This article focuses on the thirteen-odd bicommunal polities in which two, and only two, distinct communities dominate the political arena. The concept of a bicommunal polity is analytical rather than statistical. Permanent asymmetry characterizing the two components makes a simple majoritarian formula for decisionmaking processes unacceptable. What other decisional frameworks have a greater chance for success: federalism, federalism with a heavy dose of confederal ingredients, regional confederation, consociationalism or secession? A confederal modification of federalism has so far appeared as more acceptable to two asymmetric and antagonistic polities than a concept of a federal union with ts commitment to an overarching cultural-political national union. The high failure rate of bicommunal configurations points also to the necessity to relate the inner working of bicommunal polities to international balancing processes and/or support or abstinence of "blood-related" nation-states.