Disgust for Israel: A Damning Arabic Poll Reveals Deepening Isolation After Iran Strike

Disgust for Israel: A Damning Arabic Poll Reveals Deepening Isolation After Iran Strike

Disgust for Israel: The aftermath of Israel’s unprecedented direct military strike on Iranian soil in April 2024 continues to reverberate across the Middle East and shape perceptions of regional security. In a striking move that backfired spectacularly, an Israeli media outlet recently conducted an Arabic-language opinion poll on social media platforms, posing a seemingly straightforward question: “After the attack on Iran, do you feel the region has become safer?”

Disgust for Israel: The Poll and its Provocative Question

The resounding, overwhelming negative response, particularly stark on the very platforms Israel hoped to leverage, serves as a potent indicator of the profound Disgust for Israel permeating the Arab world.

This rejection transcends mere political disagreement; it reflects a deep-seated alienation and a belief that Israel’s actions fundamentally destabilize the region and threaten its peoples.

The poll results expose a harsh reality: even in digital spaces where Israel attempts to shape its narrative in Arabic, it faces near-total repudiation.

The poll, reportedly initiated by the Israeli newspaper Maariv and disseminated primarily through its Arabic-language social media channels (including Twitter/X and Facebook), emerged several weeks after Israel launched missiles against targets near Isfahan, Iran.

This attack was a direct retaliation for Iran’s large-scale drone and missile barrage against Israel days earlier, which itself was retaliation for an Israeli airstrike on an Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus.

The cycle of violence had pushed the region perilously close to a wider war.

The question posed was deliberately framed: “بعد الضربة على إيران، هل تشعر أن المنطقة أصبحت أكثر أماناً؟” (“After the strike on Iran, do you feel the region has become safer?”).

This framing assumed Israel’s action was a decisive, stabilizing measure worthy of Arab approval. It implicitly positioned Israel as a guardian of regional security acting on behalf of, or at least in the interests of, others in the region.

This framing, however, collided head-on with deeply entrenched Arab perceptions.

The Avalanche of “No”: Interpreting the Results

gaza

While precise, scientific polling methodology details were scarce (common for such social media polls), the visual evidence and subsequent reporting painted an unambiguous picture:

  1. Overwhelming Rejection: On Arabic-language posts sharing the poll, the “No” (لا) option dominated responses. Estimates and screenshots circulating widely suggested upwards of 80% or more of respondents answered negatively. The comment sections were flooded with expressions of anger, condemnation of Israel, and incredulity at the premise of the question.

  2. Platform Disparity Revealing Bias: Crucially, the poll yielded significantly different results when shared on Hebrew-language platforms versus Arabic-language ones. On Hebrew channels, while still potentially showing division, the “Yes” vote was markedly higher, reflecting the Israeli domestic perspective that the strike restored deterrence and enhanced security. This stark contrast highlights the echo chamber effect and the vast gulf in perception between Israeli society and the Arab public sphere. It underscores that the Disgust for Israel is not a fringe sentiment but a mainstream Arab view.

  3. Rejection of the Premise: Many respondents didn’t merely vote “No”; they vehemently rejected the fundamental assumption that Israel could ever be an agent of regional safety. Comments emphasized that Israel is the source of instability, not its solution. Phrases like “Security from you?” and “The region was safe before the creation of Israel” were common refrains, reflecting a core belief that Israel’s very existence and actions are inherently destabilizing. This visceral Disgust for Israel stems from decades of occupation, wars, settlement expansion, and the perception of Israeli impunity.

  4. Iran Strike as Escalation, Not Resolution: The Arab public largely viewed the Israeli strike on Iran not as a necessary act of defense or a stabilizing blow, but as a dangerous escalation that increased the likelihood of catastrophic regional war. The memory of Iran’s retaliatory barrage, which saw projectiles overflying Arab capitals like Amman and provoking defensive scrambles, was fresh. The strike inside Iran was seen as recklessly poking the bear, inviting further retaliation cycles that could easily engulf neighboring states. The Disgust for Israel here is intertwined with fear of being caught in the crossfire of conflicts fueled by Israeli actions.

Why the Poll Backfired: Misreading the Arab Street

Israel’s attempt to gauge, or perhaps sway, Arab opinion via this poll fundamentally misread the mood and backfired for several reasons:

  1. Underestimating Deep-Seated Hostility: Israeli strategists, perhaps influenced by normalization deals with some Arab states (Abraham Accords), may have hoped for a more nuanced or even appreciative response. This poll proved that governmental normalization does not equate to popular Arab acceptance or approval of Israeli policies, particularly its militarism. The depth of popular Disgust for Israel, rooted in the Palestinian cause and historical grievances, remains profound and largely untouched by diplomatic agreements between elites. The sheer volume of negative responses demonstrates that this Disgust for Israel is widespread and deeply felt.

  2. The Palestinian Prism: For the vast majority of Arabs, the lens through which they view any Israeli action remains the plight of the Palestinians. The brutal war in Gaza, with its horrific civilian death toll and destruction, was ongoing when this poll was conducted. The images from Gaza saturated Arab media and social feeds. Against this backdrop, a poll asking if an attack on Iran made the region safer seemed grotesquely disconnected and offensive. How could a state inflicting such suffering on Palestinians be seen as enhancing regional security? This cognitive dissonance fueled the Disgust for Israel evident in the responses.

  3. Perception of Arrogance and Provocation: The framing of the question was perceived as arrogant and provocative. It implied Israel had the right to unilaterally determine regional security through military force and expected Arabs to be grateful. This patronizing tone, coupled with the timing amidst the Gaza carnage, ignited anger. It reinforced the perception of Israel as a colonial power acting with impunity, indifferent to Arab lives and concerns. The poll itself became an object of the very Disgust for Israel it sought to measure.

