RSS
What Do Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank Really Think About Israel and Hamas?
Former Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh speaks during a press conference in Tehran, Iran, March 26, 2024. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Professor Khalil Shakaki’s public opinion polls made headlines last month. After revealing Hamas documents, the IDF claimed that the Palestinian terrorist organization falsified the results of the polls conducted by Shakaki in the Gaza Strip, in order to create a false representation of the Gazan public’s support for Hamas after the October 7 massacre.
Shikaki, who is considered the leading pollster of Palestinian society, heads the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) located in Ramallah, and has been conducting public opinion polls since September 1993 with the beginning of the Oslo process.
The IDF found documents stating that Hamas falsified the data regarding the Gaza Strip in a survey conducted by Shikaki in March 2024.
For example, in one of the questions in the survey, Gazans were asked whether the “decision to attack Israel on October 7 was correct.” While the results of the survey published by Shikaki showed that 71% believed that the decision was correct, Hamas documents claim that only 31% believed so.
Another question was who Palestinians would vote for in a presidential election. While the results of the survey published by Shikaki showed that Hamas candidate Ismail Haniyeh would receive 48% compared to 22% for Fatah candidate Abu Mazen, and 23% responded that they would not participate in the elections, the IDF says that Hamas documents claim that the “true results” were 21% for Haniyeh, 26% for Abu Mazen, and 52% who would not participate in the elections.
Another question examined was the preferred way to achieve the Palestinian national goals. While the results of the survey in the Gaza Strip published by Shikaki showed that the armed struggle receives 39%, peaceful popular resistance 27%, and negotiations 23%, Hamas documents claim that the “true results” were 28% for armed struggle, 21% for peaceful popular resistance, and 50% for negotiations.
Ultimately, it’s very difficult to know if the polling data in the Gaza Strip was indeed falsified as part of a Hamas influence operation to strengthen its position among Palestinian society and global public opinion.
Although Shikaki himself claims that it is unlikely that the polls were falsified, it is important to consider two things when examining the claims of forgeries.
First, the polls show that the support figures for the October 7 attack, for Hamas, and for the armed struggle among the Palestinians in the West Bank — where it is not claimed that Hamas falsified the polls — are the same and even higher than those in the Gaza Strip.
For example, a survey from March 2024 showed that 71% of Palestinians in the West Bank believe that the decision to launch the attack on October 7 was correct, while in the June 2024 poll, the figure rises to 73%. In the Gaza Strip, the “false” figure was 71% in the March 2024 survey (compared to 31% according to Hamas documents), a figure that even dropped to 57% in the June 2024 poll.
Regarding the question of the presidential elections, according to the June 2024 poll, Ismail Haniyeh receives 38% compared to 21% for Abu Mazen in the Gaza Strip, while in the West Bank the gap is larger in favor of Haniyeh, who received 46% compared to only 5% for Abu Mazen. Also, on the question of what is the preferred way to realize the Palestinian national goals, the March 2024 poll shows that while in the Gaza Strip, according to the “false” data, the armed struggle receives 39% (while according to Hamas data it is 28%), in the West Bank the figure rises to 51%.
Thus, the question arises, is Hamas also successful in falsifying the polls in the West Bank, or is it really a matter of broad popular support for Hamas? Another explanation is that after months of war with Israel because of Hamas’ massacre on October 7, the population in Gaza (which, unlike in the West Bank, has felt the results of the war) does feel differently.
Reality shows us that in the eyes of the Palestinians, Hamas is the only organization that has succeeded in posing a security challenge to Israel and hitting its soft underbelly, while the Palestinian Authority and Fatah have failed in their mission.
Second, how can the roars of joy and jubilation in the Gaza Strip in particular and the Palestinian public in general be explained in light of the barbaric terrorist attack of October 7, when many Palestinians felt that the State of Israel was about to disappear? Doesn’t Hamas want us to know that Palestinian society is a peace-loving society whose entire goal is coexistence with the State of Israel and its citizens, and it is absolutely not a barbaric society that sanctifies the murder of Jews for the past hundred years?
Unfortunately, it seems that the reality of the last hundred years is the winning proof of the question of how the Palestinians think.
Dr. Ori Wertman is a lecturer and research fellow at the University of South Wales, UK, and a research fellow at The Israel Centre for Grand Strategy- ICGS. His recent book is Israel: National Security and Securitization (Springer, 2023).
The post What Do Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank Really Think About Israel and Hamas? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
South Africa Distances Itself From Army Chief’s Pledges of Military, Political Support to Iran

