                While Three Quarters of the Palestinians Reject Hamas’s Military Action in the Gaza Strip and While Fateh and President Mahmud Abbas Gain Popular Support as a Result of Hamas’s Step, and While a Majority Supports the Presidential Decree Regarding Election Law and Supports Early Elections, 40% Want the Government of Ismail Haniyeh to Stay in Power and Half of Gazans Feel They and Their Families are Secure and Safe in Their Homes

                6-8 September 2007   

                These are the results of the latest poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip during September 6-8, 2007. Total size of the sample is 1270 adults interviewed face to face in 127 randomly selected locations. Margin of error is 3%. This poll release covers three issues: Hamas’s military action in the Gaza Strip, elections and balance of power, and the peace process. For further details, contact PSR director, Dr. Khalil Shikaki, or Walid Ladadweh at tel 02-296 4933 or emailpcpsr@pcpsr.org.

                 

                Main Findings:

                Findings show that only one fifth of the Palestinians supports Hamas’s military takeover of the Gaza Strip and that Fateh and PA President Mahmud Abbas have benefited from Hamas’s step as their popularity has increased significantly. Moreover, a majority supports the recently released presidential decree regarding election law and supports holding early elections. Findings show that a larger percentage of the public blames Hamas rather than Fateh for the problems confronting the Gaza Strip today. A large percentage accepts the position of the PA president regarding resumption of dialogue with Hamas while a much smaller percentage supports the position of Hamas regarding dialogue. Nonetheless, 40% of the public wants the government of Ismail Haniyeh to stay in office and half of the Gazans say their security and personal safety and that of their families are now assured.

                These findings indicate that Hamas has failed in convincing Palestinians to accept its narrative regarding the need to carry out its military takeover or the best way to resolve the crisis created by the takeover. Moreover, Hamas has failed to convince the public to accept its narrative regarding the responsibility of president Abbas and Fateh for the problems Gazaconfronted after the takeover such as the closure of the Rafah Crossing or the electricity cutoff. For all this, Hamas paid dearly by losing six percentage points in its popularity during the last six months. But Hamas succeeded in enforcing law and order in the Gaza Strip where half of the population feel their security and safety are now assured; a feeling they did not have for years. It is for this reason perhaps that 40% of the public want the Hamas government led by Haniyeh to stay in office.

                Findings show that Fateh and Abbas’s government have gained more than they have lost as a result of the Hamas takeover. Fateh and the PA government led by Salam Fayad have failed to meet public expectations in two of its most important needs: enforcing law and order and fighting corruption. They have also failed in wining the battle over hearts and minds through the effective use of the media. As importantly, they have failed to positively affect the level of public optimism about the future of the peace process. But Abbas and Fateh succeeded in wining public support for their position regarding the best way out of the current crisis with Hamas and regarding the need to amend the electoral system and the need to introduce eligibility conditions for party and individual nomination for the parliamentary and presidential elections, conditions that are strongly opposed by Hamas. They have also succeeded in convincing the public of the need to hold early elections. For all this, and for the first time since the last parliamentary elections, Fateh managed to increase its popularity by five percentage points during the last three months.  

                 

                (1) Hamas’s Military Takeover of the Gaza Strip

                • 22% support and 73% oppose Hamas’s military takeover of the Gaza Strip. Support for Hamas’s military action reaches 31% in the Gaza Strip compared to 17% in the West Bank.
                • 40% agree and 52% disagree that Haniyeh’s government should stay in office despite dismissal by the president. 32% evaluate the performance of the Haniyeh government as good or very good and 43% think it is bad or very bad.
                • By contrast, 49% agree and 44% disagree that the government of Prime Minister Salam Fayyad should stay in office. Positive evaluation of the Fayyad government reaches 44% and negative evaluation 28%.
                • The party most responsible for the closure of the Rafah Crossing is Israel in the eyes of 41% of the Palestinians, Hamas in the eyes of 26%, Fateh in the eyes of 15%, and Egypt in the eyes of 2%. Blaming Hamas for the closure of the Rafah Crossing increases in the Gaza Strip (33%) compared to the West Bank (22%). Similarly, blaming Fateh increases in the Gaza Strip (19%) compared to the West Bank (12%).
                • To end the current crisis between Fateh and Hamas, 27% accept Hamas’s view which calls for unconditional dialogue with President Abbas based on the exiting status quo today and 46% accept Abbas’s and Fateh’s view which calls for a dialogue but only after Hamas transfers control over the security headquarters to its rightful owners and return to the status quo ante.
                • The largest percentage (29%) expects the unification of the two authorities in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip within months and 19% expect it within a year or two. On the other hand, 20% believe unification will not take place in the next two years and 22% believe that the separation will become permanent. 

                Findings show that Hamas’s military takeover in June finds little support among the public with only 22% favoring it and about three quarters (73%) opposing it. Support for the Hamas step increases in the Gaza Strip (31%) compared to the West Bank (17%), among those opposed to the peace process (45%) compared to those supporting it (18%), among Hamas’s supporters (72%) compared to Fateh’s supporters (4%), among refugees (27%) compared to non-refugees (18%), among students (33%) compared to retired persons (14%), laborers (17%), and employees (18%), and among the youth between 18-22 years of age (28%) compared to those over 52 years of age (18%).

                Despite the high level of opposition to the Hamas takeover, a large percentage (40%) agrees that the government of Ismail Haniyeh can stay in office despite the fact that it was dismissed by the PA president. Almost a third (32%) evaluates the performance of the Haniyeh government as good or very good while 43% evaluate it as bad or very bad. Support for keeping the Haniyeh government in office increases in the Gaza Strip (44%) compared to the West Bank (38%). Moreover, positive evaluation of the Haniyeh government increases in the Gaza Strip (38%) compared to the West Bank (28%).

                However, support for keeping the government of Salam Fayyad in office is greater than support for keeping the Haniyeh government in office. About half of the respondents (49%) agrees and 44% disagree with keeping the Fayyad government in office. Findings show no difference on this matter between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Moreover, the performance of the Fayyad government receives more positive evaluation than that of the Haniyeh government with 44% giving it a positive evaluation and 28% giving it a negative evaluation. Here too we find no differences between residents of the West Bank and those of the Gaza Strip.

                These positions toward the two governments affect public perception of their legitimacy with 30% viewing the Haniyeh government as the legitimate PA government and 38% viewing the Fayyad government as the legitimate one; 22% believe both governments are illegitimate and 5% say the two governments are legitimate. Belief in the legitimacy of Haniyeh’s government increases in the Gaza Strip (35%) compared to the West Bank (27%), among those who identify themselves as “religious” (34%) compared to those who identify themselves as “somewhat religious” (19%), among those opposed to the peace process (51%) compared to supporters of the peace process (24%), and among supporters of Hamas (80%) compared to supporters of Fateh (4%) .

                Reluctance from a majority of Palestinians to grant legitimacy to either government is in part explained by the failure of the two governments to win the battle over hearts and minds. Findings show that the largest percentage (45%) does not trust the media of Hamas/Haniyeh or Fateh/Fayyad and only 19% trust the media of Hamas/Haniyeh while 27% trust the media of Fateh/Fayyad. Trust in Hamas/Haniyeh’s media increases in the Gaza Strip (27%) compared to the West Bank (15%). Similarly, trust in Fateh/Fayyad media increases in the Gaza Strip (30%) compared to the West Bank (25%). It is noticeable that while in the West Bank 50% say they do not trust either media, the percentage in the Gaza Strip of those not trusting either side decreases to 37%.

                Perceptions of legitimacy and media effectiveness affect views regarding responsibility for the problems that plagued the Gaza Strip after the military takeover. The percentage of those blaming Hamas for those problems is higher than the percentage of those blaming Fateh and president Abbas. For example, 26% say that Hamas is responsible for the closure of the Rafah Crossing while only 15% blame Fateh. It is noticeable that the percentage of those blaming Hamas increases in the Gaza Strip (33%) compared to the West Bank (22%) and that the percentage of those blaming Fateh is also higher in the Gaza Strip (19%) compared to the West Bank (12%). However, the largest percentage (41%) blames Israel while only 2% blameEgypt for the closure of the Rafah Crossing. Similar findings are found regarding the recent electricity cutoff with 23% blaming Hamas and 18% blaming president Abbas and the Fayyad government. The largest percentage (43%) blamed Israel and 10% blamed the European Union. Blaming Hamas and Fateh increases in the Gaza Strip (29% and 22% respectively) while blaming Israel increases in the West Bank (49%) compared to the Gaza Strip (32%).

                Findings show that about one third of the public believes that the top priority for the Fayyad government should be the enforcement of law and order and ending lawlessness followed by conducting political reforms and fighting corruption (22%). Ending international sanctions and returning to the peace process come third and fourth (18% each).

                Findings show greater public willingness to accept positions advanced by president Abbas and Fateh to solve the current crisis with Hamas than those advanced by Hamas. For example, 46% say that they accept Abbas/Fateh’s position which calls for dialogue only after Hamas transfers control over the security headquarters to its rightful owners allowing the return to the status quo ante. On the other hand, only 27% say they accept Hamas’s view which calls for unconditional dialogue with President Abbas based on the existing status quo today. Support for Hamas’s position increases in the Gaza Strip (33%) compared to the West Bank (24%). It is interesting to note that support for Abbas/Fateh’s position increases also in the Gaza Strip (50%) compared to the West Bank (44%). About one quarter (24%) opposes both views.

                Finally, poll findings indicate a strong split among the public regarding the future of the political unity of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The largest percentage (29%) expects the unification of the two authorities in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip within months and 19% expect it within a year or two. On the other hand, 20% believe unification will not take place in the next two years and 22% believe that the separation will become permanent.  In other words, 48% expect unification within the next two years and 42% do not expect unification in the future or near future. Optimism about unification within the next two years increases in the Gaza Strip (59%) compared to the West Bank (42%).

                 

                (2) Public Evaluation of West Bank and Gaza Conditions

                • Among all respondents in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, only 8% evaluate the situation in the Gaza Strip as good or very good while 27% describe conditions in the West Bank as good or very good.
                • West Bank-Gaza Strip public expectations regarding future conditions in the Gaza Strip tend to be pessimistic while expectations regarding future conditions in the West Bank tend to show some optimism.
                • Percentage of those wishing to immigrate to other countries continues to increase from 28% last June to 32% in this poll. The percentage is higher in the Gaza Strip (37%) compared to West Bank (29%).
                • 41% say they feel their security and personal safety and those of their family are assured today and 59% say they are not assured. Feelings of security and safety increases in the Gaza Strip (49%) compared to the West Bank (35%).

                 

                Findings show that the public is highly pessimistic about current and future conditions in the Gaza Strip and a little optimistic about conditions in the West Bank. Only 8% of all respondents view current conditions in the Gaza Strip as good or very good. This evaluation is shared equally by respondents in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. By contrast, 27% say that current conditions in the West Bank are good or very good. Here, however the evaluation is not shared equally by respondents in the two areas as 40% in the Gaza Strip compared to 20% in the West Bank say that conditions in the West Bank are good or very good.  Similarly, expectations about the future reflect much greater pessimism about conditions in the Gaza Strip than about conditions in the West Bank. For example, while only 21% expect economic conditions to improve in the Gaza Strip, 56% expect these conditions to improve in the West Bank. Moreover, while only 28% expect conditions of democracy and freedom of speech and press will improve in the Gaza Strip, 47% expect these conditions to improve in the West Bank. In general, residents of the Gaza Strip tend to show more optimism regarding conditions in their area as well as in the West Bank while residents of the West Bank tend to show less optimism regarding conditions in both areas.

