The S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace, in collaboration with The Atlantic, has pulled together a great resource for all you obsessives out there who wonder precisely what a negotiated settlement might look like. The first part of "Is Peace Possible?" asks whether land swaps could meet the expectations of both sides. I hope to comment on this series as it unfolds (especially because I no longer think the answer to the core question is necessarily yes -- at least as we've come to understand what "peace" is supposed to look like) but I strongly suggest you check it out in the meantime. You can find part one here.
The work here is rigorous and meticulous, but it is not without a bias -- a useful bias, to my way of thinking: The people behind the project support a two-state solution to the Middle East crisis. Zvika Krieger, of the Abraham Center, writes about the underlying assumption of the project:
The vast majority of both Israelis and Palestinians prefer this outcome (though doubt the commitment of the other side), and a similarly strong majority of both populations agree on the basic contours of the resolution. Creating an independent, viable state of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is the only way that Israel can remain a democracy and a Jewish state, stem the tide of international delegitimization, and be secure in its borders while accepted in the region (as we discuss in the Security chapter). The majority of Palestinians and the current Palestinian leadership still see the two-state solution (which they officially accepted in 1988) as the most realistic path to a state of their own, though they are growing increasingly frustrated with the inability of negotiations to achieve that goal. An alarming number of them are beginning to wonder whether they should instead ask for equal citizenship in Israel -- which, if granted, would end Israel's Jewish majority.
Here is a link to the homepage of the special report.