December 20, 2016 | By Dina Smeltz

American Views of Israel Reveal Partisan and Generational Divides

By Dina Smeltz and Kelhan Martin

Donald Trump has caused controversy for his stated position to relocate the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Such a move would counter decades of State Department strategy to determine the status of Jerusalem only through peace negotiations. Moreover, Trump’s announced choice for US ambassador to Israel, bankruptcy lawyer David Friedman, has drawn criticism for Friedman’s dismissal of a two-state solution and tolerance for Israel’s building settlements in the West Bank. While a majority of Americans would prefer not to take a side in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, Republicans are more likely than ever to lean toward siding with Israel, perhaps to counter what they perceive as worsening relations between the US and Israel under President Obama’s tenure.

Most Americans Oppose Taking Sides in Conflict

While other president-elect have pledged relocation before, they soon backtracked on this idea to avoid the appearance of taking a side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Taking an impartial stance on the Israel-Palestinian conflict has aligned with at least a decade of American public opinion. A majority of Americans have consistently said that the United States should not take a side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the latest Chicago Council Survey conducted June 10 - 27, 2016, six in ten (59%) say that the US should not take either side, while three in ten (33%) say the US should take Israel’s side, and a mere four percent favor taking the Palestinian side.

However, Republicans are now more likely than ever to support taking Israel’s side (57% vs. 48% in 2014). This increased support for taking Israel’s side has come at the expense of Republicans who support taking no side in the conflict: since last asked in the 2014 Survey, Republicans have become nine percentage points less likely to favor taking no side (38% vs. 47% in 2014). There have not been any significant shifts in the views of Democrats and Independents on this question.

Republicans Perceive Worsening US-Israel Ties

Republicans could be expressing increased sympathy toward Israel in response to the strained relations between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu leading up to and after the US signing of the Iran nuclear deal (the Israeli government has repeatedly denounced the accord). A majority (52%) of Republicans believe that relations between the United States with Israel are worsening, while a plurality overall and among Democrats and Independents think relations are staying the same. In addition to this finding, the 2016 Council Survey showed that a majority of Republicans oppose the Iran deal while Democrats and Independents tend to support it (Republican 52% oppose; Democrat 22% oppose; Independent 39% oppose). 

Despite the partisan differences on taking a side and on the status of bilateral relations, overall trends from Chicago Council Survey data indicate that the relationship between the United States and Israel will continue to be viewed warmly by the American public, much as they have over the past four decades of Chicago Council polling. In 2016, on a “feeling” thermometer with a 0-100 scale, with 100 being the warmest, Americans rated Israel 58°. This reading was the fourth highest registered of nations included in the survey, preceded by Canada (81°), Australia (77°), and Japan (63°). Although all partisan groups expressed a warm view toward Israel, as has been the case in past surveys, Republicans have the warmest view (Republican 65°; Democrat 53°; Independent 58°).

As Dina wrote earlier this year in the Washington Post's Monkey Cage, despite remaining favorable toward Israel, many Democrats are critical of Israeli policy and continue to support the creation of an Independent Palestinian state (while Republicans tend to oppose a two-state solution). The 2016 Survey shows that while seven in ten Republicans (68%) believe Israel is playing a positive role in resolving key problems facing the Middle East, half of Democrats (50%) believe Israel is playing a negative role. 

A Generational Divide

Another divide in the overall feeling towards Israel to have historically emerged is that of an age gap. From 1978 through the mid-2000’s attitudes towards Israel were relatively comparable and stable across all age groups. However, by 2008 generational impressions became increasingly discernable, whereby the elderly feel considerably warmer than youths towards Israel. Today a 14° gap exists between those aged 18-29 and those over 60.

The 2016 Chicago Council Survey reveals consistent age differences of opinion on Israel, whereby the elderly are more sympathetic than youths. For example, 18-29 year olds are 20 percentage points less likely than those over 60 to say that the United States should take Israel’s side (18-29, 26%; 60+, 46%), with younger Americans instead favoring no side. Those over 60 years old are also seven percentage points more like than those aged 18-29 to say that Israel is playing a positive role in the Middle East (18-29, 50%; 60+, 57%). 

