Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Israel-Iran / The Iran strike shows we don’t need bases in the Middle East
Israel‑Iran, Basing and force posture, Middle East

June 28, 2025

The Iran strike shows we don’t need bases in the Middle East

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Dan Caldwell

On June 21, B-2 bombers launched from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri flew 37 hours round trip to attack Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow and Natanz, while 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched from a submarine in the Persian Gulf at Natanz and Isfahan. These strikes were supported by dozens of aerial refuelers, reconnaissance aircraft and fighter jets that escorted the bombers into Iran.

Look closely, and you’ll notice something peculiar: Many of the aircraft involved in the operation do not appear to have taken off from the large U.S. air bases in the Middle East — or, if they did, that fact has been carefully concealed. Whether this reflects a choice made to spare gulf state partners’ ties with Iran or because these states denied the United States permission to use bases on their territory, the implication is the same. When the president decided it was time for the United States to act against Iran, the 40,000 troops and billions of dollars’ worth of military hardware that Washington keeps parked in the Middle East were of limited use.

Worse, these forces ultimately proved to be a vulnerability when, 36 hours later, Iran retaliated by launching missiles at al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar. While the incoming missiles were intercepted and no soldiers were harmed, most of the aircraft were moved out of al-Udeid, and ships stationed at the U.S. naval station in Bahrain were sent out to sea to keep them safe.

For the White House and the Pentagon, this reality should be a wake-up call. U.S. military forces in the Middle East bring more risks than benefits, and it’s time to get most of them out for good.

Read at The Washington Post

Authors

Jennifer
Kavanagh

Senior Fellow & Director of Military Analysis

Defense Priorities

Dan
Caldwell

Former Public Policy Advisor

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

ExplainerMilitary analysis, Air power, Basing and force posture, Land power, Naval power

Aligning global military posture with U.S. interests

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Dan Caldwell

July 9, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East

Why the Israel-Iran ceasefire feels like a strategic failure

By Alexander Langlois

July 8, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Hamas, Israel, Israel‑Iran, Middle East

Don’t bet on a Gaza ceasefire

July 3, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East

What lessons are foreign leaders taking from Donald Trump’s Iran bombing?

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, China, Iran, North Korea, Russia

There is no ‘axis of autocracy’

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

In the mediaIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Nuclear weapons

What comes next in the Israeli-Iranian conflict?

Featuring Rosemary Kelanic and Jennifer Kavanagh

June 30, 2025

Events on Israel-Iran

See All Events
virtualMiddle East, Grand strategy, Israel‑Iran

Past Virtual Event: Does the Middle East still matter?

February 6, 2024
virtualMiddle East, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Israel‑Iran, Syria, Yemen

Past Virtual Event: Keeping the U.S. out of war in the Middle East

January 16, 2024
in-personMiddle East, Counterterrorism, Israel‑Iran

Past In-Person Event: Recalibrating Middle East policy

November 27, 2018

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved