Rainbows and Unicorns in the Holy Land

President Bush is gearing up for his new tour of the Middle East in what seems to me, an effort at saving face.

One of his stops will include peace talks between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. BBC reports:

"If there needs to be a little pressure then you know I will provide it," he said after talks with Israeli prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

He was speaking at the start of what he called a "historic" visit to the Middle aimed at advancing peace negotiations.

However, within hours of his arrival, the Palestinians reported that Israeli forces had killed three people in Gaza.

At least five more were wounded.

The Palestinians accused Israel of stepping up such attacks during the run-up to Mr Bush's visit.

The latest Israeli raids on Gaza followed rockets launched from inside Gaza into Israel.

Mr Olmert - standing alongside Mr Bush - said Israel would not tolerate such attacks.

"There will be no peace until terror is stopped," he said.

But he also re-iterated his commitment to peace, saying both sides were "seriously trying to move forward in order to realise the vision of a two-state solution".

Mr Bush said he was under no illusion that this would be hard work.

"I fully understand that there's going to be some painful political compromises," he said.

"I fully understand that there's going to be some tough negotiations. And the role of the United States is to help in those negotiations."

First, I must point out that Bush is not the person to be pushing for peace talks. The president of the United States should encourage these sorts of things, but that doesn't change the fact that Bush isn't the guy to do it. This isn't Bush-bashing or anything,because whether or not you believe negotiating and diplomacy is appropriate in these circusmstances, you must admit that the man has used it sparingly in his presidential career.

I think this is a good time to talk about my misgivings on a two state solution in Israel-Palestine. Mainly, I am afraid that it means Palestinians will be given a state that is doomed to fail. Sort of like saying, "You want your own independent government? Fine. We'll give you some leggos to build it with. Good luck." My ideal, lofty as it is, is for Israel to become a pluralist state, similar to that of Switzerland, Belgium, or even India, where different ethnicities together create the state and live in relative peace and prosperity. Also included in my ideal are rainbow fountains and glitter covered unicorns. It may not be the most realistic of ideals, but I still like to dream.

My point is that any peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians should recognize that the Palestinians need more than just an acceptance of their sovereignty. How will they sustain themselves after gaining independence? Could there be another refugee crisis if the infrastructure fails to develop? Will a two state solution address the grievances of Arab Muslims who consider themselves to be Israeli citizens or Palestinians in Jerusalem? I have yet to see a plan for an independent Palestine that addresses these concerns.

Yes, I made that graphic myself.