Iranian Major General Amir Hatami and South African General Rudzani Maphwanya meet in Tehran to discuss strengthening military cooperation and strategic ties. Photo: Screenshot
South Africa’s army chief has faced domestic backlash after pledging military and political support to Iran during a recent visit, prompting government officials to distance themselves from his remarks over concerns they could harm Pretoria’s efforts to strengthen ties with the United States.
Members of South Africa’s governing coalition have denounced Gen. Rudzani Maphwanya, chief of the South African National Defense Force (SANDF), for his trip to Tehran earlier this week, describing his remarks as “reckless grandstanding.”
The Democratic Alliance (DA), South Africa’s second-largest party in the governing coalition, has called for Maphwanya to be court-martialed for breaking neutrality and violating military law, saying his comments had gone “beyond military-to-military discussions and entered the realm of foreign policy.”
“This reckless grandstanding comes at a time when South Africa’s relations with key democratic partners, especially the United States, are already under severe strain,” DA defense spokesperson Chris Hattingh said in a statement.
“The SANDF’s job is to lead and manage the defense forces, not to act as an unsanctioned political envoy. Allowing our most senior military officer to make partisan foreign policy pronouncements is strategically reckless, diplomatically irresponsible, and economically self-defeating,” he continued.
“South Africa cannot afford to have its international standing further sabotaged by political adventurism from the military’s top brass,” Hattingh said.
Iran and South Africa held high-level military talks earlier this week as both nations seek to deepen cooperation and strengthen their partnership against what officials called “global arrogance and aggressive colonial approaches.”
During a joint press conference with Iranian Maj. Gen. Amir Hatami, Maphwanya called for deeper ties between the two nations, especially in defense cooperation, affirming that “the Republic of South Africa and the Islamic Republic of Iran have common goals.”
“We always stand alongside the oppressed and defenseless people of the world,” the South African general said.
He also criticized Israel over the ongoing war in Gaza, expressed support for the Palestinian people, and told Iranian officials that his visit “conveys a political message” on behalf of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration.
However, shortly after Maphwanya’s remarks drew media attention, the South African government moved to distance itself from his comments, with the Foreign Affairs Ministry stating that his comments “do not represent the government’s official foreign policy stance.”
The Defense Department, which described Maphwanya’s comments as “unfortunate,” confirmed that he is now expected to meet with the Minister of Defense and Military Veterans, Angie Motshekga, upon his return to provide explanations.
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, clarified that the president was neither aware of the trip nor had he sanctioned it.
“The visit was ill-advised and more so, the expectation is that the general should have been a lot more circumspect with the comments he makes,” Magwenya told reporters during a press conference on Thursday.
“It is crucial to clarify that the implementation of South Africa’s foreign policy is a function of the presidency,” he continued. “Any statements made by an individual, or a department other than those responsible for foreign policy, should not be misinterpreted as the official position of the South African government.”
Maphwanya’s trip to Iran came after the Middle East Africa Research Institute (MEARI) released a recent report detailing how South Africa’s deepening ties with Tehran have led the country to compromise its democratic foundations and constitutional principles by aligning itself with a regime internationally condemned for terrorism, repression, and human rights abuses.
RSS
Democrat Pete Buttigieg Toughens Stance on Israel, Says He Backs Arms Embargo Following Left-Wing Pressure

Former US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg speaks during an appearance on the “Pod Save America” podcast on Aug. 10, 2025. Photo: Screenshot
Former US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, a Democrat considered by many observers to be a potential 2028 presidential candidate, has recalibrated his stance on Israel, moving from cautious language to a far more critical position after facing backlash over recent comments on the popular “Pod Save America” podcast.
In his podcast interview on Sunday, Buttigieg called Israel “a friend” and said the United States should “put your arm around” the country during difficult times. He also sidestepped a direct answer on whether the US should recognize a Palestinian state, describing the question as “profound” but offering little elaboration beyond calls for peace.
That measured approach drew sharp criticism from progressives and foreign policy voices who argued that his words were too vague amid the ongoing war in Gaza and a shifting sentiment within the Democratic party base regarding Israel. Evolving fault lines within the Democratic Party over US policy toward its staunch Middle Eastern ally signal that the issue could loom large in the 2028 presidential primary.
Following Sunday’s interview, US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) urged Buttigieg to show “moral clarity,” while Ben Rhodes, former White House aide to President Barack Obama, said he was left uncertain where the Cabinet official stood. Social media critics accused Buttigieg of offering platitudes that dodged hard policy commitments.
In a follow-up interview with Politico published on Thursday, Buttigieg took a decidedly tougher line. He said he supports recognizing a Palestinian state as part of a two-state solution and ending the decades-long practice of providing military aid to the Jewish state through sweeping, multi-year packages. Instead, he called for a case-by-case review of assistance, while emphasizing the need to stop civilian deaths, release hostages, and ensure unimpeded humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Perhaps most significantly, Buttigieg indicated support for a US arms embargo on Israel, saying he would have signed on to Sen. Bernie Sanders’s recently proposed resolution to prohibit arms sales to the Jewish state.
The shift places Buttigieg closer to the party’s progressive flank on foreign policy, a notable change for a figure often viewed as a bridge between the Democratic establishment and younger, more liberal voters. For a likely 2028 contender, the move reflects both the political risks of appearing out of step with an increasingly skeptical base and the growing influence of voices calling for sharper limits on US support for Israel.
Recent polling shows a generational divide on the issue, with younger Democrats far more likely to back conditioning aid to Israel and recognizing Palestinian statehood.
RSS
Former Algemeiner Correspondent Gidon Ben-Zvi Dies at 51

Gidon Ben-Zvi. Photo: Screenshot
Gidon Ben-Zvi, former Jerusalem Correspondent for The Algemeiner, has died at the age of 51 after a fight with cancer.
Ben-Zvi continued to write op-eds for The Algemeiner even after he left as a correspondent, including in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel.
An accomplished writer, Ben-Zvi left Hollywood for Jerusalem in 2009, moving back to Israel after spending 12 years in the United States. From 1994-1997, Gidon served in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), in an infantry unit.
In addition to writing for The Algemeiner, Ben-Zvi contributed to the Times of Israel, Jerusalem Post, CiF Watch, and blogged at Jerusalem State of Mind.
Ben-Zvi joined HonestReporting as a senior editor in June 2020, becoming an integral part of the editorial department and writing dozens of articles and media critiques for the watchdog group exposing anti-Israel bias. He moved with his family to Haifa at the end of 2022.
Ben-Zvi’s final article for HonestReporting was published in January 2025, before he took a leave of absence for health reasons. HonestReporting said in a newly published obituary that staff believed he would eventually return, noting the positivity and perseverance he exuded. The advocacy group said it learned of Ben-Zvi’s passing late last month.
Ben-Zvi leaves behind his wife, Debbie, and four young children.
All Ben-Zvi’s articles for The Algemeiner can be found here.
May his memory be a blessing.