1. United States
2. Wash.
3. Letter

There is ongoing debate around the one-state solution for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While some argue it is the most just and viable path forward, others raise serious concerns about the ability to uphold democratic rights and prevent violence between the two populations in a single bi-national state. A one-state solution would unite Israel, the West Bank, and potentially Gaza into a single country, rather than establishing an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel as envisioned by the two-state solution. Proponents contend Israeli settlements have made a viable two-state outcome impractical and that equal rights for all is the ethical path. Critics warn it could lead to an ethnic minority being oppressed, or a descent into civil war between Israelis and Palestinians. The proposal is largely outside the boundaries of official negotiations, where the two-state formula remains the focus despite its difficulties. According to polling, while support is growing among Palestinians frustrated with stalled talks, a democratic one-state resolution receives backing from only around 20-30% in both populations. A non-democratic single state remains more popular, reflecting deep divisions. In grappling with this intractable conflict, I believe all perspectives deserve careful consideration as part of a broader dialogue to identify a sustainable path to resolving the national aspirations of both peoples. Any outcome must uphold human rights, self-determination and the dignity of all those residing between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea. I urge you to examine the complexities and proposals from varied sources before reaching your own reasoned stance on this vexing issue.