Date: September 19, 2025
By: Manisha Sahu, America News World
During a September 18 press conference in London with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, President Donald Trump made headlines by announcing that the United States is making efforts to “get back” control of Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan — a major military facility that the U.S. departed in 2021.
What Trump Said
Trump said, “We’re trying to get it back … One of the reasons we want the base is … it’s an hour away from where China makes its nuclear weapons.” He emphasized that proximity to China was part of the strategic justification.
He criticized the withdrawal from Afghanistan during Joe Biden’s presidency, saying the base was “given up … for nothing.” Trump reiterated that in his view the U.S. should never have relinquished it.
Trump further claimed Bagram is “one of the biggest airbases in the world” and underscored its runway strength and size, saying you could land almost anything there—even “a planet.”
What We Don’t Know Yet
While the rhetoric is clear, several important details remain uncertain:
Whether there are ongoing negotiations with the Taliban or Afghan authorities to restore U.S. presence. Trump suggested the Taliban “need things from us,” which could imply leverage, but specifics are missing.
What kind of U.S. presence might return — whether it would be a full military deployment, a logistical facility, or something more limited.
What timeline is involved, and what political, diplomatic, or military obstacles exist. No official plan (at least publicly) has been detailed.
Some Background
Bagram Air Base was the largest U.S. military facility in Afghanistan during the height of operations. After decades of use, it was abandoned during the chaotic U.S. withdrawal in July-August 2021. Control passed first to the Afghan government, then quickly to the Taliban as U.S. forces fully departed.
The base’s strategic value is considerable: it has long runways, large capacity, and had been central to U.S. operations in the region.
Reactions & Challenges
The Afghan authorities (in the form of the Taliban government) have rejected the idea of a renewed U.S. military presence, with an Afghan foreign ministry official stating that any military return has been “completely rejected.” They say cooperation could be political or economic, but not military presence.
U.S. officials have not publicly confirmed detailed plans or strategies for reclaiming Bagram. Some analysts warn that even attempting to retake it could resemble a re-invasion, with all the logistical, diplomatic, and security risks that entails.
Strategic Considerations
Trump’s mention of China suggests a broader geopolitical framing: the U.S. sees Bagram not merely as a legacy issue or symbolic asset, but as part of a strategy to monitor, project power, or contain rivals in Asia.
Reclaiming Bagram would carry high costs — diplomatic (negotiating with the Taliban or Afghan entities), security (ensuring the base is safe against insurgent threats), and financial/military (deploying, staffing, supplying).
What It Could Mean
If Trump follows through, several outcomes are possible:
Diplomatic Negotiations: Perhaps the most probable path short term is some deal with the Taliban for limited access or use, rather than a full re-militarization.
Symbolic Reassertion: Even talk of regaining the base may serve domestic or geopolitical messaging — showing strength, criticizing previous administration decisions, or shifting how adversaries view U.S. reach.
Security Risks: Any military presence in Afghanistan under current conditions remains vulnerable to attacks by extremist groups, militant factions, and uncertainty about Taliban governance.
Bottom Line
President Trump’s remarks mark a sharp turn in rhetoric about U.S. involvement in Afghanistan. While he says the United States is “trying” to get back Bagram Air Base, no public plan or confirmation has been offered that such a return is underway — or what it would look like. The Taliban have rejected the idea of a renewed U.S. military footprint, though both sides seem interested in maintaining or developing economic and political relations.
For now, this remains a story in motion — one with significant implications — but also with many unanswered questions.
Discover more from ANW
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
