Empire of Bases

The Base Network by Region

Diego Garcia: Expelling an Entire Population to Build a Base

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the United Kingdom and the United States conspired to forcibly remove the entire indigenous population of the Chagos Archipelago — approximately 2,000 Chagossians who had lived on the islands for generations — to make way for a US military base on Diego Garcia.

The Chagossians were loaded onto cargo ships. Their pet dogs were rounded up and gassed with exhaust fumes in front of their owners — a deliberate act of cruelty meant to show there was no going back. The people were dumped in Mauritius and the Seychelles, where they lived in poverty. Many died of what they called “sagren” — sadness, homesickness, a broken heart.

The base on Diego Garcia became one of the most strategically important US installations in the world: a staging ground for operations in the Middle East, East Africa, and South Asia. B-52 and B-2 bombers launched strikes on Iraq and Afghanistan from Diego Garcia. It may have been used as a CIA “black site” for extraordinary rendition — the euphemism for kidnapping suspects and transporting them to countries where they could be tortured.

The Chagossians have been fighting for the right to return for over 50 years. In 2019, the International Court of Justice ruled that the UK's separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius was illegal. In 2024, the UK agreed in principle to transfer sovereignty to Mauritius — but the US base will remain, and the Chagossians' right to return to Diego Garcia specifically remains uncertain.

“They forced us out of our home, killed our dogs, and put us on a ship like cargo. We had nothing. We lost everything. And for what? So they could build a runway.”— Liseby Elysé, Chagossian exile

Ramstein: The Drone Relay Station

Ramstein Air Base in Germany — the largest US military community outside the United States — plays a critical role that few Germans or Americans understand: it is the relay station for US drone strikes across the Middle East and Africa.

Because the signal from drone operators in Nevada cannot reach drones in Yemen or Somalia directly (the curvature of the Earth and satellite limitations), the signal is bounced through a relay station at Ramstein. Without Ramstein, the US drone program in Africa and the Middle East could not function as it currently operates.

This means that Germany — which has not authorized any of these drone strikes and which officially opposes targeted killings — is an essential node in the US assassination program. German courts have been asked to rule on whether Germany's participation (through hosting the relay infrastructure) violates German and international law. Annual protests at Ramstein draw thousands.

Ramstein is also home to Burger King, Taco Bell, Popeyes, a movie theater, a bowling alley, and an American-style shopping mall. It is a complete American city transplanted 5,000 miles from home — from which missiles are launched that kill people on another continent. The cognitive dissonance is the architecture of empire.

Environmental Contamination: Poisoning the Land

US military bases are among the most polluted sites in the world. The contamination spans decades and continents:

Host Nation Support: Making Allies Pay for Their Own Occupation

Several US allies pay significant “host nation support” to offset the cost of US bases on their territory — a system Trump called “protection money”:

The arrangement creates a perverse dynamic: wealthy allies spend less on their own defense because the US provides it for them. This “free-riding” means American taxpayers subsidize the defense of nations with per-capita GDPs exceeding their own. Japan has the world's 4th largest economy. Germany has the largest economy in Europe. South Korea is a tech powerhouse. Yet American soldiers defend their borders 80 years after the wars that put them there ended.

The Cost: $55B/Year (At Least)

The official cost of maintaining overseas bases is approximately $55Bper year. But this is almost certainly a dramatic undercount. David Vine, author of Base Nation, estimates the true cost — including personnel, construction, maintenance, equipment, and support services — could be $100-150 billion per year.

As Vine writes: “Once a base is built, it develops its own political constituency — both in the host country and in Congress. The base creates jobs, contracts, and economic activity. Closing it means eliminating all of that. So bases almost never close, regardless of whether the threat that justified them still exists.”

South Korea: 75 Years After the Armistice

The US has maintained military bases in South Korea since 1950 — 75 years after the Korean War armistice. Approximately 28,500 US troops are permanently stationed there, at 73 military installations.

South Korea is one of the world's most technologically advanced nations, with the 10th largest GDP. Its military is among the most capable in Asia, with 500,000 active personnel and advanced weapons systems. By any reasonable assessment, South Korea is capable of defending itself. Yet the US maintains a military presence as if the 1953 armistice was signed yesterday.

