Why the US Military is Allowed to Have Bases All Over the World

The United States military casts a long shadow - with military bases or troops in more than seventy countries. It's spread across the world with over 800 total military bases. So why does the United States have military bases in so many countries? Is it an invited guest - or that holiday houseguest who just won't leave? The question is more complicated than it looks. For one thing, all six branches of the military have bases abroad - yes, including the Space Force! The newest branch of the US military has a base at Thule Air Base in Greenland, north of the Arctic Circle. This is a useful location because it hosts missile warning systems that have an easier time scanning the globe for threats from its position near the North Pole. While it primarily serves as a satellite base, over three thousand flights land there each year. Even the Coast Guard gets in on the action! This division of the US military rarely sees combat and primarily patrols sea traffic and ports - even so the US needs to keep its interests secure abroad. It has a heavy presence in Bahrain, which is at the center of conflict in the Middle East, as well as Saudi Arabia, Germany, Japan, the UK, the Netherlands, and Singapore - as well as the always controversial military base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. But that’s nothing compared to the bigger branches.

The United States Army, the first and biggest branch of the Armed Forces, is also the most wide-spread. Many of its foreign bases date back to the World Wars or even earlier, and it can be found in Belgium, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Germany, Italy, Kosovo, and Lithuania in Europe. In Asia, it has bases in Japan, Kuwait, Iraq, Israel, and a whole network of bases in South Korea. It even has a beachhead in Africa thanks to a small contingency site in Cameroon. What about the few, the proud, the Marines? The Marine corp doesn’t have as many members as the Army, being treated as an elite squad of the toughest fighters who can serve as all-purpose teams. That means they’re limited to only a few locations around the world - many of which have been the center of some of the world’s worst conflicts. Today, they can be found in Japan, Germany, and South Korea - they are also stationed on the US territory of Guam. Now let’s look to the seas. The Navy patrols the seas, so most locations of US Navy bases are likely to be based near ports - but not all of them. The Navy has a presence in the Bahamas, Bahrain, Djibouti, Greece, Italy, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Spain. It also has support locations in Poland and Romania, a connection with the United Kingdom in their British Indian Ocean territory, and a former location in Iceland. And the Navy also has a base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba - complicating that situation even more. And now it’s time to take to the skies.

The Air Force has one of the biggest footprints around the world, with US planes being located in Estonia, Germany, Honduras, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, South Korea, Cyprus, Turkey, and several key bases in the United Kingdom. It’s also based in territories like Aruba and Curacao, both run by allies of the United States. That’s a lot of bases - and the US got there in different ways. For one thing, not all of them belong to the US alone. There’s one other major category of US military bases abroad - joint bases, where the US operates a military complex in conjunction with an ally nation. Many of these do contain regular troops, but they’re also often used for top-secret weapons tests and other research. Such sites can be found in Guam, where the United States collaborates with Palau and Micronesia, as well as in Iraq and Syria. But probably the most significant of these is in Australia, where American forces have a long-standing arrangement and few diplomatic issues. As Australia has a massive amount of space in the Outback, the US has been leasing land there for weapons research for decades.

The largest of all of these sites is Pine Gap, a massive satellite surveillance base. The closest town is eleven miles away, and it’s run by the CIA and NSA. But how did the US manage to set up bases in countries which weren’t as excited about US intervention The first reason is pretty obvious - the US military isn’t easy to turn away. Many of these bases were established in the aftermath of a war, particularly in Germany and Japan. In World War II, the Allies had a lengthy occupation of the Axis Powers after they were defeated and established military bases to keep the peace. Their establishment was part of the treaties signed by the defeated nations after the war, and the new leadership had a vested interest in US presence deterring the representatives of the defeated government from trying anything. Then, of course, the Cold War ramped up and both Germany and Japan found themselves uncomfortably close to Communist countries. Having US soldiers stationed on their territory suddenly seemed like a very good idea. And then there are the more recent wars. The Korean War ended in a stalemate, not a victory - a rare occurrence for the US at the time - so the new status quo had a heavily armed, US-backed South Korea squaring off against a heavily-armed, Communist-backed North Korea. That led to the establishment of dozens of US military bases in South Korea to help maintain the demilitarized zone and provide a deterrent against a North Korean invasion. As the situation in the peninsula has changed little since the 1950s, most of those installations still exist today - making South Korea one of the countries with the highest number of active US soldiers stationed there today. But not all US bases are there to counter an external threat. When the US invaded Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 terror attacks, and two years later invaded Iraq to depose Saddam Hussein, it pretty quickly set up military bases in both.

