TEHRAN - Decades of U.S. military buildup across West Asia raises questions about sovereignty, regional stability, and escalating conflict with Iran.

Across West Asia, a vast network of foreign military bases has been established over the past several decades, most of them operated by the United States. 

These installations are located in several Arab countries along the Persian Gulf and across the wider region. They include major air bases, naval headquarters, intelligence centers, and logistical hubs used to coordinate military operations.

Supporters of this military presence argue that it strengthens regional security. Yet the experience of the past decades raises serious questions about that claim. 

West Asia has witnessed repeated wars, prolonged instability, and the rise of terrorist groups such as Daesh. Conflicts with heavy death tolls in Palestine, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, and elsewhere unfolded despite the continued presence and interference of extensive foreign military infrastructure.

These developments have led many observers to question whether foreign bases have actually brought stability to the region or whether they have instead contributed to turning West Asia into a permanent arena for geopolitical confrontation.

Many of the largest U.S. installations are located in countries bordering the Persian Gulf. One of the most prominent examples is Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, a major command hub that coordinates American air operations across the region. Thousands of personnel are stationed there, and the base supports a wide range of aircraft, including surveillance platforms, bombers, and refueling planes.

Other significant installations operate in Bahrain, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, and Jordan. In Bahrain, the United States maintains the headquarters of its naval forces responsible for maritime operations across the Persian Gulf. Kuwait hosts large logistical and staging facilities used to support troop deployments and military campaigns.

Together, these bases form an integrated military network that allows rapid deployment of aircraft, drones, and missiles across West Asia.

In practice, these installations have often been used as staging grounds for military operations throughout the region. Aircraft, drones, and intelligence systems operating from these bases have supported strikes across multiple theaters.

This reality has reinforced Iran’s long-standing argument that the U.S. and other foreign military facilities in neighboring countries are used as launch points for attacks and acts of sabotage against Iranian territory.

Iranian officials have repeatedly warned that when military operations originate from these bases, the installations themselves become part of the war. Tehran, therefore, considers them legitimate military targets if they are used to carry out deadly aggression against Iran.

This position became especially clear after the large-scale war launched against Iran on 28 February, 2026, when the United States and the Zionist regime carried out extensive air and missile strikes across Iranian territory. The attacks have caused widespread destruction across Iran, damaging infrastructure, residential areas, and public facilities.

Hospitals, roads, energy infrastructure, and civilian buildings have been heavily affected in multiple provinces. Rescue teams are working around the clock to clear rubble and recover victims as communities across the country face the human cost of the American and Israeli regime attacks.

Among the most devastating incidents was the strike on a girls’ elementary school in the city of Minab in southern Iran. During school hours, a missile hit the school building, causing a catastrophic collapse of classrooms and trapping students and teachers inside. The attack killed nearly 170 young students and staff members, most of them girls between the ages of seven and twelve. 

The tragedy quickly became known as the Minab school massacre, one of the deadliest incidents involving children in the war so far.

Against this backdrop, Iran's military response is a legitimate act of self-defense under international law. Iranian forces have launched retaliatory missile and drone strikes targeting U.S. bases, intelligence installations, and other military infrastructure linked to foreign forces operating in West Asia. 

Iranian officials have repeatedly emphasized that these operations are directed at the facilities used to conduct attacks on Iran and not at the countries that host them.

Tehran has demonstrated that its ongoing retaliation focuses on the military assets responsible for launching operations against Iranian territory.

A precedent for this approach can be seen in 2020, when Iran launched ballistic missiles against Ayn al-Asad Airbase in Iraq  which, housed US forces, following the assassination of Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani. The missiles struck the military installation itself rather than surrounding civilian areas.

In the current war, Iranian officials have emphasized their strategy follows the same principle: targeting foreign military infrastructure that participates in the attacks on Iran while avoiding harm to the populations of neighboring countries.

Nevertheless, the presence of these bases creates a dangerous dynamic for the countries that host them.

When military operations are launched from installations on their territory, those countries risk becoming part of the conflict even if they were not directly involved in the decision to attack. 

This raises important questions about sovereignty. When large foreign military infrastructures operate within a country’s territory, airspace, or waters, decisions about military actions may ultimately be shaped by external strategic priorities.

In effect, a country’s territory can be used as a launch platform for military operations that it does not fully control. This arrangement risks drawing host nations into conflicts driven by outside powers.

For many observers, this creates a clear contradiction. The bases are often presented as protective shields for the region, yet their presence can transform host countries into front lines during periods of escalation. Iran has consistently argued that long-term stability in West Asia cannot be achieved through a dense network of foreign military installations. 

Instead, Iranian leaders have long emphasized the idea of regional security arrangements developed by the countries of the region themselves. From Tehran’s perspective, reducing external military footprints could help lower tensions and prevent West Asia from becoming the battleground for global power rivalries.

Whether one agrees with Iran’s position or not, the debate surrounding U.S. military bases in West Asia has become increasingly urgent. These installations have played a central role in military operations that have affected Iranian territory and civilians, while also placing host countries at risk of retaliation.

The unresolved question remains: do these bases truly protect the nations of West Asia, or do they expose the region to conflicts driven by global power struggles?

The answer will shape the future of security along the Persian Gulf and across West Asia for years to come.