{"id":3007,"date":"2025-09-29T07:36:01","date_gmt":"2025-09-29T07:36:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/2025\/09\/29\/afghanistans-bagram-airbase-why-is-trump-desperate-to-take-it-back\/"},"modified":"2025-09-29T07:36:01","modified_gmt":"2025-09-29T07:36:01","slug":"afghanistans-bagram-airbase-why-is-trump-desperate-to-take-it-back","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/2025\/09\/29\/afghanistans-bagram-airbase-why-is-trump-desperate-to-take-it-back\/","title":{"rendered":"Afghanistan\u2019s Bagram airbase: Why is Trump desperate to take it back?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

United States President Donald Trump has demanded that Afghanistan\u2019s ruling Taliban hand the country\u2019s Bagram airbase over to Washington, five years after he signed a deal with the group that paved the way for the US withdrawal from Kabul.<\/p>\n

At a news conference with United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer on September 18, Trump told reporters that the US government was \u201ctrying to get [Bagram] back\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe gave it to [the Taliban] for nothing. We want that base back,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Two days later, on September 20, he followed up that demand with a pointed threat on his Truth Social platform: \u201cIf Afghanistan doesn\u2019t give Bagram Airbase back to those that built it, the United States of America, BAD THINGS ARE GOING TO HAPPEN!!!\u201d<\/p>\n

The Taliban has rejected Trump\u2019s demand.<\/p>\n

This is not the first time, however, that Trump has shown his interest in retaking the former US military base. In a February 2025 media briefing, now deleted from the White House\u2019s website, Trump was quoted as saying, \u201cWe were going to keep Bagram. We were going to keep a small force on Bagram.\u201d<\/p>\n

So what is the Bagram base, why does Trump want it so badly, what is its strategic significance, and can the US get it back?<\/p>\n

What is the Bagram airbase?<\/h2>\n

Four years after US forces evacuated their military bases in Afghanistan, Bagram remains a contentious piece of real estate that the Trump administration wants to retake from the Taliban.<\/p>\n

The base, which has two concrete runways \u2013 one 3.6km long (2.2 miles), the other 3km (1.9 miles) \u2013 lies about 50km (31 miles) outside Afghanistan\u2019s capital, Kabul. It has been a strategic stronghold for the many military powers that have controlled Afghanistan \u2013 and fought over it \u2013 over the past half-century.<\/p>\n

\"Interactive_Bagram_airbase_September25_2025\"
(Al Jazeera)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The airfield was first developed by the Soviet Union in the 1950s, an early shot fired at the dawn of the Cold War that would drag Afghanistan into its vortex for decades. But the Afghan government of the time controlled the base.<\/p>\n

That changed after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979 \u2014 its troops stayed in charge of the base for a decade, before Moscow withdrew from the country.<\/p>\n

In 1991, the Soviet-backed government of Mohammad Najibullah lost control of Bagram to the Northern Alliance, one of the most influential opposition groups fighting for power. But the Northern Alliance would itself lose control of the base to the Taliban.<\/p>\n

After the NATO invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the base then became a strategic centrepiece of the US military\u2019s presence in the country, used as a special command for various military divisions, steadily growing in size, capacity and utility.<\/p>\n

At its peak in 2009, the base could host about 10,000 people. While US forces controlled the base, it was shared with other NATO members, including units from the UK\u2019s Royal Marines.<\/p>\n

Aside from military units, the base hosted a large prison that became notorious<\/a> for abuse and torture of Afghan detainees by US forces and their local partners. Bagram was also home to a fully functioning hospital, housing barracks for thousands of soldiers, and several US chain restaurants, like Pizza Hut and Subway.<\/p>\n

The base and facilities were evacuated, with much of the weapons and equipment destroyed, by US forces during the withdrawal of August 2021. What remained was looted by local groups before the Taliban seized control.<\/p>\n

Why does Trump want the Bagram base back?<\/h2>\n

Trump has frequently complained about how the US left major weapons behind in its hasty evacuation in 2021, in effect handing them over to the Taliban and other armed groups in Afghanistan.<\/p>\n

But experts say that the real appeal of Bagram lies not in the largely wrecked military equipment there, nor in the abandoned chain restaurants on the complex.<\/p>\n

There is the symbolic value of showcasing US control over a base built by a geopolitical rival. \u201cIt has always been of important strategic value, since it was built by the Soviet Union,\u201d said Ibraheem Bahiss, senior analyst at Crisis Group.<\/p>\n

The rugged, mountainous terrain of Afghanistan makes controlling its airspace difficult, with few places suitable for landing large military planes and weapons carriers. Bagram \u2013 the country\u2019s largest airbase \u2013 offers rare respite.<\/p>\n

The Bagram base played a \u201ccrucial role\u201d in Washington\u2019s so-called \u201cwar on terror\u201d after 2001, said Hekmatullah Azamy, security analyst with the Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies (CAPS), a think tank with headquarters in Kabul.<\/p>\n

Major air missions took off from Bagram, including ones that led to civilian killings, such as the 2015 bombing of a hospital run by Doctors Without Borders, known by its French initials MSF, in Kunduz, in which 42 people were killed and at least 30 were injured.<\/p>\n