The extended occupations included training the local security forces to keep the peace once they were gone - but insurgencies in both countries complicated situations. The US still technically has several military bases in Iraq, although control of them was transferred to the Iraqi government in the most recent troop withdrawal and they now operate as contingency bases. In Afghanistan, the government’s hasty withdrawal in 2021 led to US bases being abandoned and seized by the Taliban - the very same forces the US invaded to depose twenty years earlier! But sometimes, the US is asked to build a base in a host country. The United States doesn’t always initiate conflicts - sometimes the war is already raging when the US gets involved as part of a coalition. That was the case in 1991, when Saddam Hussein invaded the small, oil-rich country of Kuwait. The massive response to this became known as the Gulf War, and in the end Saddam was fully routed - although it would kick off an extended rivalry between the Iraqi dictator and the US that would last over a decade until his death. But in the process, the US established bases in Kuwait and other nearby nations, some of which still exist today, and were largely welcomed as a barrier of protection. However, one of these bases was particularly controversial - as this base was hosted in Saudi Arabia, many radicals thought that US presence on Saudi Arabian soil was a desecration. One of those radicals? The terrorist mastermind Osama Bin Laden. A similar situation arose later that decade when ethnic and religious conflict in the Balkans boiled over.

As the region of Kosovo battled for independence from Serbia, the Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic escalated his campaign of mass murder against Bosnian Muslims in multiple countries. A large coalition of countries united to drive Milosevic out of power and he eventually faced trial at the Hague - but that didn’t stop the conflict. As Serbia and Kosovo are in a constant state of cold war. The United States has maintained a presence in Kosovo, one of the world’s newest countries, to make sure this cold war doesn’t turn hot. And then there’s another way the US gets its bases into other countries - good old-fashioned cash. How exactly did the United States get a base on Cuba, given that the two countries have been bitter enemies for sixty years? It all goes back to 1903, when the US and Spain went to war. Cuba was one of the key battlefields, with Spain eventually ceding control of the island in the Treaty of Paris. The United States was a strong supporter of Cuba’s independence, and in the aftermath they cut a deal where the government of Cuba would lend or sell land to the United States for bases that would be used to protect Cuba’s independence. While there was some initial controversy in Cuba - most likely because they were worried about winding up under another colonial thumb - the land for Guantanamo Bay was leased in 1903 and the US has had a military presence there ever since. And while the Communist government established in the Cuban Revolution has claimed the US is illegally occupying the land, the US has responded: “Check the contract!” So it seems pretty clear that the United States is firmly entrenched in foreign countries - but what does that mean in practice?

With the exception of active war zones and occupation zones, most US soldiers stationed abroad in military bases aren’t engaged in combat. Rather, they spend their days maintaining military equipment, training and engaging in drills, testing new gear, and preparing to defend the region if need be. That’s why many bases are in locations that are just short of a potential combat zone - such as the many bases in Germany, which is a member of NATO, and Japan, which could become a potential flashpoint should China move on Taiwan. It’s believed that between 160,000 and 180,000 of the United States’ active duty personnel are stationed around the world. And as for how the country they’re stationed in feels about it, that’s a complicated issue. There are actually a lot of reasons why countries might want the US stationed on their territory. For one thing, it provides a lot of national defense security. You’re playing host to the most effective and highly-trained military in the world, with the best gear money can buy! And the US military does NOT like losses on its resume, so you can bet any country that has a US base on its territory will have some great security. Many people feel like the US is the biggest bully on the world playground - but if you’ve got the biggest bully on the playground as your best friend, all the other bullies will think twice about picking a fight with you. And it’s also good for relations with the US. Hosting a US military base is seen as the ultimate investment in a diplomatic relationship with the United States, and it sends a clear sign to your neighbors that you have a tight relationship with the world’s only superpower.