About

Dina Smeltz joined The Chicago Council on Global Affairs in February 2012 as a senior fellow in public opinion and foreign policy, and directed the Council’s 2012 survey of American public opinion (see Foreign Policy in the New Millennium).  She has nearly 20 years of experience in designing and fielding international social, political and foreign policy surveys.

As the director of research in the Middle East and South Asia division (2001-2007) and analyst/director of the European division (1992-2004) in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research at the US State Department’s Office of Research, Dina conducted over a hundred surveys in these regions and regularly briefed senior government officials on key research findings. Her experience includes mass public and elite surveys as well as qualitative research.  She has written numerous policy-relevant reports on Arab, Muslim and South Asian regional attitudes toward political, economic, social and foreign policy issues.  Her writing also includes policy briefs and reports on the post-1989 political transitions in Central and Eastern Europe, and European attitudes toward a wide range foreign policy issues including globalization, European integration, immigration, NATO, and European security.

With a special emphasis research in post-conflict situations (informally referred to as a “combat pollster”), Dina has worked with research teams in Bosnia, Kosovo, Cyprus, Israel-Palestinian Territories and in Iraq (2003-2005), where she was one of the few people on the ground who could accurately report average Iraqis impressions of the postwar situation.  In the past three years, Dina has consulted for several NGOs and research organizations on projects spanning women’s development in Afghanistan, civil society in Egypt and evaluating voter education efforts in Iraq.

Dina has an MA from the University of Michigan and a BS from Pennsylvania State University.

Feel free to email Dina with comments or questions at dsmeltz@thechicagocouncil.org

Archive

| By Karl Friedhoff

Confidence in Congress Low

As the House becomes majority Democrat, there is low confidence among the American public for Congress--and several other institutions--to shape policies that benefit the United States.



| By Craig Kafura

Public Support for Foreign Aid Programs

Past surveys have found that Americans want to cut US spending on foreign assistance and dramatically overestimate how much the US spends on those programs. When asked to construct their own US budget in the 2018 Chicago Council Survey, Americans allocate far more than the US actually spends. 




| By James Drimalla

Bleak Outlook on US-Russia Relations

A new joint report by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the Levada Analytical Center finds experts have little hope for US-Russia relations in the near future.


| By James Drimalla

Millennials' Divergent Views on Global Affairs

Attitudes and beliefs frequently change from generation to generation and a new joint study from the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, CATO Institute, and Charles Koch Institute explores generational differences between the American public on foreign policy issues.



| By Karl Friedhoff

Consequences of Success on the Korean Peninsula

The April 27 inter-Korean summit was largely successful in the eyes of the South Korean public. It has created momentary trust in North Korea, and if that lasts, may lead the public to ask serious questions about the US-South Korea alliance.


| By Karl Friedhoff

The Reunification Spectrum for South Koreans

When it comes to reunification, South Koreans take pause. A quick reunification likely has serious cosequences for the South, and is not much favored by the South Korean public. Instead, the status quo is generally favored, and those views are often conditioned by the actions of North Korea.


| By Karl Friedhoff

Diplomacy in the Air on Korean Peninsula

In the coming months, there will be a flurry of diplomatic activity on the Korean Peninsula. This is good news for many South Koreans, even though the South Korea public still has doubts about North Korea's true intentions.


| By Dzena Berbic, Craig Kafura

America and the Millennial Agenda

Millennials have become the most populous living generation in the United States, overtaking Baby Boomers and Gen Xers in becoming the largest voting body. So what do Millennials want, and what are some of their noticeable generational differences? A recent Chicago Council on Global Affairs event featuring Congresswoman Robin Kelly (D-IL2), former Congressman Bob Dold (R-IL10), POLITICO’s Natasha Korecki, and Council pollster Craig Kafura, discussed Millennial attitudes and the Millennial political agenda.



| By Craig Kafura

O Christmas Tree

Christmas is a widely-celebrated holiday in the United States. Though the Christmas tree remains a popular symbol, Americans are changing the kind of tree they use in their homes—and a small but rising number are opting to celebrate without a tree altogether.