67.3% Fear Escalation After Israel’s Airstrike on Lebanon

The recent escalation of violence between Israel and Hezbollah has drawn international attention, particularly due to the devastating impact on civilian lives. Israel’s airstrike on Lebanon has resulted in the tragic deaths of at least five Syrians, including three children, amidst the ongoing conflict along the Israel-Lebanon border.

To gauge public opinion on this critical issue, Real Research, an online survey app, conducted a survey exploring awareness levels, perceptions of diplomatic efforts, and expectations for future developments.

Key Findings:

• 31.71% believe international organizations should play a major role in resolving the conflict.
• A significant 67.3% of respondents believe the conflict will escalate.
• A strong 56.84% think the high casualty numbers will absolutely push for a ceasefire.

The Airstrike: A Conflict Between Israel and Hezbollah

Israeli air attacks in southern Lebanon killed many, as Israel and the Hezbollah armed group continued to trade fire across the border, Lebanese media reported.

When asked about their awareness of Israel’s airstrike on Lebanon, respondents showed a significant level of cognizance. A total of 40.98% were completely aware of the incident, while 47.82% were vaguely aware. Only a small fraction, 11.2%, were completely unaware of the events.

Role of Diplomatic Efforts

Survey participants were asked what role diplomatic efforts should play in resolving the conflict. The responses were diverse, indicating a multifaceted approach to peace and resolution:

Ceasefire and de-escalation: 15.9%
Long-term peace agreements: 17.19%
Humanitarian aid and protection: 17.56%
Addressing root causes: 17.65%
Involving international organizations: 31.71%

Likelihood of UN Response

Regarding the likelihood of the United Nations (UN) responding to the needs of affected civilians in southern Lebanon, opinions were cautiously optimistic. About 21.22% believed it was highly likely, while 51.84% thought it somewhat likely. A smaller portion, 21.32%, felt it was somewhat unlikely, and 5.62% deemed it highly unlikely.

Potential Escalation of Conflict

Additionally, a significant majority, 67.3%, believed that the conflict would further escalate in the future, reflecting deep concerns about continued violence and instability. In contrast, 32.7% felt that escalation was unlikely.

Impact on Geopolitical Stability

When considering the broader geopolitical stability in the Middle East, respondents had varied expectations:

Increase regional tensions: 28.61%
Lead to greater involvement from neighboring countries: 48.18%
Strain diplomatic relations: 12.65%
Prompt international interventions: 6.21%
Shift regional alliances: 4.35%

Crucial Measures for International Community

On the most crucial measures for the international community to prevent further civilian casualties, the responses emphasized a need for multiple strategies:

Impose a ceasefire: 15.6%
Increase humanitarian aid: 13.14%
Facilitate peace talks: 17.3%
Enforce sanctions: 13.38%
Strengthen international monitoring: 20.46%
Support local NGOs: 20.12%

Urgency for Ceasefire Due to High Casualty Numbers

Finally, the survey on Israel’s airstrike on Lebanon explored how the high casualty numbers might impact the urgency for a ceasefire. A compelling 56.84% of respondents believed it would absolutely increase urgency, while 35.3% felt it would probably do so. Only 7.74% thought it would not affect urgency at all.