PUBLIC OPINION AND THE POLITICS OF PEACE RESEARCH

1
PUBLIC OPINION AND THE POLITICS OF PEACE RESEARCH

• NORTHERN IRELAND, BALKANS, ISRAEL, PALESTINE,
  CYPRUS, MUSLIM WORLD AND THE WAR ON TERROR

2
Colin Irwin

• Institute of Governance
• Queens University Belfast
• and
• Institute of Irish Studies
• University of Liverpool
• www.peacepolls.org

3
Campbells Galvanometer

• Both US and UK got WMDs wrong
• Interests and applied social science
• Political, ideological, economic, religious
• Data collection, instrument choice and design,
  data interpretation and theory choice
• Break the glass and move the needle for desired
  meter reading
• Matters of State, war and peace, life and death

4
Campbells adversarial stakeholder

• There should be adversarial stakeholder
  participation in the design of each pilot
  experiment or program evaluation, and again in
  the interpretation of results. We should be
  consulting with the legislative and
  administrative opponents of the program as well
  as the advocates, generating measures of feared
  undesirable outcomes as well as promised benefits

5
POLLING AND INTER-TRACK DIPLOMACY

• Track One - Political leadership
• Track Two - Civil society
• Track Three - The people

6
Track One - Political leadership

• Each party to the negotiations nominated a member
  of their team to work with the facilitator on the
  polls
• Questions were designed to facilitate the testing
  of party policies as a series of options or
  preferences from across the social and political
  spectrum
• All questions, options and preferences had to be
  agreed by all parties as not being partisan or
  misleading

7
Track Two - Civil society

• The research was undertaken by independent
  academics from Queens University Belfast
• The work was funded by the Joseph Rowntree
  Charitable Trust
• Detailed reports were given to the parties, two
  governments and Independent Chair
• Analysis were published in the local press and
  more recently on the inter-net
• It was a joint University, NGO, Newspaper
  enterprise

8
Track Three - The people

• A representative sample of the population in
  terms of age, gender, social class, religious
  denomination and geographical area
• Questions pitched at what most people could
  understand most of the time NOT lowest common
  denominator
• All relevant issues covered and NO irrelevant
  issues
• Results made available to the public without
  cherry-picking
• Public given a seat at the negotiating table

9
POLLING ANDCONSENSUS BUILDING

• Top down
• Bottom up
• Centre out
• Polarities in

10
Top down

• Questionnaire design and vicarious discourse
  between parties who may not even be talking to
  each other
• Understanding of the real concerns of the other
  parties electorate
• Un-real concerns exposed
• Information on public policy and deals
  disseminated to general public

11
Bottom up

• Views of public brought to negotiations on key
  issues
• The moderating voice of the silent majority
  given expression
• Public prepared for new policies, a deal and/or
  a referendum

12
Centre out

• Small centre parties not excluded and given a
  part to play in the political process
• Small centre parties given a stronger public
  voice as parties of moderation
• Common ground mapped out and defined
• Compromises mapped out and defined

13
Polarities in

• Major community based parties are included as
  they must make the deal
• Major concerns of largest communities defined and
  explained
• Extreme parties not excluded and given a part to
  play in the political process
• Extreme positions demonstrated to be marginal
  with little cross community support

14
US/UK practice?

• Most negotiating practice focuses on the major
  parties in each community
• Small centre parties are often ignored
• Extreme parties are frequently not brought into
  the political process
• Public not part of or prepared for deals done
  behind closed doors
• Real Politic power plays not consensus building
• Deals lack stability of broad consensus

15
US polling in Northern Ireland

• Since 1998 the State Department has run two polls
  a year in Northern Ireland but no systematic
  input from local parties or civil society
• The National Democratic Institute (NDI) work with
  willing parties but do not run regular polls in
  Northern Ireland. However they do include some
  questions in the State Department polls
• Fairly simple questions are used with an emphasis
  on local political profiling as part of a wide
  ranging poll
• Results selectively released to press by the
  State Department/Consulate

16
QUESTION DESIGN
17
Table 1. NI Peace Polls Constitutional Question
18
Power sharing with North-South institutions

• Power sharing with North-South institutions but
  no joint authority - Government by a Northern
  Ireland Assembly, power sharing Executive and a
  number of joint institutions established with the
  Republic of Ireland to deal with matters of
  mutual interest. (But these arrangements will not
  include joint authority between the British and
  Irish governments).

