EN

U.S. Rethinks Its Military Footprint Across the Middle East

SAFAA SUBHI

1- The United States is reviewing its military posture across the Middle East after attacks exposed vulnerabilities at key regional bases. 2- Options under consideration include redesigning the naval base in Bahrain, reducing troop levels in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, moving command centers underground, and evaluating alternative locations. 3- The review could reshape the U.S. military's regional strategy for decades.

The latest

The Pentagon has launched a broad review of its network of military bases in the Middle East after recent Iranian attacks highlighted how exposed some U.S. installations have become to missiles and drones, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Officials familiar with the discussions told the newspaper that the review goes beyond repairing damaged facilities. It is examining where U.S. forces should be based in the future and whether some long-standing installations are still worth maintaining.

Details

  • The Pentagon is considering a major redesign of the U.S. naval support facility in Bahrain, home to the Fifth Fleet, with some damaged structures potentially never being rebuilt.
  • Military planners are also weighing reductions in the U.S. presence in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, relocating parts of command-and-control operations to hardened underground facilities, and dispersing military assets across more locations to reduce the impact of future attacks.
  • Officials are also discussing shifting some military functions farther west, beyond the range of Iranian missiles. Two officials said Israel is among the locations being evaluated after hosting dozens of U.S. aircraft, including fighters and refueling planes, during the recent conflict.
  • A Wall Street Journal investigation, based on satellite imagery, videos, and interviews with current and former military personnel, found that Bahrain’s naval support base suffered significant damage, including its headquarters building, more than a dozen other structures, and two satellite communications stations. The Pentagon has not publicly acknowledged the full extent of the damage.
  • U.S. Central Command maintains that the attacks did not significantly disrupt military operations. Spokesman Capt. Tim Hawkins said protecting personnel remained the military’s top priority, noting that more than 8,000 Iranian missiles and drones resulted in only two U.S. casualties, while American forces struck more than 13,500 targets.

Background

The Pentagon’s concerns did not begin with the latest conflict. For years, U.S. military commanders have warned that many American bases in the Gulf sit within range of Iran’s growing missile and drone arsenal. They have repeatedly argued for dispersing forces and building more resilient infrastructure, but those proposals had seen limited implementation.

The United States currently maintains between 40,000 and 50,000 troops across roughly 19 military sites in the Middle East, including major installations in Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Iraq, and Syria. Together, they form the backbone of U.S. air and naval operations across the region.

The latest review follows a series of attacks on U.S. military facilities during the recent confrontation with Iran. Independent assessments have suggested the damage at some installations, particularly in Bahrain and Kuwait, may have been more extensive than publicly disclosed.

At the same time, the Trump administration has sought to reassure Gulf allies that any future engagement with Iran would not come at the expense of their security, a message Secretary of State Marco Rubio reiterated during his recent visit to the region.

What to watch

No final decisions have been made, but the review could produce the most significant overhaul of the U.S. military posture in the Gulf since the Iraq War. If Washington moves toward a smaller, more dispersed, and better-protected regional presence, it would signal that Iran’s expanding missile capabilities have fundamentally changed the strategic calculus for U.S. forces.

 

What to read next