  4. Mistaking Platforms for Receptiveness: Israel has invested significantly in its Arabic-language digital diplomacy, operating numerous official and unofficial social media accounts. The decision to run this poll on these channels likely assumed a degree of captive audience or potential persuadability. Instead, it demonstrated that even on platforms where Israel has a presence, the core audience remains overwhelmingly hostile. The platforms provided the megaphone, but the message amplified was one of unified rejection and profound Disgust for Israel. The poll showed that controlling the channel doesn’t equate to controlling the narrative when fundamental alienation exists. The Disgust for Israel permeates these digital spaces despite Israel’s efforts.

The Broader Context: Israel’s Deepening Regional Isolation

Gaza War

This poll is not an isolated incident but a stark symptom of Israel’s accelerating alienation within its own region:

  1. The Gaza War’s Repercussions: The devastating Israeli campaign in Gaza has erased years of Israeli efforts to promote normalization and improve its image in the Arab world. It has unified Arab public opinion against Israel to an unprecedented degree in recent decades, triggering massive protests and overwhelming condemnation. The Disgust for Israel generated by Gaza is visceral and all-encompassing.

  2. Stalled Normalization: While the Abraham Accords remain formally intact, the Gaza war has frozen any further normalization (e.g., with Saudi Arabia) and made existing agreements deeply unpopular within the signatory states. Public pressure on Arab governments to distance themselves from Israel is immense. The poll results reflect this popular pressure and the Disgust for Israel that underpins it.

  3. The “Fortress Israel” Mentality: Israel’s focus on military solutions, its rejection of a viable Palestinian state, and its increasing domestic shift towards hardline nationalism foster a “fortress mentality.” This inward focus often neglects or dismisses the necessity of building genuine acceptance and security through political engagement and compromise with its neighbors. The poll is a brutal reminder that military prowess does not buy legitimacy or safety in the long term. The Disgust for Israel it revealed is a significant strategic liability.

  4. Iran’s Narrative Gains: While Arab publics are not uniformly pro-Iran, Israel’s actions often inadvertently bolster Tehran’s narrative of presenting itself as the primary resistance force against Israeli aggression and Western hegemony. The strike on Iran, followed by this tone-deaf poll, plays into this narrative for many Arabs frustrated by their own governments’ perceived inaction on Palestine. The intensity of the Disgust for Israel makes alternative narratives, even from actors like Iran, momentarily more palatable to some segments of the public.

Beyond “No”: The Sentiments Expressed – A Chorus of Disgust

Analyzing the comments accompanying the poll reveals the multifaceted nature of the Disgust for Israel:

  • Moral Revulsion: Outrage at the violence in Gaza, accusations of war crimes, and condemnation of Israeli policies towards Palestinians. “Safety? While you slaughter children in Gaza?” was a common sentiment. This moral dimension is central to the Disgust for Israel.

  • Perceived Hypocrisy: Accusations that Israel cries victim while being the primary aggressor, violates international law with impunity, and then expects praise for military actions. The poll question epitomized this hypocrisy for many.

  • Fear of Escalation: Genuine fear that Israel’s actions drag the region into wider conflicts with devastating consequences for Arab populations. “You are bringing war to our doorstep.”

  • Rejection of Israeli Role: Firm dismissal of any notion that Israel has a legitimate role in defining or ensuring regional security. “The region needs security from Israel, not by Israel.”

  • Solidarity with Iran (on this issue): While complex, many comments expressed solidarity with Iran specifically as a target of Israeli aggression, framed within the broader context of opposing Israeli militarism. “Attacking a sovereign state, you are the threat.” This sentiment is less about affection for Iran and more about the depth of Disgust for Israel and opposition to its unilateral military actions.

  • Cynicism about Israeli Motives: Viewing the poll itself as propaganda, an attempt to justify aggression or test Arab reactions, rather than a genuine inquiry. This cynicism reflects a deep distrust born of the pervasive Disgust for Israel.

A Stark Lesson in Perception and Reality

War

The Israeli Arabic-language poll on regional safety after the Iran strike stands as a remarkable case study in the chasm between Israeli self-perception and Arab public opinion. The near-unanimous negative response, particularly on the platforms Israel targeted, delivers an unambiguous verdict: profound Disgust for Israel defines the Arab public sphere. This disgust is not merely political disagreement; it is moral outrage, fear, and a fundamental rejection of Israel’s role as a security provider or legitimate arbiter in the region.

The poll’s failure is multi-layered:

  1. Strategic Miscalculation: It grossly underestimated the depth and universality of Arab hostility, especially amidst the Gaza war.

  2. Narrative Failure: It provided a platform not for Israel’s desired message, but for the amplification of the very condemnation it faces.

  3. Revelation of Isolation: It starkly illustrated that even Israel’s own Arabic-language outreach channels cannot mask or overcome the foundational alienation felt by the vast majority of Arabs. The Disgust for Israel is too deep, too visceral, and too widely shared.

The results scream a truth Israeli leaders seem reluctant to acknowledge: military strikes, however precise or justified they may seem domestically, do not enhance long-term security when they deepen hatred and alienation among neighbors.

Deterrence built solely on fear is brittle.

True security requires addressing the root causes of conflict, foremost among them the Palestinian question and the occupation, which remain the core fuel for the Disgust for Israel.

Until Israel confronts this reality and engages in genuine political processes based on equality and justice, polls like this will continue to yield the same damning result:

a resounding “No” echoing a region’s profound rejection and Disgust for Israel. The digital avalanche of condemnation serves as a chilling indicator of Israel’s deepening isolation and the perilous path its current policies continue to forge.

The Disgust for Israel, as this poll so vividly demonstrated, is not just an opinion; it’s a formidable political and strategic reality.

source: raialkhalij