19
Table 2. 1st and 8th Constitutional Choice
20
Preferences 1, 2, 3 and 4
21
Qualitative 5 point scale

• Essential - You believe this option is a
  necessary part of a lasting settlement and should
  be implemented under any circumstances.
• Desirable - This option is not what you would
  consider to be Essential, but you think this
  option, or something very similar to it, is a
  good idea and should be put into practice.
• Acceptable - This option is not what you would
  consider to be Desirable, if you were given a
  choice, but you could certainly live with it.
• Tolerable - This option is not what you want.
  But, as part of a lasting settlement for Northern
  Ireland, you would be willing to put up with it.
• Unacceptable - This option is completely
  unacceptable under any circumstances. You would
  not accept it, even as part of a lasting
  settlement.

22
Table 3. Per cent Essential and Unacceptable
23
Table 4. US/NI 1995 Constitutional Question
24
Local assembly - power sharing

• A local assembly for Northern Ireland within the
  UK with power-sharing between local parties
• This option does not include North-South
  institutions and therefore probably exaggerates
  Protestant support for the Belfast Agreement

25
Table 5. US/NI 1998 Constitutional Question
26
Table 6. US/NI 2003 Constitutional Question
27
9 NORTHERN IRELANDPEACE POLLS

• 1 - Peace building and public policy
• 2 and 3 - Procedural
• 4 - Comprehensive Settlement
• 5 - Test of Belfast Agreement
• 6, 7, 8 and 9 - Implementation

28
POLLING ANDPUBLIC DIPLOMACY

• Parties
• Electorate
• Governments
• International Community

29
The Ulster Unionists

• Police reform and equality issues are essential
  to Nationalists and Republicans
• Steps we need to take to win peace, Belfast
  Telegraph, Saturday, January 10th, (1998)

30
The Democratic Unionists

• Few alternatives to the Belfast Agreement
• Alternatives to a comprehensive settlement,
  Belfast Telegraph, Tuesday, March 31st, (1998)

31
The Social Democratic and Labour Party

• Time to take seat on Policing Board
• BBC Northern Ireland, Hearts and Minds, Thursday,
  September 20th, 2001

32
Sinn Féin

• Northern Ireland Assembly is a good thing
• Why Ulster now wants to have new assembly,
  Belfast Telegraph, Monday, January 12th, (1998)

33
The Progressive Unionist Party and Sinn Féin

• Paramilitary activity must end
• Ceasefires, paramilitary Activity and
  Decommissioning, Belfast Telegraph, Wednesday,
  March 3rd, (1999)

34
Womens Coalition and Alliance Party of Northern
Ireland

• Not very sceptical

35
The pro-Agreement parties in general

• Referendum can be won
• Majority say yes to the search for settlement,
  Belfast Telegraph, Tuesday, March 31st, (1998)

36
The Ulster Unionist Council

• Ulster Unionist electorate more moderate than
  their Council and party executive
• Unionism at the Crossroads What the people
  say, Belfast Telegraph, Thursday, May 25th,
  (2000)

37
Anti-Agreement Unionists

• Alternatives to the Belfast Agreement have little
  cross community support
• What now for the Agreement?, Belfast Telegraph,
  Wednesday, February 19th, (2003)

38
Rejectionist Irish Republicans

• United Ireland has little cross community support
• Little support for SF agenda, Belfast
  Telegraph, Wednesday, April 1st, (1998)

39
Rejectionist Loyalists

• Violence loses votes
• 'The PEOPLE'S peace process', Belfast Telegraph,
  Wednesday, February 21st, (2001)

40
UK Government

• Council of the Isles is a good thing
• What hope for Council of the Isles?, Belfast
  Telegraph, Wednesday, January 14th, (1998)

41
Irish Government

• Independent cross boarder bodies with executive
  powers united Ireland by the back door - is
  unacceptable to Unionists
• Feasibility and reality of north-south bodies,
  Belfast Telegraph, Tuesday, January 13th, (1998)

42
US State Department and President

• People of Northern Ireland want negotiations for
  a settlement
• C. J. Irwin, YES vote for talks, Belfast
  Telegraph, Thursday, September 11th, (1997)

43
Irish Americans

• The Belfast Agreement is acceptable to Sinn Féin
• C. J. Irwin, 'It's the Agreement - stupid', Irish
  Times, Friday, February 23rd, (2001).

