Editor’s Note:
As international media recently reported, regional powers have signalled firm opposition to any U.S. attempt to reclaim Afghanistan’s Bagram Air Base. Russia, China, Iran, and Pakistan view such a move as a direct threat to regional security and stability — reflecting a broader consensus that Washington’s return to the heart of Central Asia would reignite great power tensions. This context underscores the stakes outlined in Giorgia Pietropaoli’s analysis: Bagram has once again become the fault line of a new geopolitical contest, where competing visions of influence and sovereignty collide.
Bagram: Trump’s Ultimatum and the New Cold War in Central Asia
By Georgia Pietropaoli
Beneath the fiery rhetoric, the struggle over the abandoned airbase is the fuse for a fierce economic and diplomatic contest between Washington and the Taliban-China-Russia axis.
Recent and peremptory threats from President Donald Trump have revived a name thought relegated to history: the Bagram Air Base. The massive installation, once the pulsing heart of US operations in Afghanistan, has returned to the centre of a diplomatic storm. “If Afghanistan doesn’t surrender Bagram to the United States, bad things are going to happen,” Trump thundered, reiterating: “If they don’t do it, you will see what I will do.” The sudden and decisive demand to reclaim the base—hastily abandoned in 2021 after two decades and billions of dollars in investment—is clearly a crucial point on his agenda.
Bagram carries the weight of two failed invasions. First, the central hub for Soviet air operations (1979-1989) was restructured and equipped to serve as the logistical and military backbone for NATO and the United States for twenty years. Its recent history, however, is stained: the final withdrawal, in July 2021, was a genuine precipitous flight in the middle of the night, an act that left the base looted and in chaos, symbolising Washington’s strategic defeat. This reckless abandonment created a power vacuum that Trump is now desperately seeking to fill.
Bagram is not simply a matter of wounded pride; it is a fundamental strategic asset. The real stake is to the East. Trump has pointed to its proximity to China, claiming the base is “only an hour away from where China is developing its nuclear weapons.”
Although nuclear experts have noted that Chinese test sites in Xinjiang are nearly 2,000 kilometres away, the strategic interest is undeniable. The region hosts advanced missile systems, space vehicles, and defence technologies. Tong Zhao, a Senior Fellow in the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, observed that Beijing continues to maintain and even expand the ancient Lop Nur site. Lop Nur, located in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region in northwestern China, is the historical and sole nuclear test site where China conducted all 45 of its nuclear explosions between 1964 and 1996, the year Beijing signed the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). While China has respected the moratorium on explosive nuclear testing since 1996, observations by Zhao and other analysts (often based on satellite imagery and open intelligence reports) indicate the site has not actually been decommissioned. Instead, they have detected construction, modernization, and maintenance activities, such as the addition of new roads, power lines, and expanded support areas, raising fears that China is preparing the capability to conduct new subterranean nuclear tests, or is using the Lop Nur infrastructure for the development and testing of advanced missile systems (such as hypersonic missiles or missile defense technologies).
Reclaiming Bagram would therefore allow Washington to project a more direct and persistent surveillance and intelligence capability directly onto Beijing’s emerging interests in an area vital to its security and the Belt and Road Initiative.
For the Taliban, surrendering Bagram is not just an economic deal but an ideological sacrifice that risks fracturing the movement. The regime cannot tolerate even the shadow of US troops without risking fuelling internal disillusionment and pushing fighters toward even more extremist groups. The primary beneficiary of this instability is ISIS-K, a terrorist faction that continues to threaten the very cohesion of the regime. Their response to the American threats has been symbolically aggressive, with fighters circulating images of themselves crushing the American flag, underscoring the regime’s unreliability.
Trump’s threats reflect a deep anxiety: the fear that Afghanistan is slipping into the orbit of China and Russia. In this scenario, Bagram is the symbol of a shifted balance of power.
Nonetheless, a direct military attack to reclaim the base is widely considered improbable. A former Defence official, cited anonymously by CBS News, warned that a return would require the deployment of thousands of troops. The human, financial, and institutional costs are too high, and US public opinion and Congress remain firmly opposed. The seriousness with which Trump has raised the issue, therefore, suggests an intense non-military coercive action. This is where Washington can truly strike: through the tightening of financial sanctions and diplomatic isolation.
In this context of diplomatic warfare, it is plausible that there is an indirect and purely strategic connection between the recent internet blackout that hit Afghanistan (cutting fibre optic connectivity and mobile services) and the Bagram base, despite the Taliban officially attributing the outage to “morality” concerns. This hypothesis rests on the crucial role the blackout can play in terms of security and geopolitical control. Primarily, the total communication outage serves as an ideal cover for sensitive operations: if secret negotiations, internal military manoeuvres, or anti-Taliban activities were underway near the strategic Bagram base, the digital silence would prevent the immediate dissemination of sensitive news and multimedia content externally. Furthermore, the blackout serves as a clear demonstration of full sovereignty and absolute control over the territory. By switching off the entire national network at a time of renewed diplomatic tension over Bagram, the Taliban sends an unmistakable signal of strength to external powers, reinforcing their negotiating position and their capacity to exert deterrence against any interference concerning the former American base.
Opposition to the American return isn’t just internal. In a joint statement on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, the Foreign Ministers of Russia, China, Iran, and Pakistan expressed their opposition to the establishment of a US military base at Bagram, deeming it a serious threat to regional security.
However, this united front does not trust the Taliban’s ability to maintain control at all. The four powers voiced deep and unequivocal concern about the activities of terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda, ISIS-K, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, and the East Turkestan Movement. They called on the Taliban to adopt effective and verifiable measures to dismantle these groups and prevent their recruitment, financing, and access to weapons. This mistrust highlights the fragility of the regime and its inability to guarantee regional stability.
For the Kabul regime, the noble goal of preserving its sovereignty will soon collide with the harsh reality of the economic crisis and the need to loosen the financial noose that only the United States can tighten or loosen.
The contest over Bagram, in essence, has transformed into a subtle but fierce economic and diplomatic war. Trump’s ultimatum is a litmus test that reflects not only regret for the lost base but, above all, the American determination to counter the geopolitical advance of China and Russia in Central Asia. The outcome of this cold battle will dictate the new rules of the game, with Bagram as its most eloquent symbol.
1 Comment