At a time when Donald Trump is openly flaunting a dangerously transactional worldview—boasting of expanding American strategic footprints and even hinting at places like Cuba as potential future targets—the global order appears to be slipping into an era reminiscent of old-style power projection. This is no longer about alliances or stability; it increasingly resembles a 21st-century replay of coercive dominance, where military muscle dictates geopolitical outcomes.
Against this backdrop, warnings from circles close to Vladimir Putin about a possible American move to reclaim the Bagram Air Base acquire far greater significance. This is not an isolated tactical consideration—it is part of a broader pattern signalling an attempt to reassert control over strategic geographies—echoing, in modern form, the instincts of past imperial powers.
The comparison may be uncomfortable, but it is difficult to ignore. History has seen phases where expansionist impulses—whether under colonial empires or aggressive regimes like that of Adolf Hitler—were justified in the language of order and security. Today, the vocabulary has evolved, but the strategic intent appears eerily familiar.
In that context, the Bagram Air Base is not merely an airstrip. It is the most critical military pivot in Afghanistan—capable of projecting power across Central Asia, monitoring Iran, influencing Pakistan, and keeping a strategic watch on western China.
Any renewed American presence there would dramatically alter the regional balance. It would effectively place a permanent lever of influence in a zone already fraught with competing interests. More importantly, it risks dragging Afghanistan back into the vortex of great-power rivalry—something the region can ill afford after decades of instability.
The American Doctrine: Assertive and Unpredictable
Under Donald Trump, the United States has increasingly signalled a preference for hard power backed by economic coercion. The ongoing tensions involving Iran and the volatility around the Strait of Hormuz underline how fragile the region already is.
An attempt to re-enter Bagram would not be seen as stabilising—it would be viewed as escalatory. It could provoke resistance within Afghanistan, trigger counter-moves by regional powers, and once again turn the country into a battleground for proxy conflicts.
Why India Cannot Ignore This
For India, the stakes are immediate and significant:
- A US military foothold in Afghanistan risks restoring Pakistan as a strategic intermediary, strengthening its leverage.
- It could dilute India’s long-standing developmental and diplomatic investments in Afghanistan, especially after the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan in 2021.
- It creates a strategic pressure point close to India’s extended neighbourhood, with surveillance and military implications.
Instability in Afghanistan has historically spilled over into South Asia. A renewed militarisation risks empowering extremist networks and complicating India’s internal security calculus.
Russia’s Warning and a Strategic Convergence
Russia’s apprehensions are rooted in its own security concerns about NATO’s proximity. Yet, in this instance, Moscow’s warning aligns with India’s interests. Even China, despite its calibrated public posture, would view a revived US base with suspicion.
This convergence presents India with a diplomatic opportunity—to shape a broader regional consensus against the militarisation of Afghanistan.
India’s Diplomatic Options: Firm but Calculated
India’s response must begin with strategic clarity:
- Direct Strategic Signalling to Washington
New Delhi must convey—firmly but diplomatically—that any unilateral move to control Bagram would be destabilising and contrary to regional interests. - Building a Regional Coalition
Engaging with Russia, Iran, and Central Asian states to create a collective position against foreign military bases in Afghanistan will amplify India’s voice. - Recalibrated Engagement with Kabul
Despite ideological differences, India must deepen its engagement with Afghanistan—through humanitarian aid, infrastructure, and political dialogue—to retain influence. - Multilateral Pressure
At global forums, India can push for Afghanistan’s neutrality and sovereignty, reinforcing the principle that its territory must not be used for external power projection.
Military Preparedness: Indirect but Decisive
India does not need to mirror aggression, but it cannot remain passive.
- Intelligence Dominance
Expanding surveillance and intelligence networks in the region will be critical to track developments. - Strategic Coordination
Quiet security understandings with countries like Russia and Iran can serve as a deterrent without overt escalation. - Indirect Support to Afghan Autonomy
If Afghanistan resists external control, India could explore calibrated, indirect assistance—logistical, technological, or intelligence-based—to ensure it retains strategic independence. - Operational Readiness
Statements from India’s military leadership about preparedness are significant. The evolving nature of warfare—drones, cyber capabilities, and precision strikes—demands constant readiness.
Lessons from Ongoing Conflicts
Recent conflicts have exposed the vulnerability of even advanced militaries to asymmetric warfare. Low-cost drones and missile systems have altered the battlefield.
India has been a keen observer—and learner. Integrating these lessons into its defence strategy will be crucial in maintaining a technological edge.
The Pakistan Variable
Any US move into Bagram will inevitably involve Pakistan—either as facilitator or beneficiary. Islamabad’s attempt to regain strategic relevance through such developments is predictable.
India must anticipate and counter this dynamic proactively.
The issue is not merely whether the United States can re-establish control over Bagram. It is whether such a move will be accepted by the region—and at what cost.
For India, this is a defining moment. It must balance its strategic partnership with the US against its core national interests. It must engage where necessary, resist where required, and prepare for all contingencies.
Bagram is not just about Afghanistan.
It is about the future balance of power in Asia.
And India cannot afford to watch from the sidelines.