44
European Community

• People of Northern Ireland want the Agreement to
  work
• 93 SAY MAKE THE AGREEMENT WORK, Belfast
  Telegraph, Wednesday, March 3rd, (1999)

45
Macedonia

• CDRSEE concerned about Albanian insurgency in
  Macedonia (fYROM) in 2002
• Poll to explore problems and solutions
• Similar results to Northern Ireland
• Protestants Macedonians concerned about
  paramilitaries decommissioning
• Catholics Albanians concerned about
  discrimination policing
• All concerned about elections
• All agree solutions

46
Table 7. Causes of Conflict
47
Table 8. Priorities for peace
48
Table 9. Fair and free elections
49
Table 9 continued.Fair and free elections
50
No insurgency and successful elections

• Media publication generated public discourse
• International community followed up on all policy
  recommendations
• First President, Kiro Gligorov, compared
  questions with those of US contractor
• EU diplomat critiqued US methods
• Ethnopoltics published Forum article
• Campbells adversarial interpretation of
  results

51
Bosnia and Herzegovina

• CDRSEE and BBC World Service Trust
• Good governance
• All aspects of reform detailed as problems and
  solutions as in NI and Macedonia
• Except for war blame game all parties agreed on
  need for reforms
• Including constitutional reform

52
Table 10. Constitutional reformEssential
Desirable Acceptable Tolerable
Unacceptable
53
Table 11. Package - All - Bosniak - Serb - Croat
54
Their country but not their constitution

• The Dayton Agreement was not designed for state
  building but to end a war. It ought to be
  changed, perhaps, but that is not the business of
  the international community. This issue will be
  decided by the citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina
  because it is their country. (Paddy Ashdown,
  2005)
• OSCE polling but do not work with parties
• Public support for reform

55
Kosovo and Serbia

• CDRSEE, KosvaLive, BETA
• www.kosovakosovo.com
• 2 polls, Kosovo, Serbs - Serbia, Serb IDPs
• General issues
• Serb / Albanian relations
• Procedural issues
• Final status issues

56
Table 12. Kosovo Final Status
57
Table 13. Stay or return to Kosovo under ideal
conditions?
58
Final Status Negotiations

• Questions fro Presidents office down, academics,
  jounalists etc.
• All at press conferences in Pristina/Belgrade
• UN negotiating team received report
• AED given contract to take work forward
• AED told NOT to include track one politicians by
  US Mission in Pristina!
• Who has to make the peace and keep it?

59
Israel and Palestine

• Louis Guttman and Israel Institute for Applied
  Social Research
• IIAS pioneer peace process monitoring
• NI/Israel 1987 Smallest Space Analysis study
• Palestine Academic Society for the Study of
  International Affairs in 2002
• Naomi Chazan and Ghassan Khatib agree project
• Start on elections but no freedom of association
• Israel/Palestine research uncoordinated and
  ineffective between and within both communities
• Three examples Jerusalem, refugees, negotiations

60
The future of Jerusalem

• December 1999, Arab League International
  Conference on Jerusalem at Chatham House
• Jerome Segal, Israeli and Palestinian public
  opinion for divided city - Proposal rejected
• UN Resolution 181 and 303 for shared city
• Israel Palestine Centre for Research and
  Information (IPCRI) - shared city not option
• Campbells adversarial stakeholders not
  included - Palestinian negotiators

61
Refugees and the right of return

• Right of return in Balkans, Cyprus, Israel,
  Palestine etc. in international law
• IPCRI 2001 poll 90 of Palestinians prefer return
  to compensation
• Khalil Shikaki 2003 poll up to 90 willing to
  accept compensation
• Shikaki discredited by Palestinian NGOs
• Campbells adversarial stakeholders not
  included - Palestinian negotiators and NGOs

