How Israelis See Obama

It’s not what you think -- and it may not even matter, compared to how they see Israel's own situation.

BY AMJAD ATALLAH, DANIEL LEVY | DECEMBER 11, 2009

However, when it comes to building peace in the long term, the poll's other findings on Israeli public opinion may prove even more consequential for an administration that finds itself at an impasse. According to the poll, Israelis would support any peace agreement reached under Netanyahu by a margin of 59 to 34 percent. They even favor a U.S.-defined peace deal, like the one attempted by President Bill Clinton at Taba in 2001, by 53 to 45 percent. The only problem is that Israelis do not seem to think that peace with the Palestinians and neighboring states is an urgent priority or that its absence carries any sufficiently immediate and negative consequences. 

So in effect, Obama's popularity or lack thereof has little to do with the prospects for peace. The real problem is, simply, Israelis are happy with the situation as it stands and have little motivation to change it. Only by a small majority of 4 percentage points do Israelis believe that they cannot shoulder the economic and security burdens of the status quo, and even fewer think that U.S. support for Israel will decline if there is no peace (by 49 to 47 percent, within the margin of error).

Given the daunting challenge of moving a number of the 500,000 Israeli settlers living beyond the green line, the country's original 1949 borders, (or leaving some under a future Palestinian sovereignty), one begins to understand why the current cost-benefit calculation weighs in favor of maintaining the status quo.

If there's any encouraging news for the Israeli government in our results, it's the pronounced Israeli capacity for pragmatism. This is evidenced in Israeli popular support for Netanyahu's negotiations with Hamas over a prisoner exchange, border-crossing issues, and informal understandings on a cease-fire. Although only 36 percent of Israelis consider their own prime minister "honest and trustworthy," according to our results (this compares with 55 percent who attribute these qualities to Obama), a commanding 69 percent approve of Netanyahu's handling of security. Indeed, the poll suggests that Netanyahu has far more wiggle room on the Palestinian issue than is generally assumed.

In the end, the poll shows that Israelis care most about regular bread-and-butter issues. When asked what would be their top reasons to support a peace, a "more normal life for our children" and "economic growth" come in first and second (polling 50 and 37 percent, respectively). Even recognition by 22 Arab states -- so ardently pursued by the administration and promoted by Congress -- motivates only 15 percent of Israelis.

In other words, Israelis see few reasons not to continue the occupation and are perhaps being offered the wrong kinds of incentives for choosing a different path. The behavior of Israel's leadership is consistent with a short-term political calculation that Israelis aren't willing to disrupt the present scenario. Continuing and even entrenching the occupation, for example, avoids hard and coalition-threatening political choices at home, incurs the most minimal international and domestic costs, and is not seen to defer new and meaningful benefits that Israelis would enjoy conditional on a peace deal. For any new peace effort to have a chance at breaking the logjam, then, its starting point will need to be the creation of a new architecture of incentives and disincentives -- and Obama's popularity, or lack thereof, will be left up to the people of Virginia.

JONATHAN NACKSTRAND/AFP/Getty Images

 

Amjad Atallah and Daniel Levy are co-directors of the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation.

BURNINGCHROME

12:29 AM ET

December 12, 2009

A few corrections

1) There is NO 1949 Border! It was an armistice line!, in this case between Jordan and Israel, and that armistice agreement specifically rejected the then existing green line as a border. I would hope that as representatives of a think tank you would at least get your facts correct.

2) Israel doesn't contemplate a return of 500,000 Israelis because most are in the so called large 'settlement blocks' that will become part of Israel.

The land these 'settlements' sit on, populated or otherwise would never be turned over to the PA. Contrary to the myth that they are the best agricultural lands in the West Bank, they are rocky mountain tops that have been uninhabited over the last 6000 years because they have no value as farm land. They are composed primarily of rock and there is little or no water resources to support a population until the introduction of modern technology.

The only real value these hills have is strategic in that they look down on central area of Israel where the majority of the population lives. Control of these mountain tops by an adversary puts the Israeli army at a severe disadvantage and exposes the entire population of central Israel to an unacceptable risk.

It should also be noted that when the original UN partition plane was drawn up these mountains were assigned to Israel not the Palestinians.

There is a very broad consensus that these strategic heights will stay in Israel no matter what. That is the view from the left to the right in Israel. Even the extreme left about 3% of the electorate where there is some support for the armistice line being the border is split on this.