The US presence has generated significant friction. Crimes by US service members — including assaults, drunk driving incidents, and a 2002 incident where a US military vehicle killed two Korean schoolgirls — have triggered massive anti-American protests. The SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) has been revised multiple times due to public anger over perceived American impunity.

The US also maintains Camp Humphreys — the largest overseas US military installation in the world, rebuilt at a cost of $11 billion. It houses 36,000 people. The base is so large it has its own zip code. Building the most expensive overseas base in history doesn't suggest planning for eventual withdrawal.

Germany: 80 Years After V-E Day

The US maintains 119 military installations in Germany — 80 years after the end of World War II. Approximately 34,000 US troops are permanently stationed there, plus thousands of civilian employees and family members.

Key US installations in Germany include:

Germany has the largest economy in Europe, spends $67 billion per year on defense, and has one of the most capable militaries in NATO. The Soviet Union — the threat that justified the US presence — collapsed 34 years ago. Yet the US military presence in Germany is larger than in most countries the US is actively at war with. The bases persist because they serve as staging areas for Middle Eastern and African operations — and because 80 years of institutional inertia, economic dependency, and political convenience make closure unthinkable.

Djibouti: America's Only Permanent African Base

Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti is the only official permanent US military base in Africa — home to4,000+ personnel and the hub for all US military and intelligence operations across East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. From Djibouti, the US conducts drone strikes in Somalia and Yemen, special operations raids, intelligence gathering, and counterterrorism operations.

Djibouti — a tiny nation of less than 1 million people — hosts military bases from the US, France, China, Japan, and Italy. The country's primary source of revenue is base leasing fees. The US pays approximately $63 million per year in rent. The base was expanded from 88 acres to 600 acres after 9/11, with $1.4 billion in construction spending.

Beyond Djibouti, the US operates a network of 29+ sites across Africa — airfields, drone bases, surveillance outposts, and special operations staging areas. Most are classified. Many were established without public announcement. AFRICOM, created in 2007, commands all US military operations on the continent. The expansion of US military presence in Africa is perhaps the least reported story of the War on Terror.

How Bases Create Permanent War

The base network isn't just a consequence of American military policy — it's a cause. Bases don't just project power; they generate demand for their own existence:

Local Opposition: The People Who Live Under the Bases

Guantánamo Bay: The Base That Won't Close

The US naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba is the oldest overseas US military base — and one of the most controversial. The US has occupied it since 1903, under a lease imposed on Cuba after the Spanish-American War. The lease can only be terminated by mutual agreement — and the US has never agreed. Cuba considers the occupation illegal. The rent checks — $4,085 per year, unchanged since 1903 — have gone uncashed by Cuba since the revolution.

After 9/11, Guantánamo became notorious as the site of the US detention facility for “enemy combatants.” The Bush administration chose Guantánamo specifically because its legal status was ambiguous — prisoners were technically not on US soil, allowing the government to argue they had no constitutional rights.

Of the 780 men detained at Guantánamo, the vast majority were held for years without charges. Many were tortured. The facility has cost over $13 million per detainee per year — making it the most expensive prison on Earth. A single maximum-security federal prisoner costs approximately $40,000 per year. Guantánamo costs 325× more.

Obama, Trump, and Biden all promised or discussed closing Guantánamo. None did. The base persists because it serves a political function: it allows the government to detain people indefinitely outside the reach of US courts, in a legal black hole that the Constitution was supposed to prevent.

Status of Forces Agreements: Above the Law

When US troops commit crimes overseas, they are typically shielded by Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) — bilateral treaties that often give the US primary jurisdiction over crimes committed by its personnel. This means that when a US service member commits a crime in a host country — including assault, rape, or murder — they are often tried by US military courts rather than local courts, if tried at all.

SOFAs effectively create a two-tier legal system: local citizens are subject to local laws, while American military personnel operate under a different — and often more lenient — legal framework. As political scientist Alexander Cooley writes: “The fundamental issue is sovereignty. When another country's military operates on your soil under its own legal system, you are not fully sovereign.”

Sources & Further Reading