The US commander in Afghanistan repeatedly changed his narrative on what prompted the bombing, before eventually acknowledging it was a mistake. Then US-President Barack Obama apologised.<\/p>\n

But even though the US has now left Afghanistan, Bagram\u2019s value has only increased, Azamy said, with the rise of Chinese influence in the region.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs the priorities shifted, and the US started viewing China as the number one threat, this base is seemingly important once again, primarily because of its proximity to China and the significance it has,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Bagram is about 800km (about 500 miles) from the Chinese border, and about 2,400km (about 1,500 miles) from the nearest Chinese missile factory in Xinjiang.<\/p>\n

Trump has also referred to China as a key reason for wanting to retake control of Bagram, saying this month in London that the base is \u201can hour away from where [China] makes its nuclear weapons\u201d. Back in February, Trump also claimed that the base was \u201cexactly one hour away from where China makes its nuclear missiles\u201d.<\/p>\n

Chinese officials, on their part, have pushed back. \u201cAfghanistan\u2019s future should be decided by its own people. Stirring up tension and creating confrontation in the region won\u2019t be popular,\u201d Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Lin Jian said after Trump\u2019s comments alongside UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer.<\/p>\n

Can the US retake Bagram?<\/h2>\n

This is questionable, say experts.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn theory, Bagram is a strategic base for the US in terms of projecting power into the region,\u201d said Ashley Jackson, co-director at the Geneva-headquartered Centre on Armed Groups. She pointed out, however, that \u201cthe move would seem to be in direct contradiction to the US policy of ending the military mission in Afghanistan\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe sheer logistics of negotiating redeployment\u00a0and handing back would be extremely challenging and lengthy, and it\u2019s not clear that this would serve either side\u2019s strategic interests,\u201d Jackson added.<\/p>\n

Both Azamy and Bahiss believe the Taliban, too, have no incentive to want to give up Bagram.<\/p>\n

Such a move would \u201ccrush the Taliban\u2019s legitimacy,\u201d Azamy said.<\/p>\n

Bahiss said the group \u201cwould be unwilling to accept a foreign footprint on Afghanistan, including at Bagram airbase\u201d.<\/p>\n

The Taliban movement was built in large part on the idea of fighting foreign occupation and influence, Kabul-based Bahiss pointed out. The group has often argued that \u201cas long as foreign troops hold even one metre of soil, jihad or holy war is an obligation\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cAny negotiations with a foreign military would shatter their strength and risk their own members deserting the movement in large droves,\u201d Bahiss said.<\/p>\n

How has the Taliban responded?<\/h2>\n

Indeed, the Taliban, on their part, have been very clear, and have repeatedly rejected Trump\u2019s demands. On September 21, the group cited the 2020 agreement that Trump\u2019s administration signed with the Taliban in Doha.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt should be recalled that, under the Doha Agreement, the US pledged that \u2018it will not use or threaten force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Afghanistan, nor interfere in its internal affairs,\u201d Hamdullah Fitrat, deputy spokesperson of the Taliban, said on social media.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe US needs to remain faithful to its commitments.\u201d<\/p>\n

Fitrat\u2019s comments followed Trump\u2019s threat of \u201cbad things\u201d happening to Afghanistan if the Taliban did not hand Bagram over.<\/p>\n

What is the US game plan?<\/h2>\n

The Taliban\u2019s refusal to negotiate over the base has not deterred Trump, so far, and analysts believe the US might be using the Bagram demand as a bargaining chip.<\/p>\n

It could be \u201ca means of demanding something grand, like Bagram, and settling for something smaller and more symbolic down the road, [like] the return of some weapons and equipment, which the president has talked about previously,\u201d Jackson of the Centre on Armed Groups said.<\/p>\n

A 2022 assessment by the then-US Department of Defense, now the Department of War, found that more than $7bn worth of weapons had been abandoned in Afghanistan, much of which is now believed to be in the Taliban\u2019s control.<\/p>\n

And if the Bagram demand is a gambit in a larger negotiation, that might be good news for the Taliban, too, say analysts. Afghanistan\u2019s rulers have been seeking wider international legitimacy, and talks with the US are a step towards that.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn some ways, the Trump administration is [saying that it is] open to the idea of engagement with the Taliban,\u201d Kabul-based Bahiss said, pointing to other examples of the US president showing a willingness to build ties with leaders Washington has previously treated as enemies: from Ahmed al-Sharaa in Syria to Vladimir Putin in Russia and Kim Jong Un in North Korea.<\/p>\n

But ultimately, Bahiss said, Trump\u2019s desire to do business with the Taliban will also depend on what is on the table for him.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat can the Taliban offer? Is it going to be private investment, minerals, or military assets like Bagram?\u201d asked Bahiss.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s really up to the Taliban to show what they can offer.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

United States President Donald Trump has demanded that Afghanistan\u2019s ruling Taliban hand the country\u2019s Bagram airbase over to Washington, five years after he signed a deal with the group that paved the way for the US withdrawal from Kabul. At a news conference with United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer on September 18, Trump told … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3008,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3007","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-travel"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3007","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3007"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3007\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3008"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3007"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3007"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pronews.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3007"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}