62
Support for a negotiated settlement

• Israeli-Jewish attitudes to the Oslo process
• Time line data
• These shared values mark the red lines that
  policymakers cannot cross without risking the
  total loss of public support, as occurred in
  summer 2000 when Baraks far-reaching peace
  proposals were rejected by the majority including
  many in the pro-Oslo camp, leading to his
  governments collapse. (Hermann and
  Yuchtman-Yaar, 2002)
• JMCC similar data and conclusion for Palestinians

63
adversarial stakeholders and sponsorship

• This time Campbells adversarial stakeholders
  are not jointly participating in the
  interpretation of results
• Joint projects token. Do not work together when
  they have to
• Realism for red lines needed on both sides
• Sponsors must make cooperation condition for
  continued support

64
Cyprus

• 1998 Greek-Turkish Forum Istanbul
• Richard Holbrook v. Senator George Mitchell
• Greek and Turkish Cypriots want peace poll
  starting with CBMs
• US initiate their own program of polling but
  without local input and public diplomacy
• But results as good as Northern Ireland
• With EU entry deal is possible
• TC and GC media do separate polls

65
Table 14. Package Greek Turkish CypriotPer
cent acceptable unacceptable preferred
66
Table 15. Turkish Cypriot published preferences
67
Table 16. Turkish CypriotHope placed in talks
in 2000
68
Table 17. Greek CypriotOutcome of talks in 2002
69
Cyprus Lessons

• Early media polls focused on Problems more than
  Solutions
• Negotiations and referendum fail in 2004
• Alexandros Lordos new independent polls
• UK Foreign Affairs Committee, Wilton Park
  Conference (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) and
  UN Security Council acknowledge errors

70
Wilton Park Conference (FCO)

• The importance of regular opinion polling was
  underlined at the conference to indicate public
  opinion on a range of issues at different stages
  of the negotiations before the public are asked
  to vote on the whole package. Experience
  elsewhere has shown that there is often much more
  flexibility on the part of the public than
  politicians believe. (Wilton Park, 2005)

71
UN Security Council

• Mr President And I was interested to learn that
  an independent bicommunal survey that polled
  attitudes to potential changes to the UN plan
  found the encouraging result among grass roots
  opinion on both sides that it might be possible
  to make certain changes that would secure
  majority support for the plan in both
  communities. (Sir Kieran Prendergast, 2005)

72
The Muslim World andThe War on Terror

• US relations with Muslim World at all time low
  (2003 Pew Research Centre)
• US General Accounting Office recommended more
  polling
• Currently US State Department do roughly 2 polls
  a year in each state with a mission
• NDI, IRI, AED, CFR, etc. etc.
• Michigan/Yaffe Center recommend as CFR

73
US Practice?

• The imperative for effective public diplomacy
  now requires much wider use of newer channels of
  communication and more customized, two-way
  dialogue and debate as opposed to push-down,
  one-way mass communication. U.S. foreign policy
  is too often communicated in a push-down style
  that does not take into account the perspectives
  of the foreign audience or open the floor for
  dialogue and debate.
• (Council on Foreign Relations, 2003)

74
Advise not taken

• USIP and ESRC grants turned down
• Also US State Department, UK Foreign and
  Commonwealth Office and Home Office
• Post 9/11 UK Home Office 2x10,0005,000
• But do not explore issues related to Muslim
  alienation and radicalisation
• Same error made in Northern Ireland in the 1970s
• Also do not explore UK and allies foreign policy
  in the Middle East

75
The London bombings

• The threat of international terrorism brings a
  new dimension to existing issues, and perhaps
  makes their resolution even more pressing - it
  does not change them. (Home Affairs Committee,
  2005)
• Hasnt Sheik Osama bin Laden told you that you
  will not dream of security before there is
  security in Palestine and before all the infidel
  armies withdraw from the land of Muhammed (Ayman
  al Zawahiri, 2005)