That is where the so called Taba understandings come to play. Israel will keep 2-3% of the West Bank and swap territory.

Keeping these mountain tops is consistent with UN resolution 242 which guarantees Israel a defensible border and numerous understandings between Israel and the US.

The presentation of the settlements as a zero sum game is a false presentation of the conflict. The settlements are not all the same nor do they all have support from the population. The nation supports the main settlements on the strategic highlands and wants the rest to disappear.

The feelings mainly on the Israeli side is that this is going to be a very contentious withdrawal. So absent a Peace Agreement with the PA or a nascent Palestinian state most people don't want all the trouble such a huge civil confrontation will invariably set off with out something to show for it. It is not that people are satisfied with the status quo, so wish to maintain it.

If the Palestinians would sign a peace agreement today, tomorrow Israelis will assume the full burden of Israelis outside the borders and any civilian upheaval that encompasses.

 

SCOTTGOOSE

3:07 AM ET

December 14, 2009

Saved me the trouble of ranting

Well bowled, sir. You said more or less what I would have. Good to see a pro-israeli FP reader. They seem few and far between, based solely on the amount of pro-palestinian rantings compared to the rare Israeli counter-arguments. Good show sir.

 

COMMENTATOR

7:03 PM ET

December 15, 2009

Why few pro-Israeli voices here

The reason there are so few pro-Israeli voices in the commentary here is that unlike the magazine itself, the comments section relating to Israel has largely become the home for thinly disguised anti-semitic screeds, and irrational Israel-bashing without a scintilla of evidence. Repeated exposure of the lies gets ignored; in the end what these polemicists write will be suitable only for wrapping fish, and has little influence on policy. If Israel has thrived despite the Arabists in the State Department, it can survive a few special pleaders here.

Lies and falsehoods are common among the commentators, and we should not be surprised at the bias of some of the editors and columnists; after all even the distinguished Council on Foreign Relations (of which I was a member before retiring) had its Henry Siegman.
The falsehoods and suppression of material facts here go pretty much unchallenged by any semblance of a moderator. The Palestinian "narrative", which is filled with outright historical and legal falsifications, finds sympathy among a noticeable portion of the magazine's editorial staff. For example, that they should provide a home for such as Steven Walt, who has publicly discredited himself repeatedly on Israel-related matters, is evidence not of balance or fairness but of bias.

 

COMMENTATOR

7:58 PM ET

December 15, 2009

Someone is either ignorant or careless

One would think that the original writers, Atallah and Levy (presumably and Arab and a Jew) of the piece that started this thread, if they claim to be expert on Israel, the West Bank and Gaza (in which areas Hebrew is a lingua franca), would know at least enough rudimentary Hebrew to recognize that the photograph used is reversed (based on the caption in the photo).

 

F1FAN

10:52 AM ET

December 14, 2009

I stopped caring long ago

About Israelis that is. They don't care about us in America all they want is our tax dollars to flow into their pockets uninterrupted and unconditionally.

 

JAYSONREX

6:35 PM ET

December 14, 2009

I also stopped caring about ... ignorant opinions

I don't know much about tax dollars but as far as OIL dollars are concerned, Americans and Europeans are supporting ALL Arab-Muslim countries "uninterrupted and unconditionally" and, I might add, 'unlimitedly'.
In return and as a sign of eternal gratitude, we managed to aquire, as a Christian nation, an implacable enemy that goes by the name Islam.
Maybe giving reality rather than fantasy a little more credence will help people better understand what truly happens in this world.

 

F1FAN

9:16 AM ET

December 15, 2009

I agree with that

America should be seeking it's energy independence as well. Giving money and weapons to the Israel does not help the US in that respect.

It is very interesting that your reaction to my indifference to Israel makes you automatically assume that I am somehow some sort of Islamist.

Unlike you, I am a loyal American and I believe that American tax dollars and foreign policy should first and foremost serve Americans, not Israel, not Saudi Arabia, not Pakistan. American foreign policy should be continually reassessed and adjust foreign aid for just how much support we get from the countries it goes to. We give Israel billions and get nothing in return, the same goes for Pakistan , Iraq, Afghanistan................

