Jerusalem — In previous decades, an American president who pressured Israel to freeze settlement growth, as President Obama has done, would have riled large sections of Israel’s Jewish population. But public sympathy for settlers and the settlements is currently at an all-time low, adding a new dimension to the sometimes tense relationship between Washington and Jerusalem.
Pollsters at Tel Aviv University found on June 1 that the majority of Israelis are prepared to dismantle the settlements outside the large blocks that Israel is expected to keep in any agreement with the Palestinians. The same pollsters, who survey the Israeli public monthly, consistently find that a majority of Israelis — almost two-thirds — consider the settlements a liability rather than an asset.
In the Israeli mainstream there has been a “disassociation” from the settlements and settlers — in other words, an “absence of strong feeling” toward either, said Daniel Schueftan, director of the National Security Studies Center at the University of Haifa.
Further neutralizing opposition to Obama’s insistence on curbing “natural growth” is the general sense of lethargy in Israel. Characterized by disillusionment with the established paths of both left and right, “Israelis are generally worn out, and in the same way that today they won’t take to the streets calling for peace, they are not going to get up and fight for the settlements,” said Mitchell Barak, CEO of Keevoon Research, Strategy & Communications.
Many experts suggest that the relationship of mainstream Israel to settlers and settlements has undergone a 180-degree turn in the past two decades. “For a long time the settlers were seen among the general Israeli public as the new pioneers, going to settle the land in hard conditions, and there was appreciation,” Barak said. “But in recent years the public has become far less supportive.”
While settlements have provoked strong criticism from some on the left ever since they were established, from the start of the occupation in 1967 until the outbreak of the first intifada in 1987, the Israeli mainstream was broadly supportive. The consensus began to erode, undermined during debates on “land for peace” and as the Oslo process took hold.
What Schueftan calls the “disassociation” from settlers and the settlements was cemented during and after the second intifada, when large sections of the population no longer seemed to accept the original security rationale for settlement activity. Today, the public believes that “settlements did not stop terror and they use up Israeli resources,” said Tel Aviv University political scientist Tamar Hermann, who is in charge of her institution’s monthly opinion polls.
Another contrast between original settlement policy and today’s reality is that settlements were originally viewed as a national project, whereas now they are increasingly seen as the sectarian interest of the religious right.
The shifts in attitude have taken place toward both large settlement blocks and (in an even more marked manner) outlying settlements. Regarding practical action, though, the public draws a line between the two, and is prepared to see the outlying ones dismantled before anything happens to the larger blocks. Israelis would still need to be convinced that their country is “getting something in return” for any major evacuations, but there is no major emotional or political attachment to overcome, said Schueftan, who is a former senior security adviser to numerous Israeli prime ministers and widely regarded as the man who placed disengagement and the separation barrier on the political agenda.
One factor contributing toward this absence of strong feeling is the fact that the average Israeli is more likely to travel internationally than to visit the territories. Last year, when polling company Ma’agar Mohot, commissioned by Peace Now, asked people whether, in recent years, they had visited the Palestinian-controlled West Bank, 73% of respondents said they had not, while in the years of the occupation, tourism there was commonplace.
Settlers are acutely aware that this works against them, and last October the settler umbrella body, the Council of Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria, launched an annual $1.5 million public relations campaign to lure vacationing Israelis to the West Bank.
But those efforts have been drowned out by the fact that, in the past year, the West Bank has become increasingly violent, or as one lawmaker described last September, “like the Wild West.” This has included violence by Palestinians, such as a fatal attack on a 13-year-old Jewish boy in Bat Ayin in April, and an intentional upturn in the use of violence by some settlers.
Last summer radical settlers introduced “price tag,” a new campaign intended to disrupt evacuations of illegal settlement outposts by wreaking havoc on roads, burning fields, and attacking Palestinian people and property.
