Pentagon divided over military priorities in Asia and the Middle East

Senior Pentagon officials are reportedly divided over the extent of military support for Israel versus engagement in Asia, a split that could influence the direction of foreign policy in a potential second term for Donald Trump.

Ben Smith, founder of the news site Semafor, explored this issue in a recent special report. According to Smith, General Michael “Erik” Kurilla, the commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), is advocating for more resources to defend Israel as retaliatory actions from Iran increase.

In contrast, Elbridge Colby, the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and a proponent of the US military focusing on China and the Indo-Pacific, opposes the diversion of American military assets from Asia to the Middle East.

An Iran war embodies the primary tension for Colby and his allies: the US has long sought to implement its “pivot to Asia,” a strategy first announced by Barack Obama in 2011. However, practical demands and political pressures consistently redirect American military involvement back to the Middle East.

Shifting priorities within the Pentagon

According to Smith, Colby’s opposition stems from concerns that deployments, such as the transfer of a Patriot missile battery from South Korea to the Middle East in April, could compromise US readiness for future conflicts with China or the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Despite providing military aid to Israel, Trump has occasionally shown frustration with open coordination and allegedly dismissed his National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, due to his close ties with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Trump’s potential appointment of Colby to a Department of Defense position has raised concerns among pro-Israel hawks, who might interpret it as a sign of diminishing US support.

Although Waltz’s dismissal and Trump’s allowance for an “independent” Israeli strike on Iran suggest a more non-interventionist approach, Colby’s influence appears to be waning.

CENTCOM chief Kurilla gains strength

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth reportedly dismissed several of Colby’s allies in April and has cultivated a closer relationship with Kurilla.

Eli Lake of The Free Press reported that the new Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East, Michael Dimino, who is from the “restrainer” camp, has set off alarm bells among Trump supporters who believe engagement in the region is vital.

Referring to Dimino’s views, one Trump ally joked, “The guy who is going to be his deputy in charge of Middle East policy thinks the US shouldn’t be in the Middle East. Somebody call Elon at DOGE.”

Earlier this month, Al-Monitor reported that Kurilla had requested the deployment of a second aircraft carrier strike group to the region. While the Pentagon has not confirmed this deployment, the US has begun sending warships and aircraft to the area. The planned visit of the USS Nimitz to Vietnam was abruptly canceled due to “urgent operational requirements.”

The future of American policy

A key force behind the “restrainer” ideology is Defense Priorities, a think tank funded by Charles Koch’s Stand Together philanthropy group.

The organization recently published a carefully worded paper arguing for reducing Israel’s reliance on US military guarantees: “A more secure, diplomatically connected Israel would rely less on American military backing and more on regional partnerships to secure its future.”

Colby and the Pentagon press office did not respond to media inquiries, but internal dynamics suggest that those who favor traditional US intervention in the Middle East are gaining an advantage.

According to Smith, as Trump attempts to balance his “America First” policy with regional alliances, the outcome of this internal debate will determine the trajectory of US-Israel relations during a period of regional instability.

Elbridge Colby’s fixation on China

One claim in the report suggests that Colby is so focused on Asia that he “clashes with anyone doing anything else in foreign policy, including loyal Trump supporters.”

After Smith’s report was published, chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell stated in an email that reports of any internal division were inaccurate and that Colby was “fully aligned with the leadership team and moving in lockstep.”

In an interview with POLITICO last July, Colby emphasized his personal view that defending Eastern NATO requires allocating forces in a way that does not diminish the US’s ability to defend Taiwan.

Colby also identified “key capabilities” such as long-range fire, logistics, command and control (known as C4ISR), and air defense as areas where the US should focus on Asia, not Europe.

Having previously argued that US commitments to Ukraine were excessive, Colby has consistently underlined that the most tangible economic and military challenge to his country and its interests comes from China.

The strategist, who noted that he views Ukraine through a “China lens,” clarified that he was not calling for an immediate halt to all aid to Kyiv. He argued that while Russia’s actions are “evil,” the assistance provided by the US does not align with the tangible interests of Americans.

When asked what he would advise the US President to do now, Colby responded: “I would say, ‘I don’t want to talk about Ukraine right now. We are going to talk about Taiwan, China, and Asia first, and after we have addressed that problem satisfactorily, then we will spend time, political capital, and resources on Ukraine.'”

Last month, the Financial Times (FT) reported that Colby had told British officials a Trump administration would expect the British military to increase its focus on the Euro-Atlantic region.