Your warning about the real meaning of “the two state solution” is right on target. Deceitful politicians find the phrase “two states” very convenient because they can throw it around without being forced by the simpleminded public to define what they mean. It is very clear what Sharon had in mind – Bantustan. He said so (http://shadowedforest.blogspot.com/2010/02/palestinian-bantustanand-sharon.html). We have no reason to think the rest of the Israeli right wing disagrees with him. The distinction between Bantustan and two genuinely independent states is enormous and critical – not just for Palestinians and Israelis but also in terms of global security implications (http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_5584.shtml). Briefly, Bantustan is a recipe for endless instability.

At least five different outcomes to the current conflict merit careful consideration – Jordan becomes Palestine, Two States, Secular Democracy, Bantustan, and Catastrophe. Americans need to think about the relative merits and dangers of these five possible outcomes in order to decide what is really in the U.S. national interest. Maybe that will help Americans to take the blinders off and start seeing the differences between the goals of the Israeli right wing and the real national security interests of the Israeli people.