Readiness for social relations between Arabs and Jews in Israel

The conflict between Arabs and Jews is complicated by the fact that it takes place at two distinct levels, between countries and within countries. For example relations between the two peoples in Israel are affected by the struggle between Israel and the Arab states, but should not be considered totally dependent on the outcome of that struggle. Even in the hoped-for peace, the tension between Arab and Jewish citizens is likely to continue and may even mount for a time, as the transition to a peace economy sharpens economic rivalry. A relaxation of security will encourage minority groups to voice grievances and make it more difficult for the majority to justify a reluctance to deal with them. After all intergroup conflict exists in many places throughout the world, even where the minority is in no way enemy-affiliated. Hence it is certainly not too early to focus attention on relations between Arabs and Jews in Israel. While the political and economic aspects of such relations have received some treatment (i.e., Harkabi, 1967, 1968; Jiryis, 1968; Landau, 1969), little attention has been paid to day-to-day social relations. Critical surveys are few (Peres, 1971; Rosen, 1970; Stock, 1968) and empirical studies are even fewer (Lakin, 1968; Peres and Yuval-Davis, 1969). Beit-Hallahmi (1971) has recently reviewed some available literature on sociopsychological issues in the Arab-Israeli conflict, between Israel and the Arab states and within Israel. However nothing appears to have been done about Jews in Arab countries or about their relations with Arabs. The stage is set for social relations in Israel. The steady modernization of the Arab village (Yalan et al., 1971), the integration of Arab labor and capital into the Israeli economy, the impact of a state-supervised Arab school system (Peres and Yuval-Davis, 1968), growing bilingualism in the Arab community (Hofman and Fisherman, 1971) -all these developments make for increased contact. Contact in turn mediates change in intergroup attitudes, hopefully for the better, possibly for the worse. Amir (1969), following Harding et al. (1968), but emphasizing the Israeli scene, has summarized the literature on the hypothesis in group relations and concluded that contact indeed affects attitudes. The direction of change is contingent on the conditions under which contact has taken place, and much of his summary deals with the specification of these conditions. The present study inquires into one such condition, namely the readiness to have social relations with members of the other national group. Readiness is akin to the action component of attitudes and to the social distance