                The negative and pessimistic evaluation of conditions today and in the future affects the percentage of respondents’ wish to immigrate to other countries leading to an increase from 28%last June, during the Hamas military takeover of the Gaza Strip, to 32% in this poll. The wish to immigrate increases in the Gaza Strip (37%) compared to West Bank (29%), among residents of refugee camps (39%) compared to residents of cities (30%) and towns and villages (31%), among supporters of Fateh (40%) compared to supporters of Hamas (20%), among holders of BA degree (44%) compared to illiterates (13%), among men (38%) compared to women (27%), among students (53%) compared to farmers (10%) and housewives (25%), and among the youth between ages of 23-27 years (46%) and 18-22 years (44%) compared to those over 52 years of age (8%) and those between 43-52 years of age (26%).  

                Finally, findings show an increase in the perception of security and safety in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip compared to the situation three months ago. Today, 41% (compared to 26% in mid June) say they feel their security and personal safety and those of their family are assured and 59% say they are not assured. Feelings of security and safety increase in the Gaza Strip (49% compared to 41% three months ago) compared to the West Bank (35% compared to 18% three months ago).

                 

                (3) Presidential Decree on Elections, Early Elections, and Balance of Power:

                • 58% support and 34% oppose the most recent presidential decree regarding the amendment to the electoral system basing it on proportional representation with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip becoming one electoral district and with the distribution of seats reflecting the percentage of popular vote received in the whole country.
                • Moreover, 62% support and 32% oppose eligibility conditions imposed by the decree on candidate lists wishing to participate in elections including their commitments to the PLO, the Declaration of Independence, and the Basic Law. A similar percentage (61%) accepts and 32% oppose the application of this eligibility condition on candidates for the presidential elections.
                • Support for early elections reaches 62% and opposition 33%. Support increases in the Gaza Strip (65%) compared to the West Bank (60%).
                • Popularity of Hamas drops to 31% losing two percentage points compared to its popularity in mid June and six percentage points compared to mid March. The popularity of Fateh increases from 43% three months ago to 48% in this poll.
                • If new presidential elections took place today and the only two candidates were Mahmud Abbas and Ismail Haniyeh, the percentage of non participation would reach 38%. From among those willing to participate, 59% say they will vote for Abbas, 36% say they will vote for Haniyeh, and 5% remain undecided.
                • Satisfaction with the performance of Mahmud Abbas increases from 36%  last June to 45% in this poll.

                 

                Findings show that the public supports the presidential decree issued in early September regarding the election law. Support covers two aspects of the decree.  A majority of 58% support, and 34% oppose, changing the electoral system so that it becomes fully based on a proportional representation system; whereby seats are distributed based on percentage of popular vote in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as one electoral district. The last legislative elections, conducted in January 2006, were based on a mixed system, proportional representation in a single district and a majority system in 16 district. Findings also show that a majority of 62% supports and 32% oppose eligibility conditions imposed by the decree on candidate lists wishing to participate in elections including their commitments to the PLO, the Declaration of Independence, and the Basic Law. A similar percentage (61%) accepts and 32% oppose the application of this eligibility condition on candidates for the presidential elections.

                Support for amending the electoral law to proportional representation increases in West Bank (60%) compared to the Gaza Strip (53%), among supporters of the peace process (64%) compared to those opposed to the peace process (33%), and among supporters of Fateh (82%) compared to supporters of Hamas (35%). 

                Findings also show that a majority of 62% supports and 32% oppose the holding of early presidential and legislative elections. Support for early elections increases in the Gaza Strip (65%) compared to the West Bank (60%), among supporters of the peace process (71%) compared to those opposed to the peace process (26%), and among supporters of Fateh (89%) compared to supporters of Hamas (39%). It is interesting that 32% of the public say that the lists and candidates they have voted for in the last legislative elections no longer represent them while 63% say they still represent them. Of those who voted for the Hamas list and candidates in the last elections, 36% say they no longer represent them while only 28% of Fateh voters say that Fateh and its candidates no longer represent them.

                If new parliamentary elections are held today, Hamas would receive 31% and Fateh would receive 48%. These findings indicate a drop of two percentage points in the popularity of Hamas compared to its standing in mid June and a drop of six percentage points in its popularity compared to its standing in mid March. For Fateh, the finding indicates an increase of five percentage points compared to its standing in mid June. It is noticeable that this is the first time since the January 2006 elections, when it won 42% of the vote, that Fateh’s popularity has significantly increased. The popularity of all the third parties combined reaches 11%, and 10% remain undecided. Hamas’s popularity increases in the Gaza Strip (36%) compared to the West Bank (28%) and Fateh’s popularity too increases in the Gaza Strip (51%) compared to West Bank (47%).

                If new presidential elections took place today and the only two candidates were Mahmud Abbas and Ismail Haniyeh, the percentage of non participation would reach 38%. From among those willing to participate, 59% say they will vote for Abbas, 36% say they will vote for Haniyeh, and 5% remain undecided.  If the competition is between Marwan Barghouti and Haniyeh, nonparticipation would drop to 29% and from among those willing to participate, 63% say they will vote for Barghouti, 32% say they will vote for Haniyeh, and 5% remain undecided. These results indicate a significant increase in the percentage of those voting for Abbas compared to the situation in mid June when it reached 49% compared to 42% for Haniyeh. Moreover, vote for Barghouti increases in this poll compared to where it was last June when it stood at 59% compared to 35% for Haniyeh.

                Satisfaction with the performance of Mahmud Abbas increases from 36%  last June to 45% in this poll.

                 

                (4) Peace Process

                • Only one quarter (26%) of the public expects the November peace conference called for by the US to succeed and 67% expect it to fail in making progress in the Palestinian-Israeli peace process.
                • 57% agree and 41% disagree with the proposed two-state solution whereby Palestinians recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish people and Israelis recognize Palestine as the state for the Palestinian people after the establishment of a Palestinian state and the solution of all the issues of the conflict.
                • Similarly, 58% support and 37% oppose conducting negotiations with the aim of establishing a Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip and 80% to 90% of the West Bank to be followed by negotiations between the state of Palestine and the state of Israel on the permanent issues such as the permanent borders, holy places and refugees.
                • But only 46% would support and 48% would oppose a permanent settlement of the borders of the Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders with the exception of settlements in about 5% of the West Bank where a swap would take place with Palestinians receiving an equal amount of territories from Israel proper. Support for this settlement increases in the Gaza Strip (54%) compared to the West Bank (42%).

                Poll findings show that the public remains highly pessimistic about the chances of success for the international peace conference proposed by the US Administration for November 2007. Only one quarter (26%) of the public expects the November peace conference to succeed and 67% expect it to fail in making progress in the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. Optimism increases in the Gaza Strip (30%) compared to the West Bank (23%), among supporters of the peace process (31%) compared to those opposed to the peace process (11%), among supporters of Fateh (41%) compared to supporters of Hamas (15%), and among the illiterates (34%) compared to holders of BA degree (22%).

                Findings show that a majority of 57% agrees and 41% disagree with the proposed two-state solution whereby Palestinians recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish people and Israelis recognize Palestine as the state for the Palestinian people after the establishment of a Palestinian state and the solution of all the issues of the conflict. Similarly, 58% support and 37% oppose conducting negotiations with the aim of establishing a Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip and 80% to 90% of the West Bank to be followed by negotiations between the state ofPalestine and the state of Israel on the permanent issues such as the permanent borders, holy places and refugees. But only 46% would support and 48% would oppose a permanent settlement of the borders of the Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders with the exception of settlements in about 5% of the West Bank where a land swap would take place with Palestinians receiving an equal amount of territories from Israel proper. Support for this compromise increases in the Gaza Strip (54%) compared to the West Bank (42%), among residents of refugee camps (51%) compared to residents of villages and towns (44%), among supporters of the peace process (54%) compared to those opposed to the peace process (24%) and among supporters of Fateh (60%) compared to supporters of Hamas (33%).... Full Report

                SPSS Data File: 

                Gaza War ends with a victory for Hamas leading to a great increase in its popularity and the popularity of its approach of armed resistance: for the first time since 2006, Hamas wins parliamentary and presidential elections if they were to take place today while West Bankers support transferring Hamas’ approach to the West Bank

                This PSR Poll has been conducted with the support of the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung in Ramallah. 

                26-30 August 2014

                These are the results of the latest poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip between 26-30 August 2014. The period before the poll witnessed the eruption of the Gaza War which was preceded by the kidnapping and killing of three Israelis. More than 2000 Palestinians, mostly civilians, were killed during the war. About 70 Israelis, mostly from the military, were killed during the war. Our fieldwork started on the last day of the war and continued during the first four days of the ceasefire.  This press release covers public perception of the war, who came out a winner, the ceasefire agreement, targeting of civilians, evaluation of the performance of various Palestinian actors during the war, and war impact on reconciliation. It also covers Palestinian elections, the internal balance of power, the June kidnapping and killing of the three Israelis, and others. Total size of the sample is 1270 adults interviewed face to face in 127 randomly selected locations. Margin of error is 3%.

                For further details, contact PSR director, Dr. Khalil Shikaki, or Walid Ladadweh at tel 02-296 4933 or email pcpsr@pcpsr.org.

                Main Findings:

                Findings of this special Gaza War poll highlight dramatic changes in public attitudes regarding major issues. It goes without saying that the war was the major driver behind these changes. As expected, and as we saw in previous instances during and immediately after Israeli wars with Hamas, findings show a spike in the popularity of Hamas and its leaders and a major decline in the popularity of Fatah and president Abbas.  But, as in previous cases, these changes might be temporary and things might revert in the next several months to where they were before the war.

                It is worth noting that the size of the change in favor of Hamas is unprecedented since 2006. Indeed, if presidential elections were to take place today, Ismail Haniyeh would easily win over Abbas and Hamas would win the largest percentage of the popular vote in parliamentary elections. The overwhelming majority of the public views Hamas as the winner and Israel as the loser in this war. Furthermore, a similar majority views Hamas’ approach of armed confrontation with Israel as the most effective means of ending Israeli occupation. Indeed, an overwhelming majority of West Bankers wants to transfer “Hamas’ way” to the West Bank and rejects the demand to disarm the Islamist group or to disband the other Gazan armed groups. Findings also indicate that the public see Iran, Turkey, and Qatar as the most instrumental in supporting Hamas and helping Gazans remain steadfast against the Israeli attacks. By contrast, Egypt’s role is seen as week and unhelpful. Indeed, a majority believes that Egypt played a negative role in the ceasefire negotiations.

                Finally, despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority, Abbas, and prime minister Rami al Hamdallah received little positive evaluation for their role during the war, a majority tends to give the reconciliation government a big role in the affairs of the Gaza Strip in the post war period. For example, a majority wants it to control border crossings and to supervise police and security sector employees; the largest percentage wants it to control borders with Israel and Egypt and to lead the reconstruction process in the Strip

                (1) Gaza War:

                • 79% believe that Hamas has won the Gaza War; 79% believe Israel was responsible for the eruption of the Gaza war, and 94% are satisfied with Hamas’ military performance in confronting Israeli forces.
                • 63% believe that the ceasefire agreement satisfies Palestinian interests, but 34% disagree with that. Moreover, 59% are satisfied and 39% are dissatisfied with war accomplishments
                • An overwhelming majority of 86% support the launching of rockets from the Gaza Strip at Israel if the siege and blockade are not ended.
                • 49% think it is justified for Hamas to launch rockets from populated areas and 46% disagree with that.
                • 57% oppose disarming armed groups in the Gaza Strip while 25% support such a measure after the ending of the siege and the conduct of elections.
                • Yet, a majority of 54% support and 40% oppose Abbas’ position that argues that the reconciliation government must be committed to existing agreements reached between the PLO and Israel.
                • But only 43%, compared to 53% last June, agrees with the statement that the inclusion of Hamas into the PLO means an implicit acceptance by Hamas of the PLO peace program and the existing agreements with Israel.
                • About two thirds (64%) believe that Iran, Turkey and Qatar combined have given the Gaza Strip the ability to remain steadfast against Israeli attacks and to be able to continue to launch rockets during the war; only 9% believe Egypt too has contributed to that.
                • Moreover, only 25% describe Egypt’s role in the ceasefire negotiations as positive while a majority of 52% describe it as negative.
                • In an evaluation of the performance of the various Palestinian actors during the war, Prime Minister Rami al Hamdallah comes at the bottom, with 35% giving him a positive rating. The PA comes next with 36%, Abbas with 39%, the reconciliation government with 43%, and the PLO with 44%. On top comes Khalid Mish’al with 78% approval and Hamas with 88% approval.

