Skepticism is especially pervasive in the Palestinian territories.  In a recent Pew Research Center poll, 61% of Palestinians said they did not believe a way can be found for Israel and an independent Palestinian state to coexist peacefully. In fact, a 45%-plurality said the best way to achieve statehood is through armed struggle. Just 15% think non-violent resistance is the best strategy. And there is little faith in negotiations – only 15% believe negotiations are the best path to statehood.

Moreover, Palestinians feel somewhat abandoned by other nations, especially other Arab nations, in their efforts to achieve statehood. Three-in-four Palestinians say that other Arab countries are doing too little to help with that goal, and many in neighboring Arab nations agree. Most Tunisians and roughly half of Egyptians say their countries are not doing enough to promote Palestinian statehood, although this view is somewhat less common in Jordan and Lebanon.

On the other side, Israelis are more optimistic about the chances for a two-state solution – 50% believe Israel can coexist beside a Palestinian state, while 38% disagree. But in the short-run, few anticipate progress. A recent Tel Aviv University poll found that seven-in-ten Israelis rate the likelihood of restarting negotiations with the Palestinians as moderately or very low. The same poll found that kick-starting negotiations is not at the top of the list of Israeli concerns – only 10% suggest it should be the government’s top priority. Instead, Israelis are worried about economic issues and the threat from Iran.

Still, there is one hopeful sign for Kerry as he returns to the region this week: many on both sides of the conflict want the U.S. to be more engaged. Roughly half of Israelis (49%) want the Obama administration to play a larger role in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And even though the U.S. is widely unpopular among Palestinians (they hold a nearly-unanimous view that U.S. policies favor Israel), a 41%-plurality believes the Obama administration should play a larger role; just 26% want a smaller role.  So, despite their skepticism about the peace process and their reservations about the U.S., Kerry may find that many Palestinians nonetheless welcome his efforts.

Two years after the Arab Spring, there continues to be unrest in the Middle East and the U.S. public has become more skeptical about the political changes that have occurred. Our October 2012 survey found nearly six-in-10  Americans (57%) do not believe the changes in the Middle East will lead to lasting improvements for people living in the affected countries, up sharply from 43% in April 2011.  A majority of the U.S. public also puts the priority on having stable governments in  the region, even if that means less democracy.

The public would like less U.S. involvement in Middle East leadership changes.

As noted in other surveys, the public has become focused on domestic issues, particularly the economy, and supports less U.S. involvement in the Middle East. Overall, 63% of Americans say they want the U.S. less involved in Middle East leadership changes while 23% say they U.S. should be more involved, according to an October 2012 survey.

A majority says the U.S. does not have a responsibility to act in Syria.

As fighting in Syria continues between government forces and anti-government groups, the public continues to say that the U.S. does not have a responsibility to do something about the fighting there. And there continues to be substantial opposition to sending arms to anti-government forces in Syria.

The public expresses consistent support for Israel.

For decades, the public has sympathized with Israel over the Palestinians and that remains the case today. A March survey found about half the public sympathizes more with Israel, compared with just 12% who say they sympathize more with the Palestinians; Almost a quarter (23%) do not offer an opinion while 12% say they sympathize with neither side. Attitudes on this question haven’t changed much in the past six years.

Read more Pew Research findings on U.S.-Middle East relations.

Browse our key data points on these topics: 

Overview | Economy | Middle Class | Gun Control | U.S.-China Relations | Immigration | Climate Change | Gay Marriage | Debt and Deficit | Foreign Policy | Iran | U.S. Catholics

In August 2012, President Barack Obama said: “We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.”

Some pundits and politicians now say the equation has changed.  Anne-Marie Slaughter, the former head of the State Department’s policy planning staff, wrote in Sunday’s Washington Post: “Mr. President, how many uses of chemical weapons does it take to cross a red line against the use of chemical weapons?” And Sen. John McCain, on NBC’s Meet the Press, called on the Obama administration to arm the rebel troops, to establish a no-fly zone over Syria and to “be prepared with an international force to go in and secure these stocks of chemical, and perhaps biological, weapons.”

