By Mohammed Abunahel, World BEYOND War, September 21, 2025
Reintroducing Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan is not so much a “return to reason” in foreign policy as it is a symbolic use of a military issue to fuel a domestic mobilization policy based on instigating wars rather than extinguishing them. This is what U.S. President Donald Trump hinted at when he announced, regarding Bagram, “we are trying to get it back,” citing its proximity to China’s nuclear facilities—a proposal that has quickly been rejected by the current Kabul authorities and prompted professional warnings that it could effectively amount to a “re-invasion.”
There is something unknown and terrifying about Trump’s talk of reclaiming Bagram Air Base. It is not a wise, strategic decision; I see it as a continuation of the same chaos that has spawned a thousand disasters.
Reigniting a new war under the slogan of “strategic power” generates nothing but pain, corruption, illusions, and, above all, a distortion of the human spirit. To be clear, a policy that relies on a foreign military presence and bases in lands whose peoples disapprove of it is inherently doomed to failure.
Trump speaks of a “nuclear China,” as if the U.S. base would be a guard against it, or prevent the Chinese from possessing or using nuclear weapons. However, the truth is that China’s nuclear weapons are not in Afghanistan; they are within its facilities, within its borders, and within its internal forces. A base in Afghanistan or anywhere in the world will not alter China’s nuclear capabilities. Still, it will exacerbate political divisions, strain U.S. finances, and tempt the United States’ adversaries to invest in counterstrikes rather than stability.
Who benefits from the presence of the military bases? Security and military companies, contractors, arms industries, and all those who benefit from the massive budgets spent on establishing bases, building airfields, air defense, and maintenance. They propagate the idea of ”security,” but it is security built on fear, the possibility of an enemy, and threats, not peace. When Trump raises the Bagram flag, he uses it as an electoral tool, not as a carefully considered strategic dimension.
Every foreign base means soldiers, equipment, targets, possible airstrikes, the possibility of civilian casualties, the destruction of cities, and the marriage of conflict to blood. The American people are burdened by pension expenses, health care, education, and poverty. Why spend millions on a military base in a country cursed by war? Every civilian death in Afghanistan or in any foreign war is a stain on the conscience of a policy that says, “We are protecting our interests.”
Who will agree to have a military base imposed on their country, even by a superpower? Reclaiming Bagram Air Base means an interference in the sovereignty of a country. This unacceptable military intervention is a humiliation of dignity and will breed resistance, hatred, and perhaps revenge. Who would believe that U.S. policy under the Trump administration respects sovereignty? Instead, it acts as if it were an unaccountable empire.
Afghanistan itself is the biggest lesson. More than twenty years of al-Qaeda, bombs, promises, training of local forces, and financial support. All of this went down the drain. Is the United States trying to repeat the same mistake? Is it trying to reopen a wound that alerted the world that war always leaves indelible losses?
Why do I reject Donald Trump’s policy? Because it reproduces a mentality of “military power above all else,” favoring the spirit of war instead of the spirit of peace. It fuels hatred and extremism, inciting both internal and external polarization. Because it reduces politics to a permanent arena of conflict, rather than treating it as a tool for negotiation, cooperation, or humanity, it exhausts the United States’ internal capacity, accelerates economic drain, and weakens international trust.
I am not neutral regarding this point, and I do not believe that “sometimes we must use force” in this situation. No. War is never the way. The base is never a symbol of pride, but a symbol of wounds. A policy that declares “I want a base” is a policy seeking war, not security.
If Trump thinks that reclaiming Bagram Air Base will give him dominance or make him look powerful, he’s deceiving himself. Real strength lies in admitting mistakes, acknowledging the harm that has been caused, stopping the exploitation of lands that aren’t his, and ceasing to spread fear to fuel wars.
I say no to Bagram, no to the policy of foreign bases, and no to any politician who adopts war as their policy. No to interests built on the blood of peoples, no to money stolen in the name of security, no to force that breaks humanity, no to policies that fuel wars and expose the fragility of slogans.
War is not an option, and bases are not an investment; it is a deception.