                79% believe that Hamas has won the Gaza War; 3% believe Israel came out the winner; and 17% believe the two sides were losers. Moreover, 79% believe Israel was responsible for the eruption of the Gaza war; 5% believe Hamas was responsible; and 12% believe the responsibility lies with the two sides. 63% believe that the ceasefire agreement satisfies Palestinian interests, but 34% disagree with that. Moreover, 59% are satisfied with the accomplishment gained in the agreement compared to the human and material losses sustained by the Gaza Strip; 39% are dissatisfied with the accomplishment. Satisfaction with war accomplishments is higher in the West Bank (61%) compared to the Gaza Strip (56%), among those who oppose the peace process (69%) compared to those who support the peace process (55%), among Hamas supporters (69%) compared to supporters of Fatah (53%), among those who hold a BA degree (60%) compared to those who are illiterates (47%), and among students (62%) compared to housewives (58%).

                An overwhelming majority of 86% support the launching of rockets from the Gaza Strip at Israel if the siege and blockade are not ended. Support for launching the rockets is higher in the West Bank (88%) compared to the Gaza Strip (82%). 60% say that Hamas does not launch rockets from populated areas, but 30% say it does. 49% think it is justified for Hamas to launch rockets from populated areas and 46% disagree with that. Percentage of those who believe that launching rockets from populated areas is unjustified increases to 59% among Gazans while standing at 38% among West Bankers. The percentage of those who believe that it is unjustified to launch rockets from populated areas increases among supporters of the peace process (48%) compared to those who oppose the peace process (42%), among supporters of Fatah (62%) compared to supporters of Hamas (38%), and among illiterates (57%) compared to those who hold a BA degree (46%). Only 30% believe that Hamas should warn Israeli civilians in the specific targeted areas before launching its rockets; 68% believe it should not do so.

                57% oppose disarming armed groups in the Gaza Strip while 25% support such a measure after the ending of the siege and the conduct of elections; 13% support this measure but only after reaching a peace agreement with Israel. In our June 2014 poll, only 33% said it opposed disarming and dissolving armed groups in the Gaza Strip. Despite the current opposition to disarming Gaza groups, a majority of 54% support and 40% oppose Abbas’ position that argues that the reconciliation government must be committed to existing agreements reached between the PLO and Israel and rejects Hamas position that opposes Abbas’ argument.  In our previous poll in June, support for Abbas’ position stood at 59%. Yet, only 43%, compared to 53% last June, agrees with the statement that the inclusion of Hamas into the PLO means an implicit acceptance by Hamas of the PLO peace program and the existing agreements with Israel.

                About two thirds (64%) believe that Iran, Turkey and Qatar combined have given the Gaza Strip the ability to remain steadfast against Israeli attacks and to be able to continue to launch rockets during the war; only 9% believe Egypt too has contributed to that. Iran comes on top with 28%, followed by Turkey (21%) and Qatar (15%); 25% select other countries or actors.  Moreover, only 25% describe Egypt’s role in the ceasefire negotiations as positive while a majority of 52% describe it as negative and 22% as neutral. Positive evaluation of Egypt’s role is higher in the Gaza Strip (29%) compared to the West Bank (22%), among supporters of the peace process (32%) compared to those who oppose the peace process (13%), among supporters of Fatah (40%) compared to supporters of Hamas and third parties (15% and 21% respectively), among illiterates (42%) compared to holders of BA degree (22%), and among housewives (28%) compared to students (21%).

                In an evaluation of the performance of the various Palestinian actors during the war, Prime Minister Rami al Hamdallah comes at the bottom, with 35% giving him a positive rating. The PA comes next with 36%, Abbas with 39%, the reconciliation government with 43%, and the PLO with 44%. On top comes Khalid Mish’al with 78% approval and Hamas with 88% approval. The approval rating for Abbas rises to 49% in the Gaza Strip and drops to 33% in the West Bank. By contrast, Khalid Mish’al’s approval rating drops in the Gaza Strip to 70% and rises to 83% in the West Bank.

                 

                (2) The reconciliation government and its role in Gaza after the war:

                • Optimism about the success of reconciliation and the end of the split rises to 69%; 28% remain pessimistic.
                • Three months after its establishment, 46% are satisfied with the performance of the reconciliation government and 46% are dissatisfied.
                • A majority of 51% wants to place the reconciliation government in charge of the Rafah crossing, but 38% prefer to keep it under Hamas’ control.
                • 48% want the reconciliation government to control the border with Egypt and 39% want it under Hamas’ control.
                • 44% believe the responsibility for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip should be placed in the hands of the reconciliation government while 39% prefer to place it in Hamas’ hands.
                • 83% want the reconciliation government to pay the salary of the Gaza public sector that served the previous Hamas government; 13% are opposed to that.
                • 65% want the reconciliation government to be in charge of supervising the work of the employees of Gaza security sector who worked in the past under Hamas government; 29% disagree with that.

                Findings show that optimism about the success of reconciliation and the end of the split rises to 69%; 28% remain pessimistic. In our last poll in June 62% were optimistic. Three months after its establishment, 46% are satisfied with the performance of the reconciliation government and 46% are dissatisfied. Indeed, 60% prefer to get rid of the reconciliation government and form a unity government in which leaders and politicians from all major factions would participate; 34% oppose such a step and prefer to keep the reconciliation government. The preference for a unity government drops significantly to 49% in the Gaza Strip and increases to 66% in the West Bank.

                A majority of 51% wants to place the reconciliation government in charge of the Rafah crossing, but 38% prefer to keep it under Hamas’ control. In the Gaza Strip, 64% want to place the Rafah crossing under the control of the reconciliation government and only 25% want it under Hamas’ control. The same, with minor variation, applies to control over the crossings with Israel. 48% want the reconciliation government to control the border with Egypt and 39% want it under Hamas’ control. The same, with minor variation, applies to the border with Israel; with 45% in favor of keeping the border under the control of the reconciliation government and 41% say they should stay under Hamas’ control. In the Gaza Strip, 56% say borders with Egypt should come under the control of the reconciliation government and 49% say the border with Israel too should come under the control of the reconciliation government. In the West Bank, 42% say that the Rafah crossing should come under the control of the reconciliation government and 45% say it should remain under Hamas control. The demand to place the control of the Rafah crossing under the reconciliation government increases among men (56%) compared to women (45%), among the somewhat religious (53%) compared to the religious (47%), among supporters of the peace process (58%) compared to those who oppose the peace process (39%), among supporters of Fatah (85%) compared to supporters of Hamas and third parties (31% and 49% respectively), and among refugees (55%) compared to non-refugees (47%).

                44% believe the responsibility for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip should be placed in the hands of the reconciliation government while 39% prefer to place it in Hamas’ hands. But 83% want the reconciliation government to pay the salary of the Gaza public sector that served the previous Hamas government; 13% are opposed to that. In this regard, 65% want the reconciliation government to be in charge of supervising the work of the employees of Gaza security sector who worked in the past under Hamas government; 29% disagree with that, wanting instead to keep these employees under Hamas’ control. In the Gaza Strip, the demand for placing the security sector employees under the control of the reconciliation government rises to 72% and only 24% want them under Hamas’ control. In the West Bank, demand to place supervision over those employees under the reconciliation government stands at 61% while 32% want them to come under the supervision of Hamas. Demand to place the security sector employees under the supervision of the reconciliation government among men (68%) compared to women (62%), among supporters of Fatah and third parties (79% and 75% respectively) compared to supports of Hamas (54%). Nonetheless, 72% agree with Hamas’ demand that security and police should remain under its control during the next 6 months, up until the elections; 24% disagree with that. Two months ago 66% agreed with that.

                 

                (3) Presidential and Legislative Elections:

                • If new presidential elections are held today and only two were nominated, Haniyeh would receive a majority of 61% and Abbas would receive 32%.
                • Level of satisfaction with the performance of Abbas decreases from 50% two months ago to 39% in this poll.
                • If presidential elections were between Marwan Barghouti and Haniyeh, the former would receive 45% and the latter would receive 49% of the participants’ votes.
                • If presidential elections were between three: Mahmud Abbas, Marwan Barghouti and Ismail Haniyeh, Haniyeh would receive 48% of the vote, Barghouti 29%, and Abbas 19%.
                • If new legislative elections were held today with the participation of all factions, 46% say they would vote for Hamas and 31% say they would vote for Fatah, 7% would vote for all other third parties combined, and 17% are undecided.

                If new presidential elections are held today and only two were nominated, Haniyeh, for the first time since we have started asking about his popularity about 8 years ago, would receive a majority of 61% and Abbas would receive 32%. Vote for Haniyeh stands at 53% in the Gaza Strip and 66% in the West Bank. Abbas receives 43% in the Gaza Strip and 25% in the West Bank. Two months ago, Abbas received the support of 53% in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and Haniyeh 41%. The rate of participation in such elections would reach 71%.  Level of satisfaction with the performance of Abbas decreases from 50% two months ago to 39% in this poll. Satisfaction with the performance of Abbas rises among supporters of the peace process (52%) compared to those who oppose the peace process (16%), among supporters of Fatah (86%) compared to supporters of Hamas and third parties (15% and 32% respectively), among those who are over 50 years of age (44%) compared to youth between the ages of 18 ad 28 (37%), and among the illiterates (63%) compared to those who hold a BA degree (33%). With regard to Abbas’ vote in the presidential elections, the vote increases among non-religious (66%) compared to the religious and the somewhat religious (25% and 36% respectively), among supporters of the peace process (46%) compared to those who are opposed to the peace process (8%), and among supporters of Fatah (89%) compared to supporters of Hamas and third parties (3% and 29% respectively).

                If presidential elections were between Marwan Barghouti and Haniyeh, the former would receive 45% and the latter would receive 49% of the participants’ votes. This is the first time in 8 years in which Haniyeh receives more votes than Barghouti. In our previous poll, Barghouti received the support of 58% and Haniyeh 38%. The rate of participation in this case would reach 77%. If presidential elections were between three: Mahmud Abbas, Marwan Barghouti and Ismail Haniyeh, Haniyeh would receive 48% of the vote, Barghouti 29%, and Abbas 19%. The rate of participation in this case would reach 80%. In our previous poll in June 2014, Barghouti received 36% of the vote, Haniyeh 33%, and Abbas 28%.

                If new legislative elections were held today with the participation of all factions, 78% say they would participate in such elections. Of those who would participate, 46% say they would vote for Hamas and 31% say they would vote for Fatah, 7% would vote for all other third parties combined, and 17% are undecided. Two months ago, vote for Hamas stood at 32% and for Fatah at 40%. Vote for Hamas in the Gaza Strip stands in this poll at 44% and in the West Bank at 47%. Vote for Fatah in the Gaza Strip stands in this poll at 36% and in the West Bank at 27%.

                A majority of 69% wants elections to take place within few to six months from today, 14% want them to take place after a year or more, and 12% do not want elections.

