US President Donald Trump has recently revived plans to regain control of Afghanistan’s strategic Bagram Airbase, an-hour drive from the capital, Kabul, which he wants to take back from the Taliban interim administration.  

During his press conference with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Thursday, among other issues, Trump returned to this topic, accusing the previous Biden administration of the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan. “We gave it to (the Taliban) for nothing,” he said, referring to the Bagram airbase. “We’re trying to get it back, by the way.”

Behind Trump’s interest in reclaiming Bagram, there are several strategic factors. First, it serves as a security measure against China, whose planes can reach the Afghan airbase in one hour from Lop Nur, a long-standing nuclear test area in the desert of the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. Second, Bagram offers access to Afghanistan’s mineral resources, including rare earth elements, according to US officials. 

But in order to regain access to the Bagram air base, Trump needs to persuade the Taliban leadership with whom it reached the 2020 Doha agreement during his first term. According to the deal, a normalisation between the US and Taliban is only possible if the US maintains no military presence in Afghanistan. 

So, how can Trump convince the Taliban leadership on Bagram? 

This week, Zalmay Khalilzad, a former Afghan-American diplomat and the US’s top negotiator with the Taliban from 2018 to 2021, and Adam Boehler, Trump’s hostage affairs envoy, visited Kabul to discuss multiple issues, including Bagram and a possible prisoner swap. 

Following the visit, which included negotiations with Taliban’s top diplomat, Amir Khan Mutaqi, the Afghan foreign ministry released a statement. It noted discussions on “investment opportunities and other prospects in Afghanistan” and suggested there was “a good opportunity” to normalise relations between the two old adversaries.  

Will the Taliban give up Bagram? 

Experts are sceptical.

“For the Taliban, the handover of Bagram to the US forces constitutes a matter of existential concern,” says Abdul Sayed, a security specialist on Afghan and Pakistani militant groups. “In view of their religious beliefs and Afghan history, it is tantamount to political death, which they are in no position to endure under any circumstances.”

Statements from Taliban officials and reactions of their supporters on social media suggest they consider Trump’s demand as political pressure, rather than a genuine negotiation. This is not Trump’s actual demand, but rather a means through which he seeks to secure other concessions, Sayed tells TRT World. 

Barnett Rubin, a leading American political scientist on Afghanistan and South Asia, is even more direct. “Trump is totally delusional. This will never happen,” Rubin tells TRT World. “The Taliban are alarmed by one man based on his delusions.”

Afghan journalist Sami Yousafzai agrees. “Trump really doesn't understand what he's saying. It's not an easy issue. How can you come back to Afghanistan?” Yousafzai suggests the Bagram talk may be a tactic to secure a prisoner swap and put pressure on the Taliban, who still hold several American citizens.  

“Afghanistan is not really a friendly country for foreign troops on any pretexts from supporting Afghans to defeating terrorism or protecting communists,” Yousafzai tells TRT World. “I don't think anyone is really taking his remarks about Afghanistan seriously as now nobody really takes him seriously about Palestine, Ukraine and other hard-core issues.”  

Bagram’s geopolitics matters 

Iftikhar Firdous, a senior Pakistani investigative journalist with a focus on Afghanistan and militant groups, notes that the US interest in Bagram has clear geo-strategic dimensions.

Its proximity to China and logistical supply chains enhances Washington’s regional influence. It also allows Trump to simultaneously attack Biden’s pullout strategy from Afghanistan in 2021 to a domestic audience, according to Firdous. 

During a February cabinet meeting, Trump insisted that during his first term, while he planned to withdraw US forces from Afghanistan, he intended to keep a small contingent at Bagram due to the growing Chinese threat.

“We were going to get out, but we were going to keep Bagram, not because of Afghanistan but because of China, because it’s exactly one hour away from where China makes its nuclear missiles,” he claimed in March, emphasising that he wanted to keep the airbase because its “biggest runways” which was “very heavy concrete and steel.”

Yet Firdous notes, “This is easier said than done as it shatters the spirit of the Doha Agreement”, which stipulates that American forces will leave Afghanistan and that Afghan soil will not be used against the US or its allies. 

For the Taliban, handing over Bagram would be “tantamount to ideological suicide,” he adds, undermining their core narrative of ending foreign occupation.  

It could also strain ties with neighbouring countries, including Russia, which formally recognises the Taliban, China, and Iran, each with its own interests in Afghanistan.

“Iran would feel most threatened in the most immediate terms, a country the US and Israel both bombed this year,” Firdous tells TRT World. 

“The first reaction from the Taliban is a carefully crafted statement with measured words that denies access in military terms but is open to economic and political ties. If Trump insists, this adventure could throw Afghanistan into a new phase of opposing armed groups jostling in a protracted conflict,” Firdous warns.

Experts agree that Trump’s calls for Bagram face major obstacles under the terms of the Doha Agreement and the Taliban’s own narrative of ending foreign occupation. With no clear path forward, the prospect of the US reclaiming the airbase remains remote.