A good example of this is Israel, a small but powerful country that relies heavily on access to US military technology. The presence of a US military base is a good investment diplomatically for the tiny Middle Eastern nation, and ensures that, regardless of the current US president, the superpower will still be committed to ensuring Israel’s safety. A country that hosts a US military base is likely to be first in line for any future trade deals, especially for military technology. And in some cases, the government relies directly on the US for national defense. You don’t get out of starting World War II without paying a heavy price, and in the aftermath of the war, Germany and Japan were essentially disarmed with strict regulations put on their future military development. While Germany has since beefed up its military quite a bit, Japan has a strictly pacifist constitution that limits its military to being a strictly defensive one. As such, the United States has essentially taken control of Japan’s national security - an arrangement that continues to this day, with Japan playing host to a large number of American troops that guard it from foreign enemies. It’s an unusual arrangement, but one that both countries are happy with. And it’s not just the United States. Hosting military bases for other nations is fairly common, with countries lending out or leasing space as a way to show faith in their diplomatic relationships.

So abroad, there’s a cultural norm to allow friendly nations a place to set up their military bases. The one exception? The United States, which is the most powerful country in the world and has little reason to extend a welcome sign to other militaries. Its geographic isolation is also a reason why it doesn’t really host foreign militaries - it only borders two countries, Mexico has little international military presence, and Canada’s military has more than enough space to work and train in Canada, the second largest country in the world! And there’s one other massive reason why countries might want the US military on their soil. The United States has 55,000 soldiers deployed in Japan, the highest of any nation. The second busiest country is Germany, with over 36,000. South Korea has around 25,000, and Italy is in fourth with 12,000. That’s a large population that needs food and has money to spend on leisure - and there’s only so much you can do on a military base. So they fan out and spend their money in the local towns, boosting the economy. In fact, several towns in Germany are essentially dependent on US soldiers spending their cash, and when there was discussion of shutting some of the bases down, the locals protested because it would lead to many businesses closing! And in some cases, the United States’ military presence might be the only thing protecting a country against an aggressor.

Possibly the thorniest situation where the US maintains a consistent presence is South Korea, where war is always just short of breaking out with the Communist north. Kim Jong-Un has escalated his belligerence in recent years, even shooting ballistic missiles over Japan and triggering an attack alarm in the process. He has a reputation for being unstable - and as the only nuclear power on the peninsula, he might be tempted to invade and try to complete the mission his grandfather failed to achieve back in the 1950s. So what’s stopping him? The world’s best guard team, the US military. Those 25,000 soldiers may not actively be engaged in the demilitarized zone, which is staffed by Korean troops, but any attack on South Korea would mean US troops are in harm’s way - do they small US contingent on the peninsula would quickly jump in to help the South Koreans. But it’s not all smooth sailing. Not everyone is happy with having a US presence on their soil, even if the country is overall friendly. Cuba is one of the few countries to outright demand the US leave - and were quickly rebuffed - but most countries have some sort of movement against the troop presence on their soil. This is usually limited to overall negative feelings about war and the military, with anti-war activists often arguing that the presence of the United States military makes them more likely to get attacked, not less.

They usually have little power to impact the government’s decision - but a dramatic shift in the government could lead to contracts being redrawn. And sometimes, the conflict is more personal. Playing host to the US military means that you’ve got top-tier military equipment and protection - but it also means you’re hosting a whole bunch of soldiers, not all of which might be good apples. The soldiers often go out into the local towns and party during leave, and in most cases, the worst that’ll mean is a drunk and disorderly charge as week as a whole lot of push-ups back at base. But in some cases, the soldiers cross the line - and soldiers have been accused of assaults, murders, and sex crimes while stationed abroad. In many cases, if the evidence is strong, the government will turn the soldiers over to be prosecuted by a friendly government - if they can trust that the government will treat them fairly. But many times, soldiers have gotten away after being accused of crimes, and that leads to greater tension as locals start to feel like the benefits of the US presence isn’t worth the risk. But if push comes to shove, is there any way to get the United States to actually leave?