                 

                (4) Domestic Conditions:

                • Positive evaluation of conditions in the Gaza Strip drops from 24% two months ago to 20% today, and positive evaluation of conditions in the West Bank remains almost unchanged at 32%.
                • Perception of safety and security in the Gaza Strip drops dramatically from 64% two months ago to 22% in this poll. In the West Bank perception of safety and security drops from 51% to 47% during the same period.
                • Hamas’ official TV station, Al Aqsa, is the one with the most viewership (37%) in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip followed by al Jazeera (21%), Palestine TV (16%), Ma’an-Mix (11%), and al Arabiya (5%).
                • In the West Bank, 35% of the respondents expected economic conditions in their area to improve in the next few years. But in the Gaza Strip 56% expected economic conditions to improve.

                Positive evaluation of conditions in the Gaza Strip drops from 24% two months ago to 20% today, and positive evaluation of conditions in the West Bank remains almost unchanged at 32%. Perception of safety and security in the Gaza Strip drops dramatically from 64% two months ago to 22% in this poll. In the West Bank perception of safety and security drops from 51% to 47% during the same period. Findings show that the percentage of Gazans who say they seek immigration to other countries stands at 43%; in the West Bank, the percentage stands at 20%. For the first time ever, Hamas’ official TV station, Al Aqsa, is the one with the most viewership (37%) in both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip followed by al Jazeera (21%), Palestine TV (16%), Ma’an-Mix (11%), and al Arabiya (5%).

                In the West Bank, 35% of the respondents expected economic conditions in their area to improve and a similar percentage (33%) expected them to worsen. But in the Gaza Strip 56% expected economic conditions to improve and only 20% expected them to worsen.

                 

                (5) Peace Process:

                • Only 47% believe the chances for the resumption of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations are medium or high; 51% believe the chances are low or non-existent.
                • The public is divided over the two-state solution: 49% support it and 50% oppose it.
                • A majority of 53% believe that armed confrontation is the most effective means to establish a Palestinian state next to the state of Israel. Only 22% believe negotiation is the best means to establish a Palestinian state.
                • 62% say that the two-state solution is no longer practical due to Israeli settlement expansion and 35% think it is still practical.
                • 81% are worried that they could be hurt by Israelis in their daily life or that their homes would be demolished and land confiscated.
                • An overwhelming majority of 81% believe that Israel’s long term aspiration is to annex the land occupied in 1967 and expel its population or deny them their political rights.
                • 57% of the public supported the June 2014 kidnapping of the three Israelis in the West Bank. Similarly, a majority of 54% supported the killing of the three kidnapped Israelis and 42% opposed it.
                • An overwhelming majority of 88% supports Hamas’ way of confronting the Israeli occupation as it did in the Gaza Strip; only 11% is opposed to that. A majority of 72% favors the transfer of Hamas’ approach to the West Bank.

                Findings show that only 47% believe the chances for the resumption of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations are medium or high; 51% believe the chances are low or non-existent. Similarly, the public is divided over the two-state solution: 49% support it and 50% oppose it. In our last poll two months ago, 54% supported this solution and 46% opposed it. A majority of 53% believe that armed confrontation is the most effective means to establish a Palestinian state next to the state of Israel. Only 22% believe negotiation is the best means to establish a Palestinian state and 20% believe that popular non-violent resistance is the most effective route to statehood.  62% say that the two-state solution is no longer practical due to Israeli settlement expansion and 35% think it is still practical. Yet, only 24% support the alternative one-state solution; 75% reject the one-state solution. These findings indicate a drop in the support for the one-state solution which two months ago stood at 31%. The belief that armed confrontations are the most effective means to establish a Palestinian state next to the state of Israel increases in the Gaza Strip (56%) compared to the West Bank (51%), among men (56%) compared to women (50%), among the religious (56%) compared to the somewhat religious and the non-religious (52% and 36% respectively), among those who oppose the peace process (78%) compared to those who support the peace process (39%), among supporters of Hamas (72%) compared to supporters of Fatah and third parties (34% and 48% respectively), among refugees (55%) compared to non-refugees (51%), among holders of BA degree (58%) compared to illiterates (49%), and among students (58%) compared to housewives (49%).

                81% are worried that they could be hurt by Israelis in their daily life or that their homes would be demolished and land confiscated. Only 19% are not worried. Similarly, an overwhelming majority of 81% believe that Israel’s long term aspiration is to annex the land occupied in 1967 and expel its population or deny them their political rights. By contrast, 63% believe that the long term aspiration of the Palestinian Authority and the PLO is to recover part or all of the land occupied in 1967.

                57% of the public say that they supported the June 2014 kidnapping of the three Israelis in the West Bank when that incident took place. Support for the kidnapping reached 76% in the Gaza Strip and only 45% in the West Bank. Similarly, a majority of 54% supported the killing of the three kidnapped Israelis and 42% opposed it. Support for the killing reached 69% in the Gaza Strip and only 42% in the West Bank. 52% of the West Bankers opposed the killing of the three kidnapped Israelis. But the public is divided over the identity of those who carried out the kidnapping and the killing of the three Israelis: 32% accuse Israel, 30% accuse Hamas, 21% believe a Palestinian acted on his own, and 2% accuse Fatah. Support for killing the kidnapped Israelis among the religious (62%) compared to the somewhat religious and the non-religious (50% and 29% respectively), among those who oppose the peace the peace process (73%) compared to those who support the peace process (43%), among supporters of Hamas (72%) compared to supporters of Fatah and third parties (40% and 50% respectively), among refugees (62%) compared to non-refugees (46%), and among illiterates (72%) compared to those who hold a BA degree (56%).

                In the absence of viable negotiations, 85% support joining more international organizations; 84% support joining the International Criminal Court; 62% favor resort to popular non-violent resistance; 60% support a return to an armed intifada; 42% support a dissolution of the PA; and 24% support abandoning the two-state solution in favor of a one-state solution. It is worth mentioning that two months ago only 41% indicated support for a return to an armed intifada.  61% believe that massive popular demonstrations could contribute to ending the Israeli occupation. But a larger majority of 72% favors the transfer of Hamas’ armed approach to the West Bank. Support for emulating Hamas in the West Bank stands at 70% among West Bankers and 74% among Gazans. Support for emulating Hamas in the West Bank is higher among those who oppose the peace process (86%) compared to those who support the peace process (63%), among supporters of Hamas and third parties (86% and 69% respectively) compared to supporters of Fatah (50%), and among refugees (75%) compared to non-refugees (68%).

                82% say they participate in boycotting Israeli goods that have local alternatives and 18% say they do not participate in the boycott. An overwhelming majority (87%) believes that the boycott movement is effective and 11% believe it to be ineffective. ...More

                 

                August 2021 

                 

                Can Hamas, and does it Want to, “Lead” the Palestinian People?

                 

                Khalil Shikaki

                 

                Within a four-week period, between the end of April and the end of May 2021, Hamas exchanged its former status as the leader of the “resistance’ and the representative of the interests of the Gaza Strip to the leader of the resistance and the representative of all interests of the Palestinian people in its relations with the Israeli occupation. It did not do that through elections or control of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) or the Palestinian Authority (PA). Instead, it did it by taking advantage of a leadership vacuum left by the PA and by winning the battle over the hearts and minds of the Palestinians living in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, i.e., under the Israeli occupation. In a rare moment in the history of the Palestinian people, the majority of those living under in these occupied areas declared that Hamas is more deserving of representing and leading the Palestinian people. It is certain that the public meant to convey a mandate to Hamas to take the initiative in responding to and addressing Israeli threats to the interests of the Palestinian people living under the occupation. It is also certain that the public did that because it believed that Hamas own something that the PA did not: capacity, political will, and the readiness to take the initiative and lead. This development, if sustained and consolidated, could represent a paradigm shift in internal relations and in Palestinian-Israeli relations. But the big question arises: can Hamas do that, even in the limited sense of representation and leadership and does it really wish to do that?

                Hamas does not have the required financial resources or the effective organizational and leadership presence on the ground in the West Bank or East Jerusalem. It does not have sufficient regional or international economic and political support and has no diplomatic recognition and presence in any of the world’s main capitals. To the contrary, the international community views it as a terrorist organization; Israel fights its fiercely financially, politically, and militarily; The PA seeks to punish it or at least contain it. Could Hamas, despite all that, take the greater responsibility for responding to Israeli policies and by doing so determine the nature of the daily relationship between the Palestinians and the state of Israel and take the conflict back to its original existential roots?

                This critical brief seeks to analyze this important development in Palestinian politics in order to understand its origins and sustainability. It ends with a review of Hamas’ options and the options of the others in dealing with it.

                Background:

                The 2020 announcement of the Trump Plan, known as the deal of the century, and what followed it in Israeli measures and threats to annex large parts of the West Bank propelled Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah movement to search for a partnership with Hamas in the hope of formulating a unified strategy of confrontation directed against Israel in the West Bank. Thus, shared interests emerged between Fatah and Hamas at a moment of PA and Fatah weakness and lack of determination and confidence to lead alone a confrontation against the US and Israeli annexation plan. Perhaps, it was this moment of Fatah and Abbas weakness that made possible the success of the efforts of Jibril al Rojoub, Fatah’s secretary general, representing the two, and Salih al Arouri, the deputy head of Hamas, to reach a reconciliation agreement that promised to hold legislative, presidential, and PLO Palestine National Council (PNC) elections in a successive manner, one after the other. Based on that success, Abbas issued a decree in January 2021 to hold legislative elections on 22 May 2021 to be followed at the end of July by presidential elections and later PNC elections.

                The decree and the practical measures taken immediately after that provided the Palestinians a rare opportunity to reunify the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, to ease the siege and blockage as well as the financial and administrative restrictions imposed on the Gaza Strip by Israel, Egypt, and the PA. It also created conditions that might have facilitated the reformation of the Palestinian political system by giving it legitimacy, reforming its basic constitutional and legal structures, and bringing back accountability and oversight in a manner that would allow a separation of powers, rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, the ending of the restrictions on freedom of speech and the activities of civil society. All these areas have witnessed serious deterioration in a gradual slide to authoritarianism and one-man rule during the past several years, particularly since 2015. The decree signaled, at last, the success of reconciliation and represented a great achievement for Hamas in its efforts to reintegrate into the formal Palestinian political system, including winning a political and organizational foothold in the West Bank. 

                 

                Setting the stage for the fourth Hamas-Israel war:

                By contrast, the decision in late April by Abbas and Fatah to indefinitely postpone the elections, because Israel refused to allow them in East Jerusalem, represented a serious blow to the efforts of reconciliation, reunification, and the reformation of the Palestinian political system. It is evident that president Abbas canceled the elections because he was afraid of their outcome, particularly the certainty of his defeat in the presidential elections and the likely inability of Fatah to form a new government after the elections without a coalition with the two Fatah defectors, Mohammad Dahlan and his Future electoral list and Marwan Barghouti and Naser al Qidwah, and their Freedom electoral list, a coalition Abbas almost certainly did not want to pay the required price for.

                Abbas’ use of the Israeli refusal to allow elections in East Jerusalem in order to postpone or cancel the elections, at a time when conditions on the ground in the city was characterized by daily popular non-violent confrontations against the Israeli army and police and extremist setters, exposed bad judgement and lack of understanding of the significance of his measure on the place and role of the PA leadership at such moments. In the eyes of the public, Abbas’ step showed an abandonment of leadership and lack of interest in directing the confrontation with Israel in East Jerusalem, thereby leaving it easy prey to the occupation and the Israeli extremist settlers.  The overwhelming majority of the public opposed Abbas’ decision to postpone the elections and two thirds believed the decision came because of fear of the outcome. Moreover, the majority demanding the holding of these elections without any delay or hesitation and without waiting for an Israel approval to hold them in East Jerusalem. The public wanted the PA to create facts on the ground in East Jerusalem and to lead the efforts that assert Palestinian sovereignty in the city.[1]  The variations in attitudes between those of the public and the leadership exposed a large gap between the two side that confirmed that the president lives in clear isolation form the environment around him and from the popular base that elected him in 2005. Abbas’ decision to postpone or cancel the elections caused a breakdown in Fatah-Hamas’s relations, one that might prove difficult to overcome, and forced Hamas to search for ways to confront the PA and its leadership to force it to come back to the previous understandings. But Hamas failed in its efforts to formulate a political alliance with other electoral lists outside Fatah that could force Fatah and Abbas to backdown.

