President Bush brought Israel back into the news by suggesting Democrats are appeasers.  Also, it is being reported on NPR and elsewhere that indirect negotiations between Syria and Israel will resume in Istanbul in a about a week.  With the Israel-Palestinian peace process stalled for the foreseeable future (or at least until we have a new President and Israel has a new Prime Minister), many analysts are sounding off on the best way to negotiate a successfull end to the long and ardous Palestianian conflict.  Here are a listing of the two most prominent resolutions I have heard proposed by prominent diplomats, think tanks, and government officials.

1. Bi-national State.-Israel and Palestinian territories are combined into a bi-national state with proportional representation for each of the major ethnic groups (Palestianian Arabs, Druze, Jews, Bedouin, Christians, etc.)

2. Two-State Solution.  Currently supported by Bush and European allies.  Would involve the continuation of Israel as a 'jewish state' and the creation of a viable, economically independent Palestine composing some or all portions of east Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza Strip.

I personally favor a two-state solution comprising the entirety of the West Bank and Gaza Strip (with appropiate connecting mechanisms between the territories which are currently separated by Israeli settlements or Israeli-claimed land) with the entire city of Jerusalem adminstered as an international area under UN jurisdiction with joint Israeli-Palestinian control (with separate religious control over holy sites for each respective religion).

What do you guys think?  Which option above or one of your own would have the greatest likelihood of resolving the long-standing conflict between Palestinians and Israeli's?

President Bush brought Israel back into the news by suggesting Democrats are appeasers.  Also, it is being reported on NPR and elsewhere that indirect negotiations between Syria and Israel will resume in Istanbul in a about a week.  With the Israel-Palestinian peace process stalled for the foreseeable future (or at least until we have a new President and Israel has a new Prime Minister), many analysts are sounding off on the best way to negotiate a successfull end to the long and ardous Palestianian conflict.  Here are a listing of the two most prominent resolutions I have heard proposed by prominent diplomats, think tanks, and government officials.

1. Bi-national State.-Israel and Palestinian territories are combined into a bi-national state with proportional representation for each of the major ethnic groups (Palestianian Arabs, Druze, Jews, Bedouin, Christians, etc.)

2. Two-State Solution.  Currently supported by Bush and European allies.  Would involve the continuation of Israel as a 'jewish state' and the creation of a viable, economically independent Palestine composing some or all portions of east Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza Strip.

I personally favor a two-state solution comprising the entirety of the West Bank and Gaza Strip (with appropiate connecting mechanisms between the territories which are currently separated by Israeli settlements or Israeli-claimed land) with the entire city of Jerusalem adminstered as an international area under UN jurisdiction with joint Israeli-Palestinian control (with separate religious control over holy sites for each respective religion).

What do you guys think?  Which option above or one of your own would have the greatest likelihood of resolving the long-standing conflict between Palestinians and Israeli's?