Poll East Jerusalem Arabs prefer to live in Israel then a Palestinian State

Hi,

Interesting poll that was done and it begs to ask the question - has anyone asked the Palestinians what they want? And why?

Poll: One-third of East Jerusalem Arabs would rather live in Israel than Palestine

In new survey, 40% of East Jerusalem residents say they are willing to relocate if their neighborhoods become part of a future Palestinian state.

By Natasha MozgovayaTags: Israel news East Jerusalem Middle East peace

Arab residents of East Jerusalem are divided on whether they would want Israeli or Palestinian citizenship should a future Palestinian state be created, suggests a new poll released on Wednesday in Washington.

The survey, conducted by Pechter Middle East Polls in partnership with the Council on Foreign Relations, asked a simple question that the leaders both in Israel and the Palestinian authority seem to ignore all too often: What do the people themselves want? And the people seem confused.

When asked if they preferred to become a citizen of Palestine, with all of the rights and privileges of other citizens of Palestine, or a citizen of Israel, only 30 percent chose Palestinian citizenship – as compared to 35 percent that chose Israeli citizenship. Another 35 percent either had no answer or declined to provide it.

A follow up question asked respondents if “most people in your neighborhood” would prefer to become citizens of Palestine or of Israel: 31percent thought that most people prefer Palestinian citizenship; 39 percent - Israeli citizenship; and 30 percent, once again, declined to answer or said they didn’t know.

When asked if they would move to a different location inside Israel, if their neighborhood became part of Palestine, 40 percent said they were likely to move to Israel, and 37percent said they will not move. In comparison, 27percent said they are likely to move to Palestine if their neighborhood became part of Israel, and 54percent said they will not move.

When asked to provide the top reasons they chose one citizenship over the other, those who chose Israeli citizenship stressed freedom of movement in Israel, higher income, better job opportunities and Israeli health insurance.

Those who chose Palestinian citizenship referred to nationalism and patriotism. Both groups, in each possible scenario, expressed concern over the possibility of losing access to the Al Aqsa Mosque because it’s unclear where the permanent border will be.

Among other concerns about becoming Palestinian citizens that respondents cited were losing access to jobs and free movement in Israel, losing government provided health care, unemployment and disability benefits, and municipal services.

Those who chose to be Israeli citizens are concerned about discrimination, obstacles to receive building permits, problems with visiting relatives and friends in Palestine, and possible moral misconduct of the kids.

"I assume the Palestinian leadership wouldn’t be too happy about the results," Dr. David Pollock, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute, who supervised the survey and analyzed it, told Haaretz.

"But I think the results are very credible and solid. I was there supervising the survey in Jerusalem in November and I am very confident in the results," Pollock said, adding that he felt "the main reason so little attention was paid to the opinion of people living there is because people were nervous to find answers to these questions."

"The Palestinian leadership might have been nervous because they understood these Palestinians have special benefits and interests not to lose these benefits," Pollock added, saying that "from an Israeli point of view – people are more interested in the political significance of the city than perceptions of the Palestinians who live there."
"Neither side had obvious short term interests in finding out what was under the surface," he added.

"A Palestinian expert and colleague of mine suggested to me that he accepts the results and takes it as a signal that the Palestinian Authority must convince more Palestinians that they can provide employment opportunities and services as well as Israel can – it’s a practical kind of challenge," Pollock said.

"From the Israeli point of view it’s kind of a mixed message – on the one hand for the Israelis who’d like to keep these neighborhoods forever it’s probably a pleasant surprise that a high percentage of Palestinians are willing to accept that," the senior researcher said, adding, however, that, "on the other hand around half of the Palestinians in East Jerusalem perceive that they are subject to significant amount of discrimination."

The Israeli government "should decide if they are indeed willing to integrate 270 thousand Palestinians," Pollack added.

"There is a real discrepancy between what policy-makers here, in Israel and in the territories assume about the Palestinians of East Jerusalem and what they actually want. I think that everyone – Israelis, Palestinians, other Arabs – should pay attention to these results," Pollock said.

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Stewart Mills on January 15, 2011 at 3:58pm

And what about that poll in WB, Gaza and Silwan?...

And what did the poll say for those who live in the West Bank what they would like? Or how about those in Gaza under siege? What did the poll say about those being evicted from their lands in Silwan? What did that poll say about the number of Israelis supporting transfer?

And why is it that so many Palestinian Jerusalemites have maintained their status as residents and not Israeli citizens?

And what did the poll say about the reasons why such a high percentage of Palestinian from East Jerusalem have refused Israeli citizenship? Granted there has been a nominal increase, in applications for citizenship. Compare this to the revocation of Palestinian Jerusalemites residency in the thousands in 2008. What I want to see is Government figures of the actual number of Palestinian Jerusalemites who are citizens and who are residents?

Wiki gives some figures

But I wanted some from UNISPAL, BADIL and PASSIA but no real figures. I'll have to keep looking..

PASSIA > Facts and Figures for Jerusalem, 2007

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dan Smith on January 15, 2011 at 5:52pm

Some very good questons and I would be happy to respond if I actually had any of the figires mentioned. But after you wrote all that, you have still to answer the question proposed here " Interesting poll that was done and it begs to ask the question - has anyone asked the Palestinians what they want? And why?"\I look forward to your unbias opinion, thanks,

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Basil Keilani on January 16, 2011 at 10:49pm

The fact of the matter is that Israel, the occupying entity, is more prosperous than the Palestinian one.