                Therefore, the popular confrontations in East Jerusalem presented Hamas with a great opportunity. It was Abbas who abandoned the electoral battle over Jerusalem, why should not Hamas turn Abbas’s blunder into a political battle with Israel, one in which it would break Israel’s will and force it to stop its hegemony over the Palestinian city and its holy places. To be able to do that, Hamas would have to risk engaging Israel in a fourth military confrontation, one in which Gaza would pay a huge price. Hamas has never before taken such a risk, even during the battle over the electronic gates to search worshippers at the entrances to al Aqsa Mosque. Therefore, neither the PA nor Israel expected Hamas to take such a gamble, particularly when the confrontation at that moment was mostly over a threat of expulsion to several Palestinian families or a threat to change the status quo at Al Haram al Sharif.

                Hamas’ decision to take the risk of triggering a fourth war with Israel, in defense of Jerusalem and its residents, by launching dozens of rockets toward the city and other major Israeli cities, reflected a significant shift in its policy. Now, it was no longer seeking to ease the conditions in the Gaza Strip in return for giving Israel security assurances; rather, it was now taking a risk in which Gaza and the its interests were being sacrificed for a matter that has not been traditionally under its responsibility. It was the PA, the PLO, and president Abbas who were responsible for the confrontation with Israel on such matters as Jerusalem and the West Bank. It was a failure on the part of the Palestinian leadership, its inability to take the initiative and mobilize the required resources to force Israel to respect the status quo at al Aqsa Mosque and to protect the residents of al Shaikh Jarrah, that created an apparent vacuum and an opportunity that Hamas could not miss to fill that vacuum. There is no doubt that Hamas’ decision to initiate a military confrontation with Israel represented several developments, the most important of which was its perceived need to make the PA understand that Hamas, and Hamas alone, can embarrass it, deprive it from legitimacy, and demonstrate to the Palestinian public that the PA leadership is helpless when confronting Israel, or worse, that it conspired with Israel to prevent the elections. In all that, Hamas succeeded beyond expectations.

                 

                Hamas’ gains in its fourth war with Israel:

                While this was Hamas’ fourth military confrontation with Israel, it was the first time that Hamas entered a war for reasons that had no direct relationship to the needs of the Gaza Strip; instead, this was a war in defense of al Aqsa and Jerusalem. Despite the fact that Hamas must have had multiple motives, and one of those was probably the desire to weaken president Abbas, the public was willing, without hesitation or reservation, to accept its full narrative regarding the reasons for and the outcome of the war. In the eyes of the public, this was a war for the sake of Jerusalem and the families of al Shaikh Jarrah that were threatened with expulsion or eviction. I was also a war that Hamas has won, not only politically, but militarily as well. Most consequentially however, when the public compared Hamas’ capacity to take the initiative and assume responsibility with that of Fatah under the leadership of president Abbas, it came to a stunning conclusion: Hamas, an organization that took part in the armed struggle against Israeli only during the first intifada, is more deserving and capable of leading the Palestinian people than Fatah, the organization that long before initiated armed struggle and one that established the modern Palestinian national liberation movement.[2]

                This development had an immediate impact on the ground, as we saw in the nature of the public response to the killing of the Palestinian opposition figure Nizar Banat. The public came out to demonstrate and to challenge the PA and demand regime change and an end to the rule of president Abbas. The public became less willing to turn a blind eye to PA behavior when that behavior was seen contrary to public consensus. Earlier, we witnessed a timid, indeed frightened, reaction of the PA to the unexpected public reaction to the deal it secretly made with Israel, with coordination with the Pfizer company, the manufacturer of the coronavirus vaccine, in which Israel delivered in June some 90,000 doses in return for receiving an equivalent number of doses later in the year when the company was ready to deliver the Palestinian-ordered shipment. Despite the fact that the Israeli-delivered doses were still valid for at least another two weeks, the PA decided to return the Israeli shipment rather than administer the vaccine to its own people who needed it the most. It did so because it had to make the deal in secrecy and because its own credibility had sunk to a new low and almost no one was ready to believe its statements. In fact, most people believed, incorrectly, that the date of expiration for the delivered shipment had already passed before it was delivered to the PA. Realizing its own inability to convince the public of the facts, the PA concluded that it would be better for the sake of the vaccination process if the shipment was sent back to Israel. Finally, it was probably the PA’s realization that it had lost much of its legitimacy and credibility, along with its fear of internal criticism that constituted the greatest motivation behind the crackdown campaign it carried out against the opposition once the Hamas-Israel war ended. Indeed, the PA decision on how to handle the Nizar Banat headache might have also been the outcome of that same timid and freighted mind set.  

                Can Hamas play the role the public wants it to play?

                Despite the public posture of Hamas’ leadership[3] that welcomes the new role for the movement, Hamas is almost certainly not ready to lead the Palestinian people, even if “leadership” is restricted to taking the initiative in responding to Israel’s expansionist policies. More importantly, Fatah and president Abbas will most likely strive to deny it that role regardless of the cost, indeed even if the cost is risking civil war in the West Bank. Four reasons clarify Hamas’ dilemma and why it might not be truly willing to play the requested role.

                First, Hamas is not ready or able because it does not have the required resources to pressure Israel by means other than the risk of total war in the Gaza Strip. The Israeli measures might not be so threatening to deserve taking such a risk. What would Hamas do in such cases? It will realize that its hands are tight.  But this would put Hamas in the same position as the PA finds itself today, i.e., without initiative or leverage except by dissolving itself and ending all types cooperation and coordination with Israel. It is true that Hamas enjoys much greater credibility among the Israelis than the PA. For example, Israeli leaders think that dissolving the PA and ending cooperation with Israel is a recipe for suicide for the PA’s political elite in control of the West Bank. However, after four wars in 13 years, Hamas on the other hand has already demonstrated its willingness to take extreme risks, in order to achieve its political goals, including those that would entail an utterly destructive war in Gaza.

                Second, Hamas is not ready to lead the Palestinian people because it lacks internal alliances and coalitions that unify groups from the various political spectrum as well as civil society from among those outside Fatah. Hamas’ behavior since its election in 2006 prevented it from bringing a single domestic ally to stand with it, with the exception of Islamic Jehad and other minor armed groups in the Gaza Strip who do not enjoy an effective popular support. Perhaps the most glaring expression of a recent failure has been Hamas’ inability to build an effective coalition with other likeminded electoral lists to oppose Abbas’ decision, that cancelled the elections, despite the great common interest they all had. Without such coalitions in the future, Hamas will discover that its options are limited and hands tight in its dealings with the PA and Israel in the Gaza Strip and will not be, in this case, different than the PA and Fatah who failed miserably, because of lack of legitimacy and credibility, in mobilizing the public and in building a wide popular alliance able and willing to engage in a serious non-violent confrontation against the Israeli occupation despite the fact that they had no other realistic alternative.

                Third, if Hamas assumed the leadership role the public seems to grant it, it will find itself much more battered by Israel than at any time in the past for two reasons. The first has to do with the role Hamas plays in domestic Palestinian politics and the direct impact of that role on Palestinian-Israeli relations. As long as Hamas’ role remains restricted to the business of the Gaza Strip, it will be less attacked by Israel because in such a role Hamas contributes to the weakening and fragmentation of the Palestinian side. Moreover, a Hamas restricted role poses only a marginal threat to Israel compared to the role Hamas aspires to assume, which poses a serious threat to Israel’s vital interests in Jerusalem and the West Bank. The second reason for the expected greater Israeli crackdown of Hamas has to do with the increased room for maneuver that Israel acquires when Hamas, not the PA and Fatah, is the enemy. It will be easier for Israel to win western public opinion when its conflict is with an organization accused of terrorism thereby gaining a greater western tolerance of its use of force against Hamas and its base in the Gaza Strip.  It is true that the PA too has failed to effectively win western public opinion. This PA failure however has essentially been due to internal incompetence and loss of initiative on the part of the PA itself rather than due to the absence of a hospitable environment to deter Israel and contain its settlement expansion. 

                Fourth, the current popular shift, the one that views Hamas as more deserving of representing and leading the Palestinian people, might not last for long. It might be temporary, an emotional response reflecting the popular sentiments that while the PA has proven incompetent and absent at a time it was expected to play its most fundamental role in defending the Palestinian national interest, Hamas was willing to pay a heavy price in order to defend these interests. This shift in public attitudes could quickly turn against Hamas when the priorities of the public shift. It was the Netanyahu’s government that created the ideal circumstances for Hamas’ intervention in Jerusalem this past May. Netanyahu’s behavior coincided with Abbas’s decision to cancel the elections and thereby destroy public expectations of a better internal political future (one characterized by a return to democracy, liberties, and rule of law) and a better economic future (one characterized by prosperity) if elections were to take place on time and in which Fatah would win and lead a ruling coalition. Given such priorities, generated by the public belief that the prospects for that future seemed realistic, most Palestinians preferred a future led by Fatah, not Hamas. However, when president Abbas cancelled the elections, he in effect destroyed that dream and forced the public to abandon it and look for other priorities. The new priority was made possible by the measures taken by Netanyahu in Jerusalem. Needless to say, a little wisdom and a more rational policy on the part of the Palestinian and Israeli leaderships can bring about another reversal in public attitudes. In other words, given the right circumstances, the public sees Hamas as the most appropriate leader to confront Israel and sees Fatah, assuming Fatah is willing, as the most fit to lead in the domestic and economic realms.

                Hamas’ choices:

                Would these reasons convince Hamas to backtrack and abandon the confrontational role the public is asking it to undertake against Israel, not only because of its limited resources and the great challenges it would confront, but also in a search for alternative ways of escaping its current unilateral control over the Gaza Strip? 

                The backtracking option sounds convincing if Hamas’ leadership came to the conclusion that despite all, a reconciliation deal with Fatah and president Abbas remains feasible and therefore a return to elections and reintegration into the formal political process should remain the goal. However, it probably will not be easy for Hamas’ leadership, particularly the one that assumed that role in the Gaza Strip since 2017, to have trust in Abbas once again. That leadership, led by Yahya Sinwar, thinks it has granted Abbas all his wishes and accepted his conditions for reconciliation but that he deceived it and reneged on his promises more than once. Nonetheless, the calculation of other Hamas leaders might be different from those of the Gaza leadership and might therefore find itself forced to resume its dialogue with Abbas and Fatah in a search for an exit that would save the Palestinians the destiny of other Arabs, such as the Syrians, the Yemenis, and the Libyans. in the aftermath of the Arab Spring.

                Hamas might also consider the backtracking option, by returning to its safer base in the Gaza Strip, if it believed in the feasibility of a long term hudna, or truce, with Israel. The prospects for this alternative seems more remote than the first one because Israel has various preconditions for such a deal involving Israeli prisoners and the bodies of two soldiers as well as Hamas’ arms and its military activities in the West Bank in return for negotiating Hamas’ conditions regarding the release of a large number of Palestinian prisoners, the removal of the restrictions on the movement of people and goods and international travel and transportation, access to greater quantities of water, electricity, and fuel, and the removal of obstacles in front of great economic investment and access to external markets.  

