A new nationwide poll reveals that most Israelis want to hold onto military buffer zones in key border regions and are firmly against giving up territory unless Israel retains control over its own security arrangements.
The survey was conducted by Lazar Research under Dr. Menachem Lazar on behalf of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA). It included a representative sample of 503 Jewish and Arab Israeli adults and reflects broad concern about the country’s security following the October 7 attack.
When it comes to border safety, 54% of those polled said they believe Israel’s borders are still not secure, while 42% felt current protections are sufficient. A majority — 56% — said the security breakdown on October 7 resulted from a combination of factors rather than any single cause.
Support for maintaining defensive zones was especially strong along the Gaza and Lebanon borders. Sixty-four percent of respondents favored a permanent military buffer zone in Gaza, with another 11% backing a temporary one. On the northern border, 73% supported an Israeli military presence and security zone in southern Lebanon stretching to the Litani River, compared to just 14% who were opposed.
Regarding Syria, 60% of respondents said Israel should either hold onto positions secured after the fall of the Assad regime or expand the existing buffer zone to guard against future threats.
In the West Bank, 57% said Israel’s military should maintain a permanent presence in the Jordan Valley no matter what any future political deal might look like. Only 11% said that presence could be given up.
The poll also revealed low confidence in the ability of international forces to take over border security responsibilities. Sixty-five percent said they do not trust international troops to replace Israeli forces along the country’s borders. Among those skeptics, 40% said only Israel itself can provide adequate defense, while 25% pointed to past failures by international forces as their reason for doubt.
On the question of a West Bank peace deal, 61% said they would oppose any agreement requiring a full Israeli withdrawal if it did not include Israeli-controlled buffer zones or security measures. Just 27% expressed support for such an arrangement.
Dr. Dan Diker, president of JCFA, offered this assessment of what the results reveal: “The Israeli public has drawn a clear lesson from October 7 and the security developments of recent years: national security cannot be based on hopes, international guarantees, or assumptions that have proven inadequate.”