The main way you’re going to get the US out of your country is if they want to leave, and that has happened a few times. The Iraq War was deeply unpopular, and Barack Obama was elected to draw down the war and bring the troops home. It took a long time, but eventually all the bases were turned over to the friendly Iraqi government and are still occasionally used with permission to hunt down agents of the terrorist group ISIL. In the case of Afghanistan, the evacuation was much more hurried, and the government at the time collapsed in the days after the withdrawal - which shows that when the US wants out, they’ll get out as fast as they can and you can’t make them stay any more than you can make them leave. But other situations are far more tense. The United States has been in a state of cold war with Cuba for over sixty years, and it nearly turned hot several times, especially after the Bay of Pigs invasion. Cuba’s hands are largely tied by the contracts the previous governments signed, and few other countries are willing to pick a fight with the United States over a single military base - so Cuba’s allies aren’t going to help it get rid of the US presence at Guantanamo Bay.

Cuba is the only country actively hosting a military base in protests, as most other cases where the US set up shop after a military conflict either had the government agree to the presence, or have the US set up across the border from the enemy like in Kosovo. But if a country actually wanted to get rid of their US base, would they have any luck? For one thing, it matters where it is. The term “sphere of influence” has gotten a lot of play over the years, as countries view any encroachment into their region as a threat. This has gotten the most attention in Europe, as Russia has created a doctrine that threatens NATO if it should expand into former communist land. But the US has a sphere of influence too - and it claims all of North America as its region. Which is another reason why no one is going to help Cuba displace the US from its soil. But if another country wanted to end its relationship with the US, would it have any cards to play? For one thing, a binding order to leave the military base would have to come from the United Nations, unless the US simply agreed. And while the UN passes many resolutions each year, few have any legal binding unless they come from the UN Security Council, which has a rotating membership and five permanent members - each of which has a veto power over any resolution. Those permanent members are Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom - and the United States. So good luck passing that anti-US resolution.

And sometimes, even if the country is opposed, loopholes can be found. Many countries that were founded in the midst of an anti-colonial movement set up constitutions that explicitly banned other countries from establishing bases on their soil. Others had an isolationist movement and set up new laws later. But anything is possible when a new government comes to power, and several countries saw their constitutions essentially shredded when a US-friendly government wanted to curry favors with the superpower. It would be as simple as building an unofficial facility that isn’t officially a US base but allows soldiers to train there. These have even taken the form of golf courses owned by the military! And getting rid of a base isn’t easy. It’s not as simple as asking the US to leave and then reaping the benefits. All the property on the bases belongs to the federal government, which means the government would likely strip it clean if they decided to abandon it. The only exception is if the US agrees to hand the base over to a friendly government, like in Iraq - or if they abandon it in a hurry like in Afghanistan.

This is especially unlikely if the country they’re leaving is seen as a strategic rival, as the US would never hand over classified military technology to a potential enemy. And if a country did manage to convince the US to leave, the odds are it would permanently damage their relationship with the world’s most powerful country. And in terms of global military reach, the US truly stands alone. The US spends more on its military than any other country in the world - more than twice as much, in fact. And a chunk of that goes to staffing and maintaining those bases overseas. The result is that the US has more bases abroad than every other country combined - and you can bet any other country would hesitate to establish a military base where the US already has one. Which might explain why the US is so hesitant to abandon any of their bases - as long as they have the longest reach in the world, a lot of other countries won’t even get close. So the end result paints a pretty clear picture. US military bases improve diplomatic relations with the host country, provide access to US defense resources, deter enemies from potentially invading, and even provide a healthy boon to the local economy. On the other hand, dislodging a US base is near-impossible, can’t be achieved through the United Nations, and would bring diplomatic and strategic fallout with the US. So it looks like this bald eagle isn’t leaving the nest any time soon.

By: Tannor Cannon | Dec 12, 2022

Read Next: Insane Facts You Never Knew About the US Military