Peace Index: April 2005
Prof. Ephraim Yaar and Prof. Tamar Hermann
Although a clear majority of the Jewish public supports the disengagement plan, in recent months a certain erosion has occurred in the rate of the support. Moreover, in light of the proposal to postpone the plan`s implementation from July to August, only a minority think it will be carried out on the new date, especially if the opponents of the evacuation succeed in mobilizing masses of people at the moment of truth a mobilization that a large majority of the public, including disengagement supporters, views as a legitimate action. Although only a very small minority believes such a mobilization will foil the plan, many, especially among the plan`s supporters, fear the possibility that at the moment of truth the evacuation opponents among the settlers will use weapons against IDF soldiers.
The pessimistic atmosphere surrounding the disengagement plan is apparently augmented by the widespread assessment that if it is ultimately implemented, the Palestinian Authority will not succeed in creating a well-functioning regime and chaos will prevail in the Gaza Strip, with violent struggles erupting between the different organizations. Indeed, a majority believes that after the departure of IDF forces from Gaza, attacks against Israel from the area, such as Kassam rocket fire, will intensify. At the same time, despite and perhaps because of the pessimistic expectations about the situation in the Strip after the IDF`s withdrawal, most of the public believes that regarding the houses and other property of the settlers that will remain behind, it suits Israel`s interests to reach an agreement with the PA and not to destroy all of it and thereby worsen the Palestinian hostility.
As for the possibility of introducing a "third party" to help the PA control the situation after the IDF`s withdrawal, a majority of the Jewish public is prepared to accept only U.S. involvement while rejecting the intervention of other bodies such as Russia, Egypt, the European Union, the Quartet, or the United Nations, in that order of rejection.
Those are the main findings of the Peace Index survey for April that was conducted on Monday and Tuesday, May 2-3.
The rates of support and opposition to the disengagement plan among the Jewish public are currently 56% and 38% (6% have no clear position on the issue). In the previous month these rates were 59% and 36%, and in February they came to 62% and 29%. In other words, the past three months have seen a small but consistent and significant trend of declining public support for the plan, though it continues to enjoy a clear majority, including among Likud voters.
In light of the proposal to postpone carrying out the plan from July to August, it turns out that only 35% now believe it will be implemented on the set date. Some 37% think it will be postponed again, and 12% do no not expect it to be carried out at all (16% do not know). The uncertainty regarding the date for implementing the disengagement plan is increased by the possibility that its opponents will be able to mobilize masses of people at the moment of truth: 51% of the Jewish public believe a mobilization of this kind will cause the postponement of the plan, compared to 36% who think it will nevertheless be carried out on time.
However, only 7% believe a wide-scale mobilization could totally subvert the plan`s implementation. As for the question of whether such a mass mobilization is a legitimate action by opponents of government policy in a democratic regime, it turns out that a large majority of the public 65.5% hold the view that it is indeed legitimate, with only 28.5% saying it is not (the rest have no position). Furthermore, a segmentation of the positions on this issue between supporters and opponents of the disengagement plan shows that even among the supporters a clear majority regards such an action as legitimate (61% vs. 34%), while among the opponents of the plan the corresponding rates are 74% and 20%.
Beyond, however, the possibility that the settlers and their supporters will use legitimate measures, a considerable portion of the Jewish public 40% fear that there are medium or high chances that at the moment of truth, settlers will use weapons against IDF soldiers in the course of the evacuation (55% say the chances of this are low, and 4.5% do not know). Interestingly, the fear of use of weapons by the settlers is higher among the supporters of the disengagement plan (48%) than among its opponents (32%).
Another source of worry about the disengagement plan concerns assessments of the situation in the Gaza Strip after the departure of IDF forces. A considerable majority of the public 64% think that if the plan is ultimately carried out, the PA will not be able to establish its rule in the area and a state of chaos will reign, with violent struggles between the different organizations. Only 23% believe the Authority will succeed in establishing its rule, and 14% do not know.
The view that the PA will not be able to set up a well-functioning regime encompasses most of the opponents as well as supporters of the disengagement plan, although, perhaps not surprisingly, it is more widespread among the former. Thus, 86% of the opponents think that after the IDF withdrawal the situation will be chaos, 6% believe the Authority will be able to establish its rule, and 8% do not know. The corresponding rates among the supporters of the plan are 50%, 34%, and 16%.
Negative assessments are also widespread regarding the security situation within Israel after the withdrawal from Gaza. Thus, 63% of the entire Jewish public share the view that the chances of intensified attacks against Israel from this area (for example, Kassam missile fire) are very high or moderately high, compared to only 29% who think such chances are very low or moderately low. It is interesting that even among the plan`s supporters a majority, albeit small, shares this assessment. As expected, the majority holding this opinion among the opponents is much larger .
As for the position Israel should take regarding the future of the houses and other property of the settlers that will stay behind after the evacuation, it turns out that a small but significant majority (51% vs. 40%) believes that from the standpoint of Israel`s interests, it is preferable to reach an agreement with the PA rather than to destroy all of it.
An analysis of the findings reveals that the positions on this issue are closely related to the positions on the disengagement plan: among the supporters of the plan, 64% favor reaching a settlement with the Authority, 29% prefer destroying all the property, and 7% do not know, whereas among the opponents, 60% favor destruction, 32% prefer an agreement, and 8% do not know. Presumably, those who support reaching an agreement on the issue of the settlers` property, instead of destroying it, believe such an approach will help in establishing the PA`s rule and reduce the danger that Gaza will serve as a base for attacks against Israel.
On the background of the pessimistic assessments about the situation in Gaza after the IDF leaves, we checked the Jewish public`s views about the possibility of "third-party" involvement that would be aimed at helping the PA prevent disorder and attacks against Israel. We presented to the interviewees a list of bodies that could play such a role and asked whether each one was acceptable or unacceptable to them.
The findings show that from a list that included six bodies the United States, Russia, the Quartet, the European Union, Egypt, and the United Nations only the first is acceptable to a majority of the public, with 68% in favor, 29% against, and 3% lacking an opinion. As for all the other bodies, there are higher rates of rejection than acceptance, in the following order: Russia 70% rejection and 24% acceptance; Egypt 62.5% and 32.5%; the European Union 59% and 35%; the Quartet 55% and 38%; the United Nations 51% and 44%.
In other words, the Jewish public is prepared to trust only American involvement, while expressing distrust of all the other states and bodies included in the list. A similar pattern of opinions on other issues where the possibility of third-party involvement in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was raised, emerged in earlier inquiries in the Peace Index framework.
Indexes: Oslo General 40.3; Jews 36.8.
Negotiation: General 58.0; Jews 54.9.The Peace Index Project is conducted at the Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research and the Evans Program in Mediation and Conflict Resolution of Tel Aviv University, headed by Prof. Ephraim Yaar and Prof. Tamar Hermann. The telephone interviews were conducted by the B. I. Cohen Institute of Tel Aviv University on May 2-3, 2005, and included 578 interviewees who represent the adult Jewish and Arab population of Israel (including the territories and the kibbutzim). The sampling error for a sample of this size is about 4.5% in each direction. 
