Change of Heart or Strategy
Pakistan and Afghanistan were worst affected in SA due to the 20th Century Geopolitics. Yet again 21st Century Geopolitics is knocking at our doors. My blog of 2021 has been cited above as a reference. This will give a clear idea about projections then made and unfolding of the events now. Such moves can only be countered through cohesion within the region. It is hoped that once again Pakistan and Afghanistan are not made to play the dirty role, we have got used to, due 20th Century Geopolitics. My blog cited above and the article of Dr Fiaz Shah, appended below will provide good insight to the reader. Our nuclear assets being primary target don’t fall in my assessment, however, central position of Afghanistan provides good leverages to the US vis-a-vis China and its ambitions namely BRI and CPEC as well as other regional countries. Holding Bagram is a smart move by the US but it portends another cycle of conflict in the devastated region. Hope better sense will prevail
US in Bagram – Future Watchdog Over Pakistan by Brig Dr Fiaz Shah
The reactivation of Bagram Airbase under a potential second Trump administration has ignited geopolitical concerns, particularly regarding its implications for Pakistan. The strategic significance of Bagram extends beyond Afghanistan—it positions the United States within immediate striking range of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. This paper explores why the US negotiated with the Afghan government to regain control over Bagram, the potential objectives behind this move, and the implications for Pakistan’s sovereignty and security.
Why Did the US Bargain for Bagram?
- Strategic Location & Regional Control
Bagram Airbase, located in Parwan Province, Afghanistan, is the largest US military base in the region, offering proximity to both Central and South Asia. The base provides a logistical hub for surveillance, rapid deployment, and regional power projection. Given its close proximity to Pakistan, retaining control over Bagram ensures the US has a forward-operating position in case of a geopolitical crisis in South Asia.
- Counterterrorism or a Geopolitical Play?
While the official narrative suggests that Bagram is needed to counter ISIS-K and prevent another resurgence of extremist elements in Afghanistan, a closer look suggests a broader agenda. The resurgence of the Pakistani Taliban (TTP) and the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) within Pakistan provides a convenient pretext for US intervention, allowing Washington to justify an expanded intelligence and military footprint.
- Pakistan’s Nuclear Arsenal – The Real Target?
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program has long been a concern for US policymakers. With an estimated 170+ warheads and one of the fastest-growing arsenals globally, Pakistan’s nuclear capability remains a strategic asset and a liability in Western security assessments.
Prominent figures in Trump’s circle—including Mike Waltz, Pete Hegseth, and former CIA Chief Mike Pompeo—have consistently voiced concerns about Pakistan’s nuclear security. The potential reoccupation of Bagram strengthens US operational readiness should Pakistan’s internal stability deteriorate.
Bagram’s Role in a Potential Nuclear Intervention
- A Three-Stage Playbook
The reactivation of Bagram appears to follow a familiar US intervention script:
Step 1: Destabilization – Increasing terrorist attacks (TTP, BLA) weaken Pakistan’s internal control and create an international narrative of fragility.
Step 2: Media Narrative Building – Western think tanks (e.g., Atlantic Council, RAND Corporation) publish reports highlighting Pakistan’s “nuclear insecurity.”
Step 3: Military Intervention – Under the guise of “securing loose nukes,” the US leverages Bagram to launch rapid-response operations.
This approach mirrors the intervention in Libya, where Western intelligence reports on WMD threats justified regime change.
- Trump’s Direct Threats
During a March 2025 rally, Donald Trump explicitly stated: “We need Bagram back to watch the bad guys next door.” Given Afghanistan has no nuclear capability, the reference clearly points toward Pakistan.
- Who is Orchestrating the Strategy?
Several key figures within the Trump camp align with this aggressive stance toward Pakistan’s nuclear program:
Mike Waltz (National Security Adviser) – Former Green Beret advocating a forward military presence in South Asia.
Pete Hegseth (Potential Defense Secretary) – Supporting the deployment of rapid-response teams to Bagram for “counterterrorism.”
Mike Pompeo (Former CIA Chief) – Previously involved in covert nuclear surveillance programs, pushing for stronger interventionist policies.
What’s Next for Pakistan?
- Immediate Security Implications
Pakistan’s military and intelligence community must anticipate and counter potential moves to destabilize the country under the guise of counterterrorism. Ensuring robust nuclear security and countering the narrative of instability is crucial.
- Diplomatic Maneuvering
Pakistan must proactively engage with regional and global powers, particularly China and Russia, to counterbalance the US presence in Bagram. Strengthening ties with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and expanding defense pacts can deter unilateral interventions.
- Strategic Defense Measures
Increasing internal intelligence operations to preempt potential destabilization attempts.
Enhancing nuclear security protocols and ensuring transparency with friendly nations to counter misinformation.
Strengthening border security with Afghanistan to limit external influences that may fuel instability.
The US return to Bagram is not just about Afghanistan—it is a calculated move aimed at maintaining strategic oversight over Pakistan. The increasing narrative around Pakistan’s nuclear “fragility” aligns with past interventions, making it imperative for Pakistan to adopt a proactive strategy in defense, diplomacy, and information warfare.
As tensions rise, Pakistan must recognize that the clock is ticking. A misstep in internal security or governance could provide the justification needed for a US-led intervention from Bagram. The battle is not just military—it is also a war of narratives, and Pakistan must ensure it does not fall victim to a scripted downfall.
Sammilogger 