I’m pro-Israel, through and through. I started my career at AIPAC. I’ve been to Israel a number of times. One of my earliest published commentaries came when I was still in college, lamenting Hamas’ election in Gaza (little did I know how prescient I was). I’ve even written that I am concerned that Donald Trump isn’t pro-Israel enough (or, more accurately, that his pro-Israel bona fides could disappear in a flash). I don’t think anyone could call me anything other than a true supporter of the Jewish State. 

Unfair Attacks on Elbridge Colby

Then again, I didn’t think anyone would question whether Elbridge Colby, reportedly under consideration for a senior national security position in the Trump Administration, believes that a strong, secure Israel is in America’s best interest.

Yet here we are. A recent piece described him as “dovish” on Iran, raising questions about whether he would, theoretically, advise the present to work with Israel to contain Iran, which, it is worth noting, is America and Israel’s greatest regional threat. 

To anyone who has ever read Colby’s book, The Strategy of Denial, or even just read his voluminous tweets, his overall approach makes clear he’s far from a dove on Iran or even the least bit unaligned with Israel’s best interests. He meets the table stakes, of course; he says we should provide Israel with political and material support (mostly weapons purchases from American manufacturers). He says that doing so is in America’s best interest, as Israel can be a far more committed (and knowledgeable) check on Iran than we can. 

But Colby goes much further than table stakes. He acknowledges that Israel has the best understanding of the “complexity and scope” of the threat Iran poses and that we should, therefore, follow Israel’s lead. Indeed, he holds up Israel as the ideal ally. As is typical, he says that Taiwan should “be like Israel,” that is, understanding that it faces existential threats and arming (and spending) accordingly. He said Israel is what a nation ready to defend itself looks like. He believes Israel deserves our unequivocal political and moral support. 

And, to those accusing him of being dovish on Iran, he notes that America is more likely to help those who also help themselves. Which brings us to the central reason Colby is being attacked: whether he would support military strikes against Iran’s nuclear program. Colby has the right approach here. First, he knows that thanks to Israel, Iran is a far more contained threat than it otherwise would be; just ask what’s left of Hezbollah and Hamas. Second, he understands that “striking Iran’s military program” is not a yes-or-no question. While they won’t acknowledge it publicly, Israel knows that, too. Indeed, Israel’s use of the Stuxnet virus set back Iran’s nuclear program by at least a year, and it didn’t require firing a single rocket (and yes, I know Israel denies it launched Stuxnet, but come on). When it comes to military strikes, the details matter. What targets are we comfortable we can destroy? How much would striking these targets set Iran back? Are the resources involved in a strike needed elsewhere, and if so, where? What are the likely American (and Israeli) casualties involved in such a mission? 

Given these incredibly important unanswered questions, issuing a blanket statement, either way, of whether we should militarily attack Iran’s nuclear weapons program is unstrategic. Refusing to provide a kneejerk answer in the affirmative is not “dovish;” it’s responsible. 

Colby is a friend of mine, but he is not above criticism. He and I vehemently disagree on a host of issues. He is an “America First” guy. I hate that phrase, as it needlessly alienates our allies and ignores that many of our biggest challenges are more universal. The fact that Colby is a committed Republican and I’m a proud Democrat tells you that our approaches are far from neatly aligned. 

But to say he’s not sufficiently supportive of Israel as an ally is absurd. In Colby’s worldview, Israel is not just “an” ally; it’s the ally. It’s who he wants Europe, Taiwan, and, indeed, our entire set of allies to emulate. 

If that doesn’t qualify him as a pro-Israel advocate, then such an advocate has never existed, myself included. 

About the Author: 

Neal Urwitz is a former speechwriter for and advisor to the Secretary of the Navy.