The United States once controlled Bagram airbase, along with many other military facilities across Afghanistan, under a 2014 Bilateral Security Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. But in 2020, the first Trump administration chose to walk away, signing the Doha deal with the Taliban. The Biden administration then carried out the withdrawal in 2021 ignoring the other three obligations of the agreement.
So why, four years later, is Bagram suddenly back on the table as a national security issue? That is the first question Washington must answer – not only to the American public but also to the wider world. If the justification is its proximity to China, then the geography has not changed since 2020.
The second question is even tougher: could the U.S. take Bagram without sparking another war, and, if it did, could it hold it without an endless conflict? Taliban leaders would find it almost impossible to persuade their fighters – who have been told for decades that fighting foreign invasion was Jihad – to tolerate an American return. Many might even defect to ISIS-K. And the Taliban’s allies, from al-Qaeda to Pakistani and Central and South Asian as well as Chinese militant groups, would see any deal as betrayal and resist it violently.
Then there is the regional picture. Unlike after 9/11, when the U.S. enjoyed sympathy across the globe, today’s neighbourhood – dominated by China, Russia and Iran – is openly hostile to any new American foothold. President Trump’s framing of Bagram as part of an anti-China strategy only makes regional cooperation less likely. For Washington, selling this as a counter-terrorism plan will be close to impossible.
Most countries in the region will do everything they can to block the Taliban from allowing a U.S. presence, which they view as a direct security threat. And if the past twenty years taught America and its NATO allies anything, it is that counter-terrorism in this region cannot succeed without regional cooperation and backing.
For Afghans themselves, the risks are even greater. If the U.S. tried to retake Bagram by force, Afghanistan would once again become a battlefield for global powers, with devastating consequences for ordinary people. If it were done through a deal, the Taliban would benefit politically, economically and militarily – entrenching their illegitimate rule and continuing to suppress the Afghan people’s rights and freedoms. Either way, Afghanistan loses.
The real threat facing the U.S., Afghanistan and the region is terrorism. Confronting it requires a legitimate Afghan state that upholds its responsibilities to its citizens and the global community. It also requires regional cooperation, not another misguided foreign intervention.
Rather than launching a risky new adventure at Bagram, Washington’s energy would be far better spent supporting a genuine political process to resolve Afghanistan’s crises. That is the only path to lasting stability – for Afghans, for the region and for the world.