To get a glimpse at how peace poll processors work, consider the latest “Peace Index” public opinion poll released yesterday by Tel Aviv University, announcing that — by re-framing the question with great adjectives and verbs — the Israeli public can be converted from (a) an “overwhelming and consistent majority” against returning the Golan Heights to Syria into (b) a public “no longer clearly against an agreement:”
On the issue of the negotiations with Syria, it turns out the overwhelming and consistent majority that has been found over the years opposing a return of the Golan Heights to Syria in exchange for a peace agreement is considerably narrowed if the question is formulated in up-to-date and regional terms.
Indeed, in many past measurements, the most recent of which was last month, when the question was presented as: “For a full peace treaty with Syria would you support or oppose a full withdrawal from the Golan Heights ?” a clear-cut majority of 75% opposed the treaty.
However, when we asked about support or opposition to an Israeli-Syrian peace agreement that would include transferring sovereignty over the Golan to Syria under these conditions: “appropriate security arrangements, demilitarization, allowing most of the Israeli settlements and enterprises on the Golan to continue to exist for many years, Israeli control over the Sea of Galilee, Syria breaking off relations with Iran and clamping down on Hizballah and Hamas,” public opinion is no longer clearly against an agreement but, instead, divided: 45% of the public now supports such an agreement while 47% oppose it.
So you can turn a “clear-cut majority of 75%” against a full withdrawal from the Golan Heights — reflecting the “overwhelming and consistent majority” found “over the years” and as recently as “last month” — into only 47% against (and 45% for) by framing it as a withdrawal with “appropriate” security arrangements, retention of Golan settlements for “many” years, an unenforceable promise of “breaking off” relations with Iran, culminating with the old reliable, evergreen, endlessly recyclable promise: “clamping down” on terrorists.
And they still can’t get a majority, or even a plurality, to buy it. But they can announce the public is “no longer clearly against an agreement.”