Such exhortations seem to be out of step with much public sentiment in the United States, in Europe and in the Middle East. Just 45% of the American public favors military intervention in Syria even if it is confirmed that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons against anti-government groups, according to a new poll by the Pew Research Center conducted April 25-28, 2013 among 1,003 adults in the United States. About three-in-ten Americans (31%) oppose such military action. And 23% has no opinion. But just 18% of the public say that it has been following news about the Syrian chemical weapons issue very closely.

A separate Pew Research Center survey conducted in March before information emerged of the alleged use of chemical agents found nearly two-thirds (64%) of Americans were against even arming the Syrian rebels. And there was even less support for such involvement in Europe. Eight-in-ten Germans (82%) opposed such assistance, as did more than two-thirds of the French (69%) and a majority of the British (57%). Even the Turks (65%), who share a border with Syria and now house 300,000 refugees from the civil war, oppose military aid to the rebels.

Publics in the Middle East are even less supportive of the West getting involved. In five of the six countries that were surveyed in March in the region – Lebanon (80%), Turkey (68%), Tunisia (60%), Egypt (59%) and the Palestinian territories (63%) – publics opposed Americans or Europeans supplying the Syrian rebels with weapons. Only in Jordan (53%) did people back Western intervention.

Most publics in the region do not even want their own governments to get involved. Only the Jordanians (65%) support Arab countries sending arms and military supplies to anti-government groups in Syria. The Turks (66%) and the Lebanese (60%) are particularly opposed.

The news about the alleged Syrian use of chemical weapons may yet change public opinion. As in any war, facts on the ground can affect public sentiment. But, so far, pleas from American pundits and politicians have failed to rally majority support for such action in America, Europe or the Middle East.

Growing evidence that the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad may have used chemical weapons against its own people has led to calls for the Obama administration to intervene in the Syrian civil war.

In August 2012, President Barack Obama said: “We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.”

Some pundits and politicians now say the equation has changed.  Anne-Marie Slaughter, the former head of the State Department’s policy planning staff, wrote in Sunday’s Washington Post: “Mr. President, how many uses of chemical weapons does it take to cross a red line against the use of chemical weapons?” And Sen. John McCain, on NBC’s Meet the Press, called on the Obama administration to arm the rebel troops, to establish a no-fly zone over Syria and to “be prepared with an international force to go in and secure these stocks of chemical, and perhaps biological, weapons.”

Such exhortations seem to be out of step with much public sentiment in the United States, in Europe and in the Middle East. Just 45% of the American public favors military intervention in Syria even if it is confirmed that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons against anti-government groups, according to a new poll by the Pew Research Center conducted April 25-28, 2013 among 1,003 adults in the United States. About three-in-ten Americans (31%) oppose such military action. And 23% has no opinion. But just 18% of the public say that it has been following news about the Syrian chemical weapons issue very closely.

A separate Pew Research Center survey conducted in March before information emerged of the alleged use of chemical agents found nearly two-thirds (64%) of Americans were against even arming the Syrian rebels. And there was even less support for such involvement in Europe. Eight-in-ten Germans (82%) opposed such assistance, as did more than two-thirds of the French (69%) and a majority of the British (57%). Even the Turks (65%), who share a border with Syria and now house 300,000 refugees from the civil war, oppose military aid to the rebels.

Publics in the Middle East are even less supportive of the West getting involved. In five of the six countries that were surveyed in March in the region – Lebanon (80%), Turkey (68%), Tunisia (60%), Egypt (59%) and the Palestinian territories (63%) – publics opposed Americans or Europeans supplying the Syrian rebels with weapons. Only in Jordan (53%) did people back Western intervention.

Most publics in the region do not even want their own governments to get involved. Only the Jordanians (65%) support Arab countries sending arms and military supplies to anti-government groups in Syria. The Turks (66%) and the Lebanese (60%) are particularly opposed.

The news about the alleged Syrian use of chemical weapons may yet change public opinion. As in any war, facts on the ground can affect public sentiment. But, so far, pleas from American pundits and politicians have failed to rally majority support for such action in America, Europe or the Middle East.

Bruce Stokes is director of global economic attitudes in the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project.