In a single day on June 1, as Benjamin Netanyahu pushed ahead with his promise to evacuate outposts, this strategy went into overdrive. Settlers began blocking roads and stoning Palestinian cars near Karnei Shomron, Kedumim and Yitzhar and Palestinians responded by throwing rocks at the settlers. Olive groves and fields belonging to Palestinian residents of Burin, near Yitzhar, were torched, allegedly by settlers. After soldiers and police removed three caravans from the Nahalat Yosef outpost, near Elon Moreh, settlers retaliated later in the day by torching Palestinian fields at various locations in the northern West Bank. In a statement sent to reporters, the perpetrators said this was “the price for harming our sacred land.”
Palestinians torched a Jewish field at the Havat Gilad outpost; settlers and Palestinians began throwing rocks at each other on the road near Yitzhar, and a group of young settlers blocked the main Jerusalem-Tel Aviv highway near the entrance to Jerusalem to protest the outpost evacuations.
Some settlers have also created conflict with police and soldiers. During the June 1 settler actions, lawmaker Michael Ben-Ari of the National Union alliance was arrested after he climbed onto the van in which police had locked a settler and refused to get off, claiming parliamentary immunity. Ben-Ari is now demanding a police investigation into his treatment, arguing he was beaten as he was removed from the van.
Such violence tends to alienate the Israeli mainstream. “When they start to clash with Israeli forces, they clash with people who the public think represent what is best for Israeli society and people who they think they have a certain sanctity attached to them,” said Ephraim Yaar, head of Tel Aviv University’s conflict resolution program.
Contact Nathan Jeffay at jeffay@forward.com.
The Israeli public votes in a general election. In the most very recent election it returned a majority of parties who are pro-settlement, despite that a significant part ofthe population of voters is Arab who oppose the State, let alone the settlements.
Biased polls by biased pollsters are not democracy; they are simply lies.
If it is true that Jews (actually secular people with Jewish last names) would place their love of Hussein Obama over Israel, Torah, and G-d, then we can only thank the Rabbis for Obama, and the other meaningless entities within organized Judaism, for these lapsed "Kumbayah" Jews.
Thanks to the "Tikkun Olam Jews," and the "I ONLY follow those portions of Torah, with which I agree Jews," we are closer to religious oblivion.
Maybe some of the ease with which people can call themselves "Rabbi" is to blame, as well.
I used to be conservative, and once even belonged to a "Deform" congregation. IMHO, those branches, are on ramps to Hell.
I do subscribe to "Jerusalem, if I forget you, let my right hand lose its cunning."
As for the Rabbis for Obama, and the 78% of Jews who chose Obama over Israel and Hashem....HOW'S THAT HOPE AND CHANGE WORKING OUT FOR YOU???
It is a well-known adage in the 'polling' business that any point of view can be supported by the careful wording of polling questions. As has been said before, the only real poll that counts is the one on election day. And the recent election(poll) in Israel firmly puts the lie to the premise of this article. Such obviously slanted Liberal-Left anti-Zionist pap is standard on the Forward.
Once again "the Forward" proposes and the public disposes. You have yet to publish your leftist destructive articles that you get a resounding no to what the writer proposes.
When was the last time Jeffay was in Israel and talked to anybody that wasn't a member of "Peace Now" to find out what real Israeliwes think. Keep it up. I enjoy the rejoiners about what the Forward prints.
It must be that Mr. Jeffay is getting his information from Tel Aviv, the home of all the leftists in Israel. Fortunately, there are 5,500,000 Jews who don't live there who support overwhelmingly the right of Residents to build on disputed land won in a defensive war. It does not belong to Palestine, as there is no Palestine.
So the Israeli population voted in Meretz in the last election I guess
Wait no Meretz was crushed in the last election. Actually parties favoring settlement won the election. Bibi is Prime Minister not leader of the opposition. Their are 65 Zionist seats in favor of settlements.
Indeed even leftists like Peres oppose Obama's call to destroy all the settlements. Many Kadiman and Labor MK's oppose Obama so probably 75-80 Knesset members are pro settler.
Also people do visit the territories just not the areas controlled by the PA which is what the poll you mention was about. Something about the Arabs will kill any Jew who visits land they control might be the cause of it.
The reality is the radical left lost in Israel. Settlements will grow and expand.
