From CENTCOM commanders to Elliott Abrams, calls are growing to rethink US bases in the Middle East. Ending the war should include closing those bases.
A US Army team carries the the remains of Sgt. Michael Emmanuel Swinton, 30, of Fayetteville, North Carolina, in Dover, Delaware, on July 22. Swinton was killed on July 19 at Erbil Air Base in Iraq.(Saul Loeb / AFP via Getty Images)
Their names were James Feehan, Isabella Gonzales, Michael Emmanuel Swinton, and Angel S. Rampersad. The four US soldiers, one just 19, were killed amid President Donald Trump’s recent escalation of the war on Iran. Their deaths at US military bases in Jordan and Iraq highlight the vulnerability of US troops across the Middle East.
Since the illegal war’s first days, US bases have suffered extensive damage from Iranian retaliation. The losses include 18 US military deaths, dozens killed in host nations, and billions in infrastructure costs. This damage and the limited military utility of US installations are forcing a much-needed reconsideration of the US military presence in the Middle East. A growing consensus finds that dramatic changes are needed.
The result will almost certainly be the end of the nearly half-century-long era when scores of US bases have occupied the Middle East. The sooner US leaders accept this reality and start moving the military out of the region, the safer our nation, our troops, and our world will be.
Base Buildup and Vulnerability
US bases began dotting the Middle East around 1980 when Presidents Jimmy Carter and, after, Ronald Reagan started building installations in response to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and Iran’s 1979 revolution. More appeared during the 1991 Gulf War and the 2001 and 2003 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They remained long after original rationales disappeared. Today, the military has at least 80 installations in almost every country across the region.
The Iranian military has attacked most countries hosting US bases because they’ve helped enable the US/Israeli war. In addition to the human toll, damage to military infrastructure and hardware runs into the tens of billions of dollars.
US troops have been so vulnerable that military leaders moved many to local hotels and offices, likely violating the laws of war. Iran has made many Middle East installations “all but uninhabitable,” reports The New York Times.
Calls for Change
Many, including former military leaders, are urging change. Current infrastructure “has become an anachronism that endangers US troops,” writes one of the architects of US Middle East basing, former high-ranking George W. Bush and Trump 1.0 administration official Elliott Abrams.
Some want to “harden” installations by improving their ability to survive attacks. Others want to “disperse” troops to more locations, especially those farther from Iran, including Israel.
Both supposed solutions would cost taxpayers tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars in construction and operational costs. No amount of hardening and dispersing can fully protect US troops, let alone host nations. Iran could still hit US bases farther away, Abrams acknowledges, as recent deaths and injuries in Jordan show.
With the midterm elections now firmly upon us, the question is whether Democratic candidates will do more than merely occupy ballot lines as mild alternatives to the red-hot crisis that is Donald Trump.
As Trump spends over $1 billion a day on a globally destabilizing war on Iran and admits that he doesn’t “think about Americans’ financial situation,” millions across the country are struggling with the surging costs of essentials. Democrats must seize this moment and advance bold, small-“d” populist ideas—not settle for cynical caution that once again snatches defeat from the jaws of victory.
The Nation elevates progressive ideas, movements, and elected officials achieving real change across the country into the national conversation. At the same time, our journalists are exposing how crypto and AI-funded super PACs are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to knock out candidates they oppose, reporting on the devastating impact of the Supreme Court’s evisceration of the Voting Rights Act, and sounding the alarm on attempts by red states to quickly redraw electoral maps, disenfranchising Southern Black voters.
We can play this critical role because of support from readers like you. This June, we’re raising $20,000 to power The Nation’s independent journalism in the run-up to November’s immensely consequential elections.
It’s in our power to build a more just society, and your support at this critical moment brings us closer to that bold vision. I hope you’ll donate today.
Onward,
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Editor and Publisher, The Nation
Governments may refuse to host as they increasingly question allowing US bases to occupy their territory. The US military turned hosts into targets for Iran rather than offering protection, as US leaders promised.
Moving more US forces to Israel would be even more dangerous. Thousands of troops have already moved there due to damage to other bases. No missile defense system, including Israel’s “Iron Dome,” can keep US troops completely safe, as recent Iranian missile and drone strikes demonstrate.
Politically, Israel is increasingly isolated internationally and dramatically less popular across the US political spectrum. Expanding the US military presence would deepen US complicity in Israel’s crimes in Gaza, encourage more untethered Israeli aggression, and increase the likelihood that retaliatory attacks on joint bases draw the US into Israel’s wars.
Ending the Era
The era of US bases in the Middle East isn’t over yet. US officials have already announced contracts to rebuild in Qatar.
Still, closures are inevitable, just as past empires eventually abandoned bases overseas. US leaders can choose whether closures will happen through a careful process involving replacing troops with empowered diplomats or through chaos, potential military defeat, and wasted billions.
Every president since the Cold War’s end has closed bases, including in the Middle East. President Trump has openly questioned the hundreds of US bases worldwide. “What are we getting out of this?” he’s asked.
What we’re getting isn’t peace and security, as conventional wisdom long said. The war on Iran has shown how US bases are rarely defensive. Instead, they’ve been platforms for disastrous offensive wars in Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, and beyond.
With overwhelming public opposition to this war, we should demand an end to US bases in the Middle East as part of ending the conflict. Taxpayers shouldn’t spend another nickel on installations that enabled endless wars responsible for the deaths of James Feehan, Isabella Gonzales, Michael Swinton, Angel Rampersad, and thousands more across the region.
David VineDavid Vine, PhD, is a political anthropologist and author of a trilogy of books about war and peace including The United States of War: A Global History of America's Endless Conflicts, from Columbus to the Islamic State. Vine was a professor of anthropology at American University in Washington, DC, for 18 years, before resigning with the rank of full professor in 2024.