It would be like asking an Indian about living in Britain rather than India during the British Empire. Some would answer in Britain. Palestinians are economically under the strong influence and control of Israel.

Thus trying to act smug and toot the horn of the Israeli man's burden versus his poor Semitic relation, the Palestinians makes no sense. It harks to the old British and European idea of superiority and how the occupied would love to be them. There is nothing civilized in subjugating others and building walls, annexing their lands. People want to take care of their families. When people say they want an unbiased opinion often want to hear the opinion that fits their agenda, and ignore that things don't happen in a vacuum, that there is an occupation, economic circumstances, uncertainty. Many people are afraid of change. Many German Jews didn't want to leave Germany after 1933. It didn't mean they were right and shouldn't have fled. It's just an opinion poll where a minority are not so certain they would be better off under the Palestinian leadership in terms of their well-being. We would need to know more about the questions asked.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dan Smith on January 17, 2011 at 9:00am

"Many German Jews didn't want to leave Germany after 1933." - Are you insane? seriously... You would dare try to compare Nazi Germany to the situation in East Jerusalem? The Nazi forced Jews to walk around with stars, beat them in the street and soon after took them by trains to gas chambers and gased them, shot them, burnt them to death. Systematic murder... YOU HAVE THE NERVE to compare such things... you should be embarrassed, I am try disgusted by such a comment and it just show your ignorance...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Basil Keilani on January 17, 2011 at 6:54pm

Give me a break about your disgust. You should save your disgust as Norman Finkelstein would say for your own Apartheid state that demolishes peoples homes in front of their children on their own land! That's what your state does. In 1933, people were not wearing stars in Germany. That came later. My point was Jews also voted for Adolf Hitler and were deluded into supporting him. British Indians in some cases if polled in some areas would have preferred to be part of the British Empire or some Algerians would have preferred to be part of occupying France or the same for Morocco. It doesn't make the colonialism correct.

Some slaves in America maybe had misgivings about being freed as slaves. It doesn't change or wash away the sins of the occupation is the point. Your country talks about

transferring Arab-Israelis, has destroyed an Arab-Israeli village. Is that being a role model, a paradigm of tolerance? Save your disgust for the crying Palestinian children left without homes after they are destroyed. That's where your disgust should be.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Linda Feldman on January 18, 2011 at 8:11am

The contention that Jews supported Hitler would insinuate that they were morons. Even the most rabidly nationalist Jews in the Weimar period--the Deutschnationalen--shied away from Hitler because of his racist policies.

According to Ernest Hamburger, a former Weimar legislator and board member of the postwar Leo Baeck Institute, 60 percent of German Jews supported the Centre Party and a further 30 percent supported left-wing parties in the elections of 1932 and 1933. Historian Donald Niewyk also points to the centre and left as recipients of Jewish voter support.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Linda Feldman on January 18, 2011 at 7:59am

As a matter of fact, many Germany Jews did want to flee after 1933, and quite a lot of them were successful in doing so. The problem was getting countries to accept them. The bordering countries (France, Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, Czechoslovakia and Switzerland) were preferred destinations until Nazi expansion turned them into traps. Poorer German Jews did not have the option of emigration, since wealth was to key to both leaving (what you had to leave behind) as well as arriving (what you had to give the host country in order to gain legal admittance).

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dan Smith on January 18, 2011 at 9:13am

I appreciate your comments but disturbs me to even give any sort of validation to compare the two situations...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Linda Feldman on January 18, 2011 at 3:23pm

Dan,

Let me raise two brief points.

1) My comments were intended as corrective to Basil's arguments. Quite simply,on two points he was wrong. To let them stand uncorrected would give credence to them, so I spoke up. That is scarcely a validation of what he was arguing.

2) Your point about comparing the two situations, while emotionally understandable, is not validated in practise, for any two objects, be they material or metaphysical, can be subject to a process of comparison. If I choose to compare oranges and zebras, I may find more differences than points of intersection, but that is no impediment to undertaking the comparison. The only recourse when faced with a comparison one finds objectionable is to point out its fallacies, not to belittle the person making the argument.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dan Smith on January 18, 2011 at 4:05pm

I have to disagree on the second point.

It is an attempt to use genocide for political gain... It is discussing and bares zero comparison.....

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Basil Keilani on January 16, 2011 at 10:42pm

The problem with the poll is this done while Palestinians are under occupation, there is not much of a state, Palestine is in shambles, divided and 1/3rd is not the majority. The question is how were these polls conducted? How were the questions asked? What was the methodology. Was there a political reason behind doing this? I suspect that. Palestinians do not like the Israeli occupation including in East Jerusalem, but they are not sure about being under the Palestinian Authority.

They feel insecure either way. They are not glorifying Israel, be certain of that.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by TONY RANSOM on January 16, 2011 at 11:33pm

Occupation is such an ugly word and yes Palestine has been occupied for well over 2000 years and yet no one claimed ownership to it other than the Jews: not even Jordan that has been in occupation of this land between 1948 and 1967.

I submit that rather than bandy about catch phrases without any meaning or substance we call this area disputed. It was agreed by the formulators of 242 in 1967 that Israel may in fact have a better claim than either Jordan and Egypt and the Palestinians did not even warrant a mention by the UN. How do you explain that?