The survey, conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in the West Bank and Gaza Strip between August 5 and 8, 2026, reveals that… the fundamental political attitudes that have plagued Palestinian society for decades remain largely intact. Hamas remains a major political force; convicted terrorists and Hamas leaders remain popular candidates for the Palestinian Authority (PA) presidency; overwhelming majorities oppose the unconditional disarmament of Hamas; and Iran, Hezbollah, and the Houthis in Yemen continue to enjoy remarkably high approval ratings.
Asked who is most suitable to succeed PA President Mahmoud Abbas, 39% chose imprisoned Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti… An Israeli court convicted him in 2004 of five counts of murder stemming from three terrorist attacks.
Barghouti was sentenced to five consecutive life terms plus 40 years.
Yet this is the man whom a majority of likely Palestinian voters would like to see as their next president.
The second-place candidate is the head of Hamas.
The PA parliamentary elections are scheduled for November 28, 2026, with presidential elections expected in early 2027. The PSR poll offers a warning of what those elections could produce.
Hamas could still win another Palestinian Authority election (as it did in 2006).
An overwhelming 72% say Hamas should not disarm before Israel completely withdraws from the Gaza Strip.
US envoy Jared Kushner recently met Hamas leader Khalil al-Hayya and other Hamas officials in Cairo as part of US efforts to advance President Donald J. Trump’s Gaza peace plan.
Whatever the administration’s intentions, such meetings provide Hamas with something it has sought for years: international legitimacy.
When representatives of the world’s leading superpower sit directly with Hamas leaders, Hamas can present the encounter to Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims as evidence that its strategy has succeeded.
The message is that terrorism pays. If you carry out attacks, take hostages, retain your weapons and survive long enough – eventually the Americans will negotiate with you.
These figures are difficult to reconcile with claims that Palestinian society is undergoing a transformation toward moderation.
What exactly are these elections expected to accomplish?
Elections are not automatically synonymous with democracy, moderation, or peace.
The PA held a parliamentary election in 2006. Hamas participated and won. A year later, Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza Strip.
Now the Palestinians may be heading toward another election in which Hamas could again emerge as the largest faction….
Why, then, should the international community rush toward elections that could legitimize extremists and terrorists rather than marginalize them?
Before elections, Palestinians need real political reform. The Palestinian Authority needs accountable institutions, independent courts, freedom of expression, an end to corruption, and, most importantly, a political culture that does not glorify terrorists or treat armed groups as legitimate alternatives to government.
Nearly three years after Hamas’s October 7, 2023 massacre in Israel and following the devastating war in the Gaza Strip, one might have expected a fundamental change in Palestinian public opinion.
Palestinians might have turned away from Hamas, terrorism, and the Iran-backed “Axis of Resistance.” Palestinians also might have demanded new leaders committed to democracy, reform, an end to corruption, and peaceful coexistence.
The latest Palestinian public opinion poll, however, presents a disturbing picture.
The survey, conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in the West Bank and Gaza Strip between August 5 and 8, 2026, reveals that although support for Hamas has declined, the fundamental political attitudes that have plagued Palestinian society for decades remain largely intact. Hamas remains a major political force; convicted terrorists and Hamas leaders remain popular candidates for the Palestinian Authority (PA) presidency; overwhelming majorities oppose the unconditional disarmament of Hamas; and Iran, Hezbollah, and the Houthis in Yemen continue to enjoy remarkably high approval ratings.
Perhaps the most alarming finding concerns the identity of the Palestinians’ future leaders.
Asked who is most suitable to succeed PA President Mahmoud Abbas, 39% chose imprisoned Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti. Hamas leader Khalil al-Hayya came second with 16%, followed by former Fatah official Mohammed Dahlan with 15%.
In a hypothetical presidential election involving Abbas, Barghouti, and al-Hayya, Barghouti would receive an astonishing 54% of the votes among likely voters. Al-Hayya would receive 26%, while Abbas would receive only 14%.
Who is Marwan Barghouti?
He is not some imprisoned Palestinian political dissident. An Israeli court convicted him in 2004 of five counts of murder stemming from three terrorist attacks.
He was also convicted of attempted murder and membership in a terrorist organization. Barghouti was sentenced to five consecutive life terms plus 40 years.
Yet this is the man whom a majority of likely Palestinian voters would like to see as their next president.
The second-place candidate is the head of Hamas. That alone should cause alarm in Washington, Brussels and other Western capitals that continue to talk about Palestinian elections as though voting, by itself, will magically produce moderation and democracy.
The PA parliamentary elections are scheduled for November 28, 2026, with presidential elections expected in early 2027. The PSR poll offers a warning of what those elections could produce. If legislative elections were held today, Fatah would receive 32% of the votes and Hamas’s “Change and Reform” list would receive 29%. In the Gaza Strip, Hamas would actually come first, with 34% compared to 30% for Fatah.
In other words, Hamas could still win another Palestinian Authority election (as it did in 2006).