                By contrast, Hamas might want to play the role requested by the public if its leadership elite came to the conclusion that the prospects for reconciliation with Fatah and president Abbas are slim to non-existent and that the chances for reaching a long term hudna with Israel were low, not only because of the anticipated difficulties regarding the arrangements to be implemented in the Gaza Strip, but more so because the continued occupation of the West Bank entails an unavoidable clash sooner or later, which would lead to the collapse of any long term hudna.

                Regardless of whether other options were available and even if public demand for a Hamas leadership of the conflict with Israel wanes, Hamas might decide to play the now publicly requested role if religions metaphysical motives were at play. For example, Hamas might insist on guarding its gains in the last war if its political and religious elites were convinced that the timing of the current conflict, despite all the risks, is one dictated by a higher authority, that of God; that it is an essential component of the “the second of the warnings,” or Wa’d al Akhirah, and the “inevitability of Israel’s demise,” or hatmiyyat zawal Isra’el, two highly controversial issues within the circles of Islamist scholars and activists, particularly in Palestine. The change in Hamas’ language, and that of other Islamists, that accompanied the pursuing of the last war with Israel, compared to the language used in other Hamas-Israel wars since 2008, might be partially explained by this metaphysical belief regarding the existence of a so-called “Quranic prophecy” that would take place in 2022. The Palestinian Islamist movement witnessed during the past 30 years a debate around a so-called “numerical or digital miracle,” of which the timing of Israel’s demise is central, a debate that started in 1992 with a publication by a highly respected Islamist scholar of Quarn. The last confrontation between Hamas and Israel played an important role in confirming the believers’ view of the accuracy of the prophecy and its perceived timing in al Isra’ chapter (soura 17) in the Quran. It should be stated however, that these assertions have been met with vigorous rejection of this kind of use of Quranic verses from various Islamist scholars[4].

                Needless to say, an improved performance by the PA and Israel might slow down the current march toward a confrontation. A PA performance that acknowledges the place of Hamas in the Palestinian political system, puts that system back on the road to accountability, separation of powers, and rule of law, and restores hope in the viability of diplomacy and negotiations might bring about a new reality, one that could slow down or prevent a slide into a new paradigm shift in Palestinian-Israeli relations in which the conflict reverts to its existential nature under a Hamas leadership. Otherwise, a continuation of the current path provides Hamas a fertile ground to put in place a new basis for pursuing domestic and Palestinian-Israeli conflicts. Such conflict will most likely be characterized by the absence of internal trust and one in which popular confidence in the demise of Israel and the existential nature of the conflict, either us or them, prevails.  

                 
                 

                [1] See the results of poll 80, issued by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in June 2021: http://pcpsr.org/sites/default/files/Poll%2080%20English%20full%20text%2...

                [2] Ibid.

                [3] In an interview with al Arabia TV on 4 July 2021 on the last war with Israel, Khalid Mish’al, the head of Hamas’ political bureau abroad, listed the various potential sources of armed conflict between Hamas and Israel. Mishal listed these sources in which Gazan-related issues came last. He said: “The war might be forced upon the ‘resistance’ because of the behavior of the occupation, its aggression and the settlement activities, aggression against Jerusalem and holy places, and the Gaza siege.” https://www.alwatanvoice.com/arabic/news/2021/07/04/1422088.html

                [4] The original 1992 publication in Arabic has been written by Bassam Jarrar, Palestinian scholar, under the title “the demise of Israel, a prophecy or a numerical coincidence,” and published by the Ramallah-based Noon Center for Quranic Studies (issued on 5 August 1993). For an Islamist critique, see the following two YouTube examples. Mohammad al Mubayyed, under the title “numerical calculations and the question of Israel’s demise in the year 2022”: الحسابات العددية ومسألة زوال إسرائيل سنة 2022م - YouTube and Dr. Iyad al Qannibi under the title “Is the demise of Israel in the year 2022 a Quranic prophecy?”: هل زوال دولة إسرائيل عام 2022 نبوءة قرآنية ؟ د.إياد قنيبي - YouTube

                Despite Dissatisfaction with the Performance of the Hamas Government, Especially Regarding Salaries, and Despite Public Preference for a National Unity Government in which Fateh and Hamas are Equal, Hamas’ Popularity Remains Largely Unchanged and the Majority does not Think it Should Recognize Israel

                 

                14-16 September 2006

                These are the results of the latest poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip during September 14-16, 2006. The poll deals with public evaluation of the performance of the Hamas government, views on the national unity government, attitudes towards peace and violence in the aftermath of the Lebanon war, and the domestic balance of power. Total size of the sample is 1270 adults interviewed face to face in 127 randomly selected locations. Margin of error is 3%.

                For further details, contact PSR director, Dr. Khalil Shikaki, or Walid Ladadweh at

                 Tel 02-296 4933 or email pcpsr@pcpsr.org.

                 

                Main Findings:

                Six months after the establishment of the Hamas government, poll findings show widespread public dissatisfaction with its performance especially in the economic areas of salaries and poverty as well as the enforcement of law and order. This dissatisfaction leads the majority to support the formation of a national unity government that is not under the full control of Hamas. The largest percentage supports the formation of a government in which Hamas and Fateh would enjoy equal weight.

                But the dissatisfaction with the performance of the government does not lead to a reduction in the popularity of Hamas compared to where it was three months ago. Moreover, Fateh does not benefit from Hamas’ lack of performance with its popularity remaining essentially stable. Moreover, despite the criticism of the performance of the government, two thirds of the public does not believe that Hamas should recognize Israel as required by the international donor community. This view does not reflect a hardening of public attitude toward the two-state solution. Rather it reflects public rejection of recognition of Israel as a precondition for negotiations. Poll findings show that a Palestinian majority supports recognition of Israel as a state for the Jewish people but only as part of a settlement that creates a Palestinian state along side Israel and resolves all other issues of the conflict.

                 

                (1) Domestic Conditions, Governmental Performance, and Views on a National Unity Government

                • Only 42% are satisfied with the overall performance of the Hamas government; 54% are dissatisfied. The public is least satisfied with the government’s performance regarding economic issues (26%) and most satisfied with its performance in fighting corruption (46%).
                • 46% want a national unity government in which Fateh and Hamas would have equal weight; 25% prefer a national unity government under Hamas’ control; and 24% prefer an apolitical government made up of professionals, not politicians.
                • The largest percentage (32%) wants the top priority of the national unity government to be the enforcement of law and order while 25% want the top priority to be the return to the peace process and 23% want it to be the ending of the financial and political sanctions.
                • An overwhelming majority (84%) sees conditions of the Palestinians today to be bad or very bad and only 5% see them good or very good; 80% say they are not safe and secure.
                • 89% believe corruption exists in the PA and 72% believe that jobs are obtained mainly through wasta, or personal connections.
                • 46% believe the strike of PA employees and teachers is not political while 36% believe it is political aimed against Hamas
                • 41% define poverty and unemployment to be the biggest problem confronting Palestinians today while 25% define the biggest problem as being occupation and 22% say it is corruption and 11% say it is internal anarchy.
                • 86% oppose kidnapping of foreigners residing in Palestinian areas and 13% support it. 

                Poll findings show that 54% of the public is dissatisfied with the overall performance of the Hamas government and 42% are satisfied. Satisfaction is at its lowest with regard to performance in economic issues such as providing salaries and alleviating poverty with only 26% satisfied and 69% dissatisfied. Satisfaction is at its highest with regard to performance regarding fighting corruption with 46% satisfied and 49% dissatisfied.

                Satisfaction with the overall performance of Hamas government increases in the Gaza Strip (45%) compared to the West Bank (40%), in cities (44%) compared to villages and towns (40%), among the most religious (44%) compared to the least religious (39%) among supporters of Hamas (75%) compared to supporters of Fateh (17%), and among those most unwilling to buy a lottery ticket (51%) compared to those most willing (27%).

                Poll findings show that strong correlation exists between satisfaction with the overall performance of Hamas government and those willing to vote for Hamas if new elections are held today: 90% of the highly satisfied intend to vote for Hamas (compared to 4% for Fateh) and 4% of those who are not satisfied at all intend to vote for Hamas (compared to 66% for Fateh) 

                To find a way out of the current crisis, the largest percentage (46%) supports the formation of a national unity government in which Fateh and Hamas would enjoy equal weight. A quarter supports the formation of a national unity government in which Hamas would dominate while a similar percentage (24%) prefers a non political government made up of professionals. With regard to the priorities of the future national unity government, the public is divided with about one third (32%) focusing on fighting lawlessness by enforcing law and order, a quarter focusing on renewing the peace process, and a similar percentage (23%) focusing on ending the current financial and political sanctions. Only 18% want the top priority to be fighting corruption.

                Findings show a great deal of depression regarding existing conditions with 84% describing current condition as bad or very bad and only 5% describing it good or very good. Moreover, 80% say they and their families do not feel secure and safe in PA areas. The percentage of those believing that corruption exists in PA institutions is at its highest (89%) while 72% believe that jobs today can be obtained largely through wasta, or personal connections.

                This gloomy perception might be the reason why the largest percentage (46%) does not view the strike by public employees and teachers as a political strike targeting the Hamas government and instead view it as motivated by professional consideration, a protest against the existing miserable conditions. Only 36% view it as an attack against the Hamas government.

                 

                (2) Lebanon War

                • 86% believe that Hezbollah emerged as a winner in the Lebanon war and 2% see Israel as a winner.
                • 90% oppose the position advanced by some Arab countries that saw the war as an uncalculated adventure by Hezbollah and 9% support this position.
                • 73% believe the war strengthens the resistance option in Palestine and 24% believe it weakens it while 75% believe that in light of the war they would support taking Israeli soldiers prisoners in order to exchange them with Palestinians.
                • 65% believe that the war was an Israeli calculated step since Hezbollah represented a threat to Israel and only 5% believe it was caused by Iranian and Syrian intentions.
                • 84% agree that one of the war lessons is the need to establish soon a Palestinian state in order to prevent in the future a war between Palestinians and Israelis similar to the war in Lebanon but 64% agree with the view that Israel will never allow the creation of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital.
                • About three quarters agree with the views that the Palestinians can not count on Arab support, that they are in need for international understanding, and that they can not count on armed action only.
                • 63% agree that Palestinians should use the same methods as Hezbollah such as the launching of rockets at Israeli cities and 41% only agree with the view that only after it ends its occupation of the West Bank Israel would be able to live in peace.

                Findings show a semi consensus among the public (86%) that Hezbollah has emerged victorious from the war in Lebanon while the percentage of those who believe that Israel came out winner is 2%. Moreover, the overwhelming majority (90%) does not share the views expressed by some Arab countries that the war in Lebanon was an uncalculated risk by Hezbollah with about two thirds (65%) believing that the war was a planned Israeli measure because Hezbollah has become a threat against Israel. The percentage of those who believe that the war had  Syrian and Iranian origins did not exceed 5%. In brief, the overwhelming majority of the Palestinians accepts Hezbollah’s, rather than Israel’s narrative regarding the origin and outcome of the war in Lebanon.

                With regard to lessons learned from the war and their implications for the Palestinian-Israeli situation, findings show apparent inconsistency. On the one hand, 73% believe that the war has strengthened the armed resistance option in Palestine and in light of the war 75% would support taking Israeli soldiers prisoners in order to exchange them with Palestinian prisoners. Moreover, 63% believe that the Palestinians should emulate Hezbollah’s methods by using rockets against Israeli cities.

                On the other hand, three quarters agree with the view that Palestinians can not depend on armed action alone and must reach a political settlement with Israel. Moreover, a similar percentage believes that Palestinians can not count on themselves alone and that they need the help and understanding of the international community.