76
Post 7/7 independent polls

• 2 agree or strongly agreed with the 7/7
  actions of the suicide bombers (Sky
  News/CommunicateResearch)
• 6 said the bombings were justified (Daily
  Telegraph/YouGov)
• 1 Western society is decadent and immoral, and
  Muslims should seek to bring it to an end, if
  necessary by violence (YouGov)
• 61 agreed or strongly agreed Britains role
  in the Iraq war was largely to blame for the
  London bombings (CommunicateResearch)

77
NO undesirable outcomes

• Campbells adversarial stakeholders NO
  measures of feared undesirable outcomes
• BBC/MORI - identity and multiculturalism
• Muslim Voice - Muslim leadership
• Too little too late
• Problems and solutions for both domestic and
  foreign policy
• Public enquiry

78
The West and the Muslim WorldA Conflict in
Search of a Peace Process

• Global Market Insite, Inc. (GMI)
• Muslim Voice UK
• Internet poll
• 1000 UK weighted sample
• 250 Muslim booster sample
• 100 Jewish booster sample
• MVUK.co.uk sample still being collected

79
Complex Global Conflict

• Domestic and International
• Problems and Solutions
• Islamophobia and the clash of civilizations
• Discrimination and integration
• The Muslim community
• Relations between West and Muslim states
• Extremism and the War on Terror

80
Table 18. Support for Plan of Action
81
Internet Peace Polls

• Internet used for hate and violence
• Internet used for polling and voices of
  moderation, reason and accommodation
• Cost and time effective
• Reform of government programs
• Not just governments any more
• NGOs and peace making
• Europe, Americas, Middle East etc. etc.

82
METHODOLOGY

• Getting started - Academic poll and small parties
• Agree research program - give ownership
• Sample, Ethics, Timing, Publication, Funds
• Questionnaire - All agreed including terms
• NOT just simple, across spectrum options
• NOT other issues, structured to inform
• Publication - NOT cherry picking
• Transparency - Highest academic standards

83
Peace Polls Golden Rules

• 1. All the parties to a conflict should draft and
  agree all the questions
• 2. All the communities and peoples to the
  conflict should be asked all the questions
• 3. All the results should be made public
• And when done in support of negotiations
  Dovetail negotiations, research and publication
  together

84
RECOMMENDATIONS

• Made to the US State Department
• at Michigan/Yaffe Center Seminar in 2003

85
Not just more of the same

• Through the State Department, US AID, NDI and IRI
  the US probably do more political polling around
  the world than almost everyone else put together
• But these polls tend to combine subjects and do
  not engage locally as much as they could and are
  rarely open to public scrutiny

86
Specialised polls

• Specialised polls should be run by people with
  appropriate political and communication skills as
  well as public opinion expertise
• These polls should not be part of wider polls but
  dedicated research enterprises designed to
  address matters of particular concern with clear
  research objectives

87
Work with various parties

• The work should be undertaken with local input
  but not with just one academic, political or
  community perspective
• When local representatives cannot work together
  to produce a common piece of work an outside
  facilitator should be brought in to co-ordinate
  the research

88
Publish more

• As much of the work as can be published should be
  published
• Make the research available to a wider audience
  including academics, journalists, and
  broadcasters for critical review and
  incorporation into other activities

89
Fire-wall

• For all the reasons made clear in the CFR report
  create appropriate mechanisms for working with
  private institutions and companies on a regular
  basis
• Establish working relationships that allow
  distance when appropriate but also allow the
  State Department to take credit for successes
  when appropriate Norwegian Foreign Ministry and
  the Oslo Peace Research Institute (PRIO) for
  example

90
Remedial action

• More state polling has not improved research
• For applied research require Campbells standards
  for adversarial stakeholders
• In design, interpretation feared outcomes
• WAPOR standard setting for codes of ethics and
  best practice in respect to peace research
• Establish NGO to monitor, advise and undertake
  peace polls as may be required
• Pollsters can become peace makers

91
CONCLUSION

• WE MAKE PEACE WITH OUR ENEMIES
• WE MAKE PEACE RESEARCH WITH OUR ADVERSARIAL
  STAKEHOLDERS