This is the same Hamas that carried out the October 7 massacre. Yet after everything that has happened since then, the terrorist group remains within striking distance of Fatah in an election.
True, Hamas has lost some support. Overall identification with Hamas has dropped from 35% ten months ago to 24%. Satisfaction with Hamas’s performance during the Gaza war has fallen from 60% to 42%.
These changes should not be ignored. Moreover, they should not be confused with a Palestinian repudiation of Hamas or its ideology.
When Palestinians are asked which faction is most deserving of representing and leading them, Hamas still beats Abbas’s Fatah: 28% to 21%. An encouraging 44% say neither faction deserves to lead, but Hamas nevertheless remains a major political player and retains the support of nearly one-quarter of the population.
Even more revealing is what Palestinians say about Hamas’s weapons.
An overwhelming 72% say Hamas should not disarm before Israel completely withdraws from the Gaza Strip. Only 20% support disarmament before a full Israeli withdrawal. Opposition to disarming Hamas reaches 79% in the West Bank and 62% in Gaza.
This is crucial. The problem, therefore, is not whether Palestinians approve or disapprove of Hamas’s performance. The issue is whether they believe Hamas should be allowed to retain its weapons and continue functioning as an armed organization.
The answer from nearly three-quarters of the respondents is clear: Yes, at least until Hamas’s condition of a full Israeli withdrawal is met.
This should be of particular concern to the Trump Administration and anyone expecting Hamas to disarm as part of the latest Gaza arrangements. Hamas is not operating in a political vacuum. It knows that a large majority of Palestinians oppose requiring it to surrender its weapons before an Israeli withdrawal.
The poll also shows why direct American engagement with Hamas is dangerous.
US envoy Jared Kushner recently met Hamas leader Khalil al-Hayya and other Hamas officials in Cairo as part of US efforts to advance President Donald J. Trump’s Gaza peace plan.
Whatever the administration’s intentions, such meetings provide Hamas with something it has sought for years: international legitimacy.
When representatives of the world’s leading superpower sit directly with Hamas leaders, Hamas can present the encounter to Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims as evidence that its strategy has succeeded.
A US-designated terrorist organization that perpetrated the October 7 massacre is no longer merely being pressured to surrender; its leaders are sitting across the table from senior American representatives.
The message is that terrorism pays. If you carry out attacks, take hostages, retain your weapons and survive long enough – eventually the Americans will negotiate with you.
This perception is particularly dangerous just months before Palestinian elections. Instead of politically isolating Hamas, direct high-level engagement helps portray the terrorist group as an indispensable regional actor.
The PSR poll contains another warning: Palestinian admiration for Iran and its terrorist proxies remains extraordinarily high.
Satisfaction with the Houthis in Yemen stands at 61%. Hezbollah and Iran each receive 50%. Moreover, when Palestinians were asked where they stood during the recent US-Iran war, 45% said they sided with Iran, compared to only 12% who opposed Iran.
These figures are difficult to reconcile with claims that Palestinian society is undergoing a transformation toward moderation.
The Houthis have attacked Israel, Saudi Arabia and international shipping. Hezbollah has long functioned as Iran’s heavily armed proxy in Lebanon. Iran has funded and armed terrorist groups throughout the Middle East, including Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Yet these are among the regional actors receiving the highest Palestinian satisfaction ratings.
There are, admittedly, some encouraging findings in the poll. Support for armed struggle as the most effective strategy has fallen from 41% to 27%, while support for negotiations has increased from 36% to 44%. These are significant changes.
Yet even here, caution is required. Half of Palestinians still reject the proposition that armed resistance has failed to protect Palestinians or end the conflict despite the destruction suffered in Gaza and parts of the West Bank. Moreover, 36% still support a return to confrontations and an armed intifada (uprising) against Israel.
The Palestinian Authority, meanwhile, faces its own crisis of legitimacy.
Seventy-nine percent of Palestinians want Abbas to resign. Eighty-three percent believe there is corruption in PA institutions. Sixty-five percent say the PA has become a burden on the Palestinian people rather than an achievement. Only 20% are satisfied with Abbas’s performance.
This raises a question Western governments should answer before celebrating the announcement of new Palestinian elections: What exactly are these elections expected to accomplish?
Elections are not automatically synonymous with democracy, moderation, or peace.
The PA held a parliamentary election in 2006. Hamas participated and won. A year later, Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza Strip.
Now the Palestinians may be heading toward another election in which Hamas could again emerge as the largest faction – or close enough to remain a dominant political player. Meanwhile, the leading candidate for PA president is serving five life sentences in an Israeli prison, and his principal Islamist rival is the leader of Hamas.
Why, then, should the international community rush toward elections that could legitimize extremists and terrorists rather than marginalize them?
Before elections, Palestinians need real political reform. The Palestinian Authority needs accountable institutions, independent courts, freedom of expression, an end to corruption, and, most importantly, a political culture that does not glorify terrorists or treat armed groups as legitimate alternatives to government.
egretnewseditor@gmail.com