                One reason for this apparent inconsistency can be found in the belief of 84% that there is a need to establish soon a Palestinian state in order to prevent a future a war between Palestinians and Israel similar to the war in Lebanon while almost two thirds (64%) believe that Israel will never allow the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital. In other words, while the Palestinians recognize the need for a political settlement acceptable to Israel and the international community they do not believe that Israel would agree to a settlement that would establish a Palestinian state; therefore, most Palestinians support armed confrontations.

                 

                (3) Peace Process and Olmert’s Realignment Plan

                • 74% want permanent status negotiations between Mahmud Abbas and Ehud Olmert but only 44% believe such negotiations if they were to take place would succeed and lead to a compromise agreement.
                • 59% want Hamas to negotiate with Israel but only 36% believe such negotiations if they were to take place would lead to a compromise permanent status agreement.
                • 67% do not believe Hamas should recognize the state of Israel in order to meet international donor demands. But 63% would support a Palestinian recognition of Israel as a state for the Jewish people after a peace agreement is reached and a Palestinian state is established.
                • 77% support the call for a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinians and 22% oppose it.
                • 62% have not heard of Olmert’s realignment plan to evacuate most of the West Bank settlements while realigning into large blocks of settlements along the line of the separation barrier.
                • 70% do not welcome Olmert’s plan and only 20% believe it will be implemented.
                • 75% believe that the evacuation of the settlements in the Gaza Strip was a victory for armed struggle.
                • 52% support the Road Map and 42% oppose it. Also, only 44% support collection of arms from Palestinian armed groups in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. This percentage increases to 64% if collection of arms is restricted to Gaza Strip. 82% support the integration of armed groups into the Palestinian security services.
                • 57% support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel and 57% believe that armed confrontations have helped Palestinians achieve national rights in ways that negotiations could not.

                Findings show that two thirds of the public do not believe that Hamas should accept the international demand to recognize the state of Israel in order to end the current financial and political sanctions. This view does not mean that the public opposes a future Palestinian recognition of Israel as 63% support recognition of Israel as a Jewish state but only as part of a package of permanent status that would resolve all issues of the conflict and lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state recognized by Israel as the state for the Palestinian people. Moreover, about three quarters (74%) want President Mahmud Abbas (Abu Mazin) to conduct permanent status negotiations with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. A majority of 59% (compared to 70% last June) supports Hamas’ engagement in peace negotiations with Israel. But expectations that such negotiations would succeed are not high: 44% if conducted by Abu Mazin and 36% if by Hamas.

                Findings show that 52% support the Road Map plan while 42% oppose it. But only 44% support collection of arms from armed groups in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as required by the plan. However, if collection of arms is restricted to the Gaza Strip (now, after the Israeli withdrawal from it) support would increase to 64%. Moreover, if the solution to the arms and the armed men and militias can be found in merging them into the Palestinian security services, the overwhelming majority (82%) would support that.

                Support for armed attacks against Israeli civilians remain relatively high as it was three months ago, standing today at 57% and opposition at 41%. Findings also show that three quarters believe that the Israeli evacuation of settlements in the Gaza Strip has been victory for armed struggle while 57% believe that armed confrontations have helped achieve national rights in ways that negotiations could not and 40% do not share that view.

                Most Palestinians have not heard about Olmert’s Realignment Plan for the evacuation of some settlements in the West Bank and the relocation of settlers to settlement blocs near the separation wall. Findings show that 70% do not welcome the plan while only 26% welcome it. Given the war in Lebanon and the continuation of armed confrontations in the Gaza Strip, the majority (65%) does not believe that the plan will be implemented while only 20% think it will.

                 

                (4) Domestic Balance of Power

                • Despite the dissatisfaction with the performance of Hamas’ government, the percentage of those willing to vote for it in new elections remain as it was three months ago (38%) while Fateh’s popularity increases slightly to 41%.
                • Satisfaction with the performance of president Mahmud Abbas reaches 55%. But if new elections are held today, only 31% would elect him, 24% would elect Ismail Hanieh, 13% Marwan Barghouti, 5% Mustafa Barghouti, and 3% Mahmud Zahhar.
                • If elections were to be held for a vice president, Ismail Hanieh would receive 20% of the vote, Mahmud Zahhar 16%, Marwan Barghouti 15%, Mohammad Dahlan 9%, and Saeb Erikat, Farouq Qaddoumi, and Mustafa Barghouti 7% each.

                Findings show that despite the dissatisfaction with Hamas government, the popularity of Hamas has not dropped compared to where it stood three months ago. 38% say they would vote for Hamas if new elections are held today compared to 39% last June and 47% last March. Support for Fateh remains relatively stable with a slight increase in this poll compared to three months ago. 41% would vote for Fateh if elections are held today compared to 39% in March 2006 and again in June 2006.

                Findings show that satisfaction with the performance of Abu Mazin stands today at 55% compared to 53% last June and 61% last March. But if new elections for the presidency are held today and five candidates competed, Abu Mazin would receive 31% followed by Ismail Hanieh, the current Prime Minister, with 24%, Marwan Barghouti (13%), Mustafa Barghouti (5%) and Mahmud Zahhar (3%).

                If elections are held for the office of a vice president and seven candidates competed, Ismail Hanieh would receive the largest percentage (20%) followed by Mahmud Zahhar (16%), Marwan Barghouti (15%), Mohammad Dahlan (9%), and Saeb Erikat, Farouq Qaddoumi, and Mustafa Barghouti (7% each)..... Full Report

                SPSS Data File: 

                PSR's Domestic Politics Unit seeks to examine the Palestinian domestic scene and the process of governance. It focuses on the different facets of state building and political change. Issues of interest include institution building, security sector reform transition to democracy, clean government, civics, political trends, and political alignment. DPU seeks to develop various quantitative political indicators with a special focus on developing a Palestinian democracy index, a security sector index, as well as trends in political affiliation and the domestic balance of power. 

                 

                Who Needs Security?

                Surverys:

                 Palestinians residing in area “B,” area “C,” H-2 in Hebron, and Isolated Jerusalem neighborhoods (excluded by the separation wall) struggle to survive in an environment lacking security and rule of law and hold the Palestinian Authority responsible for their protectionFindings of two special polls on security and rule of law in West Bank territories, particularly those outside area “A”   June-August 2016 

                Palestinians residing in area “B,” area “C,” H-2 in Hebron, and isolated Jerusalem neighborhoods struggle to survive in an environment lacking security and rule of law and hold the Palestinian Authority responsible for their protection and demand Palestinian police presence in their areasFindings of four special polls on security and rule of law in West Bank territories, particularly those outside area “A” June-December 2016

                 

                 Palestinian Security Sector Index: 2010-2012:  


                 Arab Democracy Index: 

                1) Report number 3, 2011

                2) Report number 2, 2010

                3) Report number 1, 2008

                Palestinian Split:

                Palestinian Public Institution Reform:

                Hamas:

                 

                Fatah:

                  Palestinian Draft Constitution:

                  Elections:

                  Workshops: (Arabic only)

                  Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No. (26)

                  A Total Lack of Confidence in the Annapolis Process Keeps Hamas’s Popularity Stable Despite Worsening Conditions in the Gaza Strip

                   

                  11-16 December 2007

                   

                  These are the results of the latest poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip during 11-16 December 2007. Total size of the sample is 1270 adults interviewed face to face in 127 randomly selected locations. Margin of error is 3%. This poll release covers three issues: public evaluation of the situation in the Gaza Strip compared to the West Bank six months after the Hamas take over of the Gaza Strip; attitudes toward the peace process such as the Annapolis conference and the permanent settlement; and the domestic balance of power. For further details, contact PSR director, Dr. Khalil Shikaki, or Walid Ladadweh at tel 02-296 4933 or email pcpsr@pcpsr.org.

                   

                  Main Findings:

                  Findings show that Hamas’s popularity relative to Fateh’s has now stabilized despite the fact that public evaluation of conditions in the Gaza Strip has become bleaker than it was three months ago and despite the fact that a big gap exists in the public’s evaluation of conditions in the Gaza Strip compared to conditions in the West Bank in favor of conditions in the latter. Findings also indicate stability in public attitudes regarding Hamas’s military step against Fateh and the PA in the Gaza Strip last June and regarding the legitimacy of the governments of Ismail Haniyeh and Salam Fayyad.

                  Hamas’s ability to achieve this stability might reflect public disappointment with the Annapolis conference and the process it unleashed. Findings show that only a small percentage views the conference as a success or expects a successful outcome for the negotiations it authorized. They also show that public confidence in the ability of the Palestinian leadership to conduct permanent status negotiations or implement a permanent settlement is very limited. The same lack of confidence applies to public perception of the abilities of the Israeli leadership. A slightly less pessimism applies to public perception of the ability of the two sides to implement their commitments under the Roadmap. It is interesting to note that Palestinian positive evaluation of its side’s ability to implement its commitments under the Roadmap improves dramatically when assuming that the Israeli side has implemented its own obligations.

                  Public attitude regarding a permanent settlement along the lines of the Clinton Parameters and the Geneva Initiative remains stable as it has been since December 2005 before Hamas’s electoral victory. These attitudes reflect a divided public with one half supporting and another opposing such a settlement. A small majority supported this permanent settlement only in December 2004. The drop in support for the compromises of the permanent settlement might have been a reaction to the Israeli unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in September 2005.

                   

                  (1) Situation in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank six months after Hamas’s Military Takeover of the Gaza Strip

                  • 74% oppose Hamas’s June 2007 take over of the Gaza Strip and 21% support it.
                  • 41% believe and 47% do not believe that Hamas is planning a similar take over in the West Bank.
                  • Only 8% describe overall conditions in the Gaza Strip today as good or very good and 85% describe them as bad or very bad. By contrast, 31% describe overall conditions in the West Bank as good or very good and 41% describe them as bad or very bad.
                  • Positive evaluation of economic conditions in the Gaza Strip do not exceed 5% while 47% describe conditions in the West Bank as good or very good.
                  • Positive evaluation of democracy and human rights conditions in the Gaza Strip does not exceed 28% compared to 42% for conditions in the West Bank.
                  • 52% of residents of the Gaza Strip compared to 44% of the residents of the West Bank say they feel safe and secure in their homes. These percentages represent an increase in the level of perceived safety and  security particularly in the West Bank (three months ago perception of safety and security reached 35% in the West Bank)
                  • Level of confidence is slim in the media controlled by Hamas and (19%) and Fateh (24%) while 46% do not trust either side.
                  • 27% say that current conditions force them to seek immigration abroad; in the Gaza Strip, the percentage stands at 32%.

                   

                  Findings show that about three quarters of the public continue to oppose the military step taken by Hamas in the Gaza Strip as was the case last September. But the percentage of negative evaluation (bad or very bad) of conditions in the Gaza Strip has increased from 80% to 85% while negative evaluation of conditions in the West Bank has decreased from 45% to 41% during the same period. The gap in public evaluation of conditions in the West Bank compared to those in the Gaza Strip is very big favoring the former. For example, while 93% said economic conditions in the Gaza Strip are bad or very bad, the percentage for the West Bank was 51%. Similarly, negative public evaluation of conditions of democracy, particularly, freedom of the press, in the Gaza Strip reaches 65% compared to 44% for same conditions in the West Bank. Negative evaluation of the status of law and order in the Gaza Strip reaches 60% compared to 42% for West Bank conditions. But negative evaluations of the status of personal safety and security in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are equal standing at 45% for Gazans (commenting on the situation in the Gaza Strip only) and an identical percentage for West Bankers (commenting on the situation in the West Bank only). However, when asked about their own personal feelings of safety and security, 52% of the Gazans said they feel safe and secure in their own homes while only 44% of the West Bankers said they felt safe and secure in their own homes. Despite the fact that the percentage in the West Bank is smaller than that in the Gaza Strip, it is noticeable that it reflects a significant increase from the 35% reported in our September 2007 poll.

