Bagram Airbase Standoff: Why the Taliban and Regional Powers Reject US Return to Afghanistan:

In a surprising turn of international diplomacy, the Taliban and Afghanistan's neighboring countries have united to firmly oppose any return of US military forces—particularly to the strategic Bagram Airbase. Former US President Donald Trump recently reignited tensions by demanding that the Taliban hand back control of Bagram, a former US military base north of Kabul. “We gave it to [the Taliban] for nothing. We want that base back,” Trump said during a visit to the UK. He later posted on social media that “bad things” would happen if the US didn’t regain Bagram, raising alarms across the region. However, this aggressive rhetoric has met strong resistance. In early October, a key meeting in Moscow brought together officials from Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, and the Central Asian republics—Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan—alongside Taliban representatives. Together, they issued a joint statement rejecting any foreign military presence in Afghanistan. Though the US wasn’t named directly, experts agree the message was unmistakable: The region stands united against American military redeployment, especially to Bagram Airbase. Bagram’s Strategic Value—and Symbolism Originally built by the Soviet Union in the 1950s, Bagram later became the nerve center of US operations during its 20-year presence in Afghanistan. Its large runways and logistical capacity make it one of the few viable large-scale military bases in the country. Trump has justified his demands by pointing to Bagram’s proximity to China—only 800 km from the Chinese border and about 2,400 km from key military sites in Xinjiang. He claims the base could help counter China's growing influence. Yet experts say the likelihood of a US military return is slim. Kamran Bokhari, an analyst at the Washington-based New Lines Institute, said maintaining Bagram would be a massive logistical and political challenge—especially given Washington’s current strategy of military retrenchment. Taliban’s Delicate Balancing Act For the Taliban, the idea of surrendering Bagram is a non-starter. Caving to US pressure would not only damage their internal credibility but could also trigger domestic resistance. “Offering Bagram to the US would risk major backlash,” said Ibraheem Bahiss, a senior analyst with Crisis Group. At the same time, the Taliban seek legitimacy and economic relief. Western sanctions have crippled Afghanistan’s economy, and the group is eager to reengage with the international community. But as experts note, any negotiation with the US—such as on sanctions—will require the Taliban to offer something in return. That could include counterterrorism cooperation or regional security guarantees. Regional Unity: Why Neighbors Say ‘No’ to US Return The Taliban's stance has found rare support among countries that often disagree on other geopolitical issues. India and Pakistan, long-time rivals in Afghan affairs, joined hands with China, Iran, and Russia in opposing any renewed foreign military presence. Each country has its reasons. Central Asian states fear their borders could be destabilized by renewed conflict. Iran doesn’t want US forces close to its eastern frontier. Russia and China view an American base as a threat to their influence in the region. “This isn’t anti-Americanism—it’s strategic pragmatism,” said Kazakh analyst Kuat Akizhanov. Hosting a US base, he noted, would drag smaller states into great-power rivalries, something they are keen to avoid. Instead, regional players prefer working through local forums like the Moscow Format or the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), which focus on regional security and economic integration without outside interference. No Formal Recognition, But Functional Engagement Despite rejecting US intervention, most of Afghanistan’s neighbors are now increasing engagement with the Taliban. Afghan officials are meeting counterparts in Pakistan, Iran, China, and even India—marking a shift from isolation to cautious diplomacy. This engagement isn’t full diplomatic recognition. But it reflects a growing understanding that regional stability hinges on cooperation with Kabul’s current rulers, not their exclusion. As Taimur Khan of Pakistan’s Institute of Strategic Studies puts it: “What we are seeing is not recognition—but a practical acknowledgment that isolating Afghanistan won’t serve anyone’s interests.

NEWS