Methinks Mr. Jeffay was too much in a jiffy. Here are two recent polls translation courtesy of IMRA: Poll of representative sample of Israeli adults (including Israeli Arabs) carried out by Geocartography Knowledge Group - Prof. Avi Degani - this week for Israel Television Channel One's Populitika program. results broadcast on 2 June 2009.
Will the USA of President Obama support Israel during time of war, as it did in the past? Yes 53% Only declarations 25% No 10% No opinion 12%
Will the USA intervene militarily to Israel's defense when the Iranian nuclear threat to Israel will be tangible and close or Israel is actually attacked? Yes 55% Just talk 21% No 12% No opinion 12%
Should Israel say "no" now to the US of Obama and not make any concessions to the Palestinians conditions of peace and security (on the ground) are reached? Yes 54% No 33% No opinion 13%.
In return for a peace agreement with the Palestinians that will be good for Israel would you support transferring a large portion of the territories in Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians? No 50% Yes 43% No opinion 7%
Prof. Degani noted on the program that the reply to the last question reflected a shift to the Right in Israeli public opinion as compared to the past.
Israelis) carried out by Shvakim Panorama for Israel Radio's Hakol Diburim (It's All Talk) the week of 4 June 2009 and broadcast on 4 June.
Do you support or oppose the evacuation of unauthorized outposts? For 40.1% Against 40.4% Don't know 19.5%
Do you support or oppose the American demand for a halt to construction in Judea and Samaria? Support 29.5% Oppose 55.6% Don't know 17.9%
Does President Obama give preference to the interests of the Arab states over Israel's interests? Yes 47.1% No 28.9% Don't know 24.0%
Let me make it clear that Israel will not allow ethnic cleansing in West Bank as Israel allowed in Gaza. In Gaza Jews have substantial pieces of land first bought by Tuvia Miller in Kfar Darom in Gaza. He bought 200 dunams in 1920 and the land purchased was doubled in 1926. When the strip was given to Egypt Jews were not allowed to return to their homes. In 1967 when Israel took this territory from Egypt Jews who lived in Gaza started to return to their homes. They rebuilt their homes in the same way that one will build a home in America or Europe, on private legally acquired property. In 2005 Israel decided to disengage from Gaza under the premise that those who want to stay will be allowed to do so and Palestinians will protect their security. Palestinians refused to allow any Jew to live in Gaza and for the sake of security the Jewish inhabitants of Gaza they were forcibly removed in 2005 by Israeli police. The fate of Christians in Gaza was not different. Out of 100,000 in 2002 only 5,000 are left in Gaza today. Their Churches were set on fire, schools closed, Christian land was grabbed, property stolen, women raped and men killed. Some were forced to convert to Islam. Peace did not come to Gaza as we well know. Sharon's "Gaza first" meaning West Bank second to be served to the Palestinians did not work. Gaza became a bastion of anti Israel war of attrition. Even now during cease fire there are daily attacks on Israeli civilians by Hamas, Fatah and Al-Qaeda soldiers. This cannot happen in West Bank. West Bank has large parcels of land which were legally purchased by Jews in the 1880 and beyond. Many of the towns and villages where Jews live are either on private Jewish land, public land and some on private Arab land for which Jews were ready to compensate the locals. These Jewish towns are striving communities which have a university, Ariel university, light industry, etc. About 300,000 Jews live there. These communities protect the "belly" of Israel a dire security need for the existence of the Jewish state. Israeli majority does not oppose and actually support these Ariel communities. Israel does not support illegal outposts manned by religious zealots. Usually these are two caravans on a top of a hill, nothing more. Israeli destiny cannot be dictated by any radical on the left or right. The Camp David accord suggested to return 96% of West Bank to the Palestinians and switch 4% for 4% Israeli land elsewhere. This Clinton Barak proposal still is offered today. The Israeli fence is mostly on Israeli land and provides security to Israel, reduced dramatically burglaries and car theft, reduced drug trafficking and illegal immigration. Some attribute the relative calm in the West Bank, the building of Jenin, to the fence. Our Secretary of State Mrs Clinton wants Israeli in the West Bank not to have children, not allow internal growth. This is classical ethnic cleansing. Madam Secretary should look at the experience of Gaza before making any judgements. Isaac Barr MD
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.