                  Negative evaluation of the overall conditions in the Gaza Strip increases among supporters of Fateh (95%) compared to supporters of Hamas (64%), among supporters of the peace process (90%) compared to those opposed to it (69%), among women (87%) compared to men (83%), among residents of the Gaza Strip (87%) compared to residents of the West Bank (84%). By contrast, negative evaluation of overall conditions in the West Bank increases among supporters of Hamas (54%) compared to supporters of Fateh (25%), among those opposed to the peace process (60%) compared to supporters of the peace process (35%), among women (44%) compared to men (37%), and among residents of the West Bank (47%) compared to residents of the Gaza Strip (30%).

                  Findings also indicated that a larger percentage of the public does not believe that Hamas plans to take over the West Bank in the same manner it took over the Gaza Strip (47% do not believe it while 41% believe it). The percentage of those who believe that Hamas does indeed plan a military take over of the West Bank increases among residents of the Gaza Strip (45%) compared to residents of the West Bank (40%), among men (44%) compared to women (39%), among those who say they are “somewhat religious” (46%) compared to those who say they are religious (37%), among supporters of Fateh (55%) compared to supporters of Hamas (30%), among holders of BA degree (48%) compared to those with elementary education (37%), among employees (51%) compared to housewives (38%), among those between the ages of 18-22 (47%) compared to those whose age is over 52 (35%), and among supporters of the peace process (46%) compared to those opposed to it (35%).

                  Public confidence in the media of the two factions, Fateh and Hamas, is small with only 19% having confidence in Hamas’s media compared to 24% having confidence in Fateh’s media. The largest percentage (46%) trusts neither side. Confidence in Hamas’s media increases among residents of the Gaza Strip (24%) compared to residents of the West Bank (17%). Similarly, confidence in Fateh’s media increases among residents of the Gaza Strip (27%) compared to residents of the West Bank (23%).

                   

                  Finally, a decrease has been reported in this poll in the percentage of those who believe that separation between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip is temporary and that the two authorities will be unified in the coming months from 29% last September to 36% in this poll. Optimism about the chances for a quick unification increases among residents of the Gaza strip (55%) compared to residents of the West Bank (25%), among residents of refugee camps (46%) compared to residents of towns and villages (27%), among the religious (44%) compared to the “somewhat religious” (27%) among supporters of Hamas (50%) compared to supporters of Fateh (33%), and among the illiterates (46%) compared to holders of BA degree (30%).  

                   

                  (2) Peace Process: Annapolis and the permanent settlement

                  • Only 11% of the Palestinians deem the Annapolis conference a success in pushing the peace process forward, 59% see it as a failure.
                  • Only 23% of the Palestinians believe the two sides will indeed succeed in achieving the goal of a permanent settlemnet before the end of 2008 and 72% believe they will not succeed.
                  • Only 18% believe that the other side’s leadership will indeed implement their roadmap obligations, while 79% do not believe these obligations will be implemented. On the other hand 67% think that their leadership will implement these obligations if the other side implements them.
                  • Findings indicate stability in support of the overall package along the lines of the Clinton Parameters and the Geneva initiative: 47% support and 49% oppose the whole package combining the elements as one permanent status settlement. Majorities support components related to final borders and territorial exchange (56%), end of conflict (66%), and security arrangements (51%) while minorities support other components related to refugees (39%), Jerusalem (36%), and the establishment of a state without an army (23%).
                  • 32% believe that it is possible and 64% think it is impossible these days to reach a permanent status agreement with Olmert’s government.
                  • About two thirds (65%) believe that chances for the establishment of a Palestinian state in the next five years are slim or non existent while 32% say the chances are medium or high.
                  • 49% agree with the proposal that after reaching a permanent agreement to all issues of the conflict, there would be mutual recognition of Israel as the state for the Jewish people and Palestine as the state for the Palestinian people. 49% disagree to this step.

                   

                  Findings show a widespread disappointment with the Annapolis conference with 59% describing it as a failure and only 11% describing it as a success. Moreover, the public does not believe that the process unleashed by the Annapolis conference will succeed, with 72% saying that the two sides will fail in reaching a permanent agreement during 2008 as indicated in the Annapolis Joint statement. Pessimism also prevails regarding Israel’s willingness to implement its obligations under the Roadmap with 79% saying that Israeli leaders will not implement the commitments they took upon themselves in the Roadmap while only 18% believe they will. Even with regard to the ability of the Palestinian side under the leadership of President Mahmud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to implement its Roadmap obligations, the public is skeptical with 52% believing it can and 44% believing it can not. But if the Israeli side does implement its Roadmap obligations, 67% of the public believe that the Palestinian leadership will in this case implement its Roadmap obligations.

                  Confidence in the ability of the Palestinian side to implement its Roadmap obligations if Israel implements its own increases among supporters of Fateh (82%) compared to supporters of Hamas (46%), among supporters of the peace process (73%) compared to those opposed to it (49%), and among the “somewhat religious” (71%) compared to the religious (64%).  Optimism about the ability of the Israelis and the Palestinians to reach a permanent settlement during 2008 increases among residents of the Gaza Strip (29%) compared to residents of the West Bank (19%), among supporters of Fateh (38%) compared to supporters of Hamas (7%), among the illiterates (27%) compared to holders of BA degree (19%), among employees (25%) compared to students (18%), among those over 52 years of age (27%) compared those between 18-22 years of age (21%), and among supporters of the peace process (30%) compared to those opposed to it (5%).

                  Findings show stability in the position of the Palestinians toward a permanent settlement along the lines of the Clinton parameters and the Geneva Initiative. In this poll, 47% supported such a package and 49% opposed it. Support for the same package stood at 48% in December 2006 and 46% in December 2005. From among the six elements of the package, support increases in this poll to a majority level for final borders and territorial exchange (56%), end of conflict (66%), and security arrangements (51%). Support decreases for the other three elements: refugees (39%), Jerusalem (36%), and the establishment of a state without an army (23%).

                   

                  Support for Clinton’s Permanent/Geneva Initiative Framework (2003-2007)

                   

                  Dec

                   03

                  Dec

                   04

                  Dec

                   05

                  Dec

                   06

                  Dec

                   07

                  1) Borders and Territorial Exchange

                  57%

                  63%

                  55%

                  61%

                  56%

                  2) Refugees

                  25%

                  46%

                  40%

                  41%

                  39%

                  3) Jerusalem

                  46%

                  44%

                  33%

                  39%

                  36%

                  4) Demilitarized Palestinian State

                  36%

                  27%

                  20%

                  28%

                  23%

                  5) Security Arrangements

                  23%

                  53%

                  43%

                  42%

                  51%

                  6) End of Conflict

                  42%

                  69%

                  64%

                  62%

                  66%

                  Overall Package

                  39%

                  54%

                  46%

                  48%

                  47%

                   

                   

                  Support for this package increases in the Gaza Strip (50%) compared to the West Bank (46%) among supporters of Fateh (63%) compared to supporters of Hamas (28%), and among supporters of the peace process (56%) compared to those opposed to the peace process (22%).

                  Findings indicate a decrease in the level of support for a settlement with a mutual recognition of Israel as the state for the Jewish people and Palestine as the state for the Palestinian people within a context of a permanent settlement in which all issues of the conflict are resolved from 57% last September to 49% in this poll. Opposition to this mutual recognition of identity reaches 49% in this poll. This is the first time since June 2003 that a majority fails to support this recognition of identity. The decrease in support for this compromise comes after the Palestinian leadership has refused in November an Israeli request to recognize Israel as a Jewish state as a pre condition to the Annapolis peace negotiations.

                  The public shows little confidence in the chances for reaching a permanent settlement with only 32% believing and 64% not believing that it is possible these days to reach a compromise solution between Abbas and Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert and that even if an agreement is reached, only 31% believe that Olmert is capable of implementing it on the ground. Also, the public shows little confidence in the ability of its own leadership to reach a permanent agreement or to implement one with only 39% believing that Abbas is strong enough to negotiate a permanent compromise settlement. Even if such a settlement is reached 42% believe and 52% do not believe Abbas has the ability to implement it on the ground.

                  This pessimism about the lack of ability on both sides to reach an agreement or implement one is reflected on expectations regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state during the next five years. Almost two thirds (65%) say the chances that this would happen are slim or non existent while 32% say that chances are high or medium.  In June 2007, 26% believed that the chances were medium or high and 70% said the chances were slim or non existent

                   

                  (3) Domestic Balance of Power:

                  • If new legislative elections are held today, Hamas would receive 31% of the vote and Fateh 49%. 10% and 11% remain undecided.
                  • Satisfaction with the performance of Mahmud Abbas reaches 50% compared to 45% last September and 36% last June.
                  • If new elections are held today and the two candidates were Mahmud Abbas and Ismail Haniyeh, Abbas would receive 56% of the vote and Haniyeh 37%. But if the presidential elections were a contest between Marwan Barghouti and Ismail Haniyeh, Barghouti would receive 63% and Haniyeh 32%.
                  • 42% say they agree that Haniyeh should stay as prime minister in the Gaza Strip while 52% say they do not agree with that. On the other hand, 51% say they agree that Salam Fayyad should stay as prime minister while 40% disagree with that.
                  • In a contest over legitimacy, 27% say that Haniyeh’s government is the legitimate one while 37% say Fayyad’s government is the legitimate one. 11% say the two are legitimate and 21% say the two are illegitimate.

                   

                  Findings show that the balance of power between Fateh and Hamas has now stabilized after a widening of the gap to Fateh’s advantage took place last September. If new parliamentary elections are held today, with all factions participating, 31% would vote for Hamas’s list, Change and Reform, and 49% would vote for Fateh while all other lists combined would receive 10% and 11% remain undecided. Support for Hamas reaches 33% in the Gaza Strip and 28% in the West Bank and support for Fateh reaches 52% in the Gaza Strip and 47% in the West Bank. Support for Hamas increases among women (34%) compared to men (27%) while the opposite is true for Fateh with support among men reaching 50% and among women reaching 48%. Support for Hamas increases among the religious (35%) compared to the “somewhat religious” (26%), but this is also true for Fateh with support among the religious reaching 50% and among the “somewhat religious” 47%. Support for Hamas decreases among employees (19%) and increases among students (33%) while support for Fateh increases among employees (61%) compared to students (47%). Support for Hamas increases among those working in the private sector (25%) compared to public sector (18%). Support for Fateh increases among employees of the public sector (67%) and decreases to 45% among employees of the private sector. Finally, support for Hamas increases among those opposed to the peace process (66%) compared to supporters of the peace process (22%) and support for Fateh decreases among those opposed to the peace process (10%) and increases among supporters of the peace process (60%).

                  Satisfaction with the performance of Abbas increases in this poll to 50% compared to 45% last September and 36% last June. If new presidential elections took place today and only two candidates, Abbas and Haniyeh, competed, Abbas would win 56% of the vote to Haniyeh’s 37%. If the competition was between Marwan Barghouti and Haniyeh, the former would receive 63% and the latter 32%.

                  Findings show that 42% approve and 52% disapprove of Haniyeh remaining in his post as prime minister in the Gaza Strip while 51% approve and 40% disapprove of Salam Fayyad remaining in his post as prime minister. Parallel to this, 27% say that Haniyeh’s government is the legitimate one while 37% say Fayyad’s is the legitimate one. 11% view both governments as legitimate and 21% view both as illegitimate. These findings indicate a small decrease in the percentage of those who view Haniyeh’s government as the legitimate one from the 30% it obtained last September while indicating no change in public perception regarding the legitimacy of Fayyad’s government..... Full Report

                   
                  SPSS Data File: 

                  Pages

                  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next › last »