 

CARTILAGE

3:48 PM ET

December 15, 2009

tax dollars

Yes they want our tax dollars, but they want it in euros. why don't americans know this? yes that's right, our charity to israel is no good unless it's handed over to them in euros. for israelis, beggars can be choosers. and for uneducated christian that is complaining about the islam enemy, read a history book and then come back and make an informed statement. fox news doesn't cut it anymore

 

COMMENTATOR

7:28 PM ET

December 15, 2009

What we get in return

"We give Israel billions and get nothing in return"

We get more Israeli Nobel Laureates per capita than any country other than the US. We get massive breakthroughs in medicine and pharmaceuticals that save hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of American lives. We get repeated breakthroughs in science and technology. We get some of the world's greatest musicians, who entertain Americans and contribute to American musical life and teaching. We get major agricultural breakthroughs, shared with the US and the world. We get modern computers based on Intel's latest family of chips invented in Israel. We get high security based on Israeli cryptographic research. We get a shining example of economic development which brings credit to us and discredits dictatorial regimes who eventually will have to answer to their citizens.

Uh, er, um, what have the Palestinians done for us lately except for killing Americans, including American civilian women, children, and the elderly? The Palestinians can't even get along with their "brother Arabs". They tried to overthrow the government of Kuwait and got kicked out. They tried to overthrow the government of Jordan and got kicked out. They tried to overthrow the government of Lebanon and got kicked out. Wherever they go, there they are. Maybe, just maybe, the problem is the Palestinians, not the Israelis.

 

SABABA03

9:55 PM ET

January 1, 2010

When it comes to knowing the act

I hope it is not late to post another Israeli pov.
One important element to which many readers perhaps are not aware of.

You see, on one side you have us the Israelis (I am an American-Israeli). We live in a system where freedom of expression, and independence of press (except on matters of national security) rain supreme. We have access to all publication, where we can read all opinions and pov's, then judge for ourselves. In Israel there are no taboos on any particular subject (again, except for national security). Politics, social, race, and religion, all open topics to debate, agree or disagree.

Since almost all of us also serve in the military, we do come in contact with the Palestinians in the territories, as part of the service. We talk to them, listen to their grievances, and wishes. We also get to listen to what they really think of us as Jews. Although, as solders we can not engage in matters of state politics, we do nonetheless, gain direct and personal experience with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In lieu of all these facts, our government can not mislead us on what really is happening "over there". Therefore, we mostly post here from our own eye witness account, rather then a government dictated propaganda.

On the other side thought, you have the Arab & Islamic populations. all of whom live in one sort of dictatorship or another. Since the amount of true information available to them (as well to those who live in the west) is severely controlled, by and large, they post opinions which has been packages for them by the massive Arab propaganda machine.

There is another element here. true to the form "if it bleeds, it leads (or sells more copies)". Since more blood was spilled in Gaza then in Sderot, western publication like FP rush to join the chorus.

 

WESTCOASTRESEARCHER

3:01 AM ET

January 2, 2010

Pro Israel ....the world needs more leaders like Bebe Netanyahu

~Obama needs to listen closely to Netanyahu. (experience matters)~

-

Benjamin Netanyahu is, in my opinion, a fantastic leader. When I first heard him speak in the 90s, I thought how refreshing it was to hear a blunt and stern voice. The jewish people of Israel have had to put up with so much crap from Arabs and muslims....you just have to wonder at how amazingly patient the technically superior Israelis have been... not responding more forcefully. The fact that Iran is either very near...or...already has weapons of mass destruction...AND THEY VOW TO DESTROY ISRAEL ? .....good lord.
-
Pounce !
-
I think the time is very near where the Iranian leader, mouse that he is, will have to be taught a lesson. Barking and loud dogs tend to get the water hose. I hope Netanyahu strikes soon. In 1981 they did just that and it proved to be profoundly important. I wish we lived in a more peaceful world, but people like the Palestinians and the Taliban still exist. They strike first almost always. Thank God they both have very low intellectual capacity toward engineering and weaponry.....Call it Karma....The fact that Iran is rapidly increasing their capacity for nuclear grade materials production..that alone should be a strong impetus for a laser strike in the two locations where we know they are manufacturing currently....as well as where it looks like they are building their newest "secret" location.
-
It is clear that Obama is not strongly pro-Israel, eventhough he claimed it in the election. The Israeli people know this all too well, but like many moderate Republicans like myself, we keep hoping Obama will see the light and become a "tough realist". Obama's penchant for thoughtful analysis seems to lead directly toward stilted paralysis. I grew very tired of Bush. He nearly detroyed the Republican party. I hope Obama does better and finds some toughness and rigidity in his spine. I really do.
-
Israel should strike NOW ! (we, under Obama, are rather feckless)