Loading...
Market
How will the Australian public's perception of the government's handling of the Golan Heights issue change by December 31, 2024?
1
Resolution / Starting Odds
Improves • 25%
Worsens • 25%
No change • 25%
Other • 25%
Public opinion polls from reputable sources
Story
Australian Government Clarifies Stance on Golan Heights After Penny Wong's Majdal Shams Comment
Aug 1, 2024, 01:17 AM
The Australian government is facing backlash after Foreign Minister Penny Wong mistakenly referred to the town of Majdal Shams in the Israel-occupied Golan Heights as an 'Israeli town.' This statement has sparked controversy as Majdal Shams is internationally recognized as a Syrian city, with only Israel and the United States acknowledging the Golan Heights as Israeli territory. The Australian government has since clarified its stance, reiterating that the Golan Heights is Syrian territory illegally occupied by Israel. The incident has highlighted the sensitive nature of geopolitical terminology and the importance of accurate historical references in diplomatic communications. Additionally, Israeli media reportedly deleted an article admitting that Majdal Shams, where children died, is a Syrian city.
View original story
Similar markets
Improved • 25%
Worsened • 25%
Unchanged • 25%
Other • 25%
Increased support for stronger defense measures • 25%
Increased support for diplomatic engagement • 25%
No significant change • 25%
Other • 25%
Strongly approve • 25%
Approve • 25%
Disapprove • 25%
Strongly disapprove • 25%
Positive • 25%
Neutral • 25%
Negative • 25%
No significant change • 25%
Further alignment with UN resolutions • 25%
Return to previous neutral stance • 25%
Adoption of a pro-Israel stance • 25%
No significant change • 25%
Positive • 33%
Negative • 33%
Neutral • 34%
Significant shift against Israel • 25%
Significant shift in favor of Israel • 25%
No significant change • 25%
Mixed results • 25%
Condemnation from UN • 25%
Condemnation from EU • 25%
Support from major ally (e.g., USA) • 25%
No significant international reaction • 25%
Increased diplomatic tensions • 25%
Strengthened international alliances • 25%
No significant reaction • 25%
Mixed reactions • 25%
Mostly Positive • 25%
Mostly Negative • 25%
Neutral • 25%
No significant opinion • 25%
Majority support • 25%
Majority oppose • 25%
Evenly split • 25%
Insufficient data • 25%
Relations improve • 25%
Relations remain unchanged • 25%
Relations slightly deteriorate • 25%
Relations significantly deteriorate • 25%