Senators Chris Van Hollen (D–Md.) and Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.), co-drafters of the Senate resolution, with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Photo: Zach Gibson/Getty Images

If Israel succeeds in its reported attempts to block the U.S. Senate from expressing support for a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians, the result could further destabilize the Middle East and endanger American interests across the region.

The big picture: Support for a two-state solution has been U.S. policy since the George W. Bush administration, as it could ensure Israel remains a Jewish-majority democracy while also providing justice for the Palestinians. This bipartisan consensus has broad political support among the American electorate.

Details: A one-state solution — with Israel maintaining physical control of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, potentially through annexation — would permanently deny political rights, economic freedom and a sense of justice to the 4.7 million Palestinians in those territories.

The catch: There are risks for Israel as well, including the potential for Palestinians to outnumber Jews given current population growth.

  • That could mean either the end of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state or, as former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak has said, Israel becoming an apartheid state, leading to permanent instability for Israel and deep resentment toward the U.S. across the Arab world.
  • However, Israel doesn’t appear to be worried about the latter, as long as it has American backing to control the Palestinian territories without providing political rights.

Between the lines: Senators are attempting to safeguard the U.S.' interests in the Middle East and to protect Israel from what could ultimately be a counterproductive strategy.

  • If the U.S. communicates a lack of support for a one-state solution, in which Palestinian political rights are denied, Israel could be less likely to see that outcome as an option. A Senate resolution would make this clear in a way the Trump administration has not.

Joel Rubin is the president of the Washington Strategy Group and a former deputy assistant secretary of state.

Go deeper

Media prepares to fact check debates in real time

Illustration: Annelise Capossela/Axios

From live blogs to video chyrons and tweets, media companies are introducing new ways to fact check the presidential debates in real time this year.

Between the lines: The debates themselves are likely to leave less room for live fact-checking from moderators than a traditional news interview would.

Life after Roe v. Wade

The future seems clear to both parties: The Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade in the next few years, either gradually or in one fell swoop, and the abortion wars will move to a state-by-state battle over freedom and restrictions. 

What's new: Two of the leading activists on opposite sides of the abortion debate outlined for “Axios on HBO” the next frontiers in a post-Roe v. Wade world as the balance on the Supreme Court prepares to shift.

Dion Rabouin, author of Markets
2 hours ago - Economy & Business

Jerome Powell, Trump's re-election MVP

Photo illustration: Annelise Capossela/Axios. Getty Images photos: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP and Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket

President Trump trails Joe Biden in most polls, has generally lower approval ratings and is behind in trust on most issues. Yet polls consistently give him an edge on the economy, which remains a top priority among voters.

Why it matters: If Trump wins re-election, it will largely be because Americans see him as the force rallying a still-strong U.S. economy, a narrative girded by skyrocketing stock prices and consistently climbing U.S. home values — but the man behind booming U.S. asset prices is really Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell.