Abhishek G BhayaRenowned American economist Jeffrey D Sachs has urged US President Donald Trump to close the American bases across Asia, arguing that these installations serve more as instruments of American power projection than as protective forces for allied nations.
In an emailed message to TRT World, Sachs advocated a shift from militarisation to diplomacy as the optimal strategy for peace in the region, reiterating the appeal he made at the 4th Antalya Diplomacy Forum earlier this month.
Trump has voiced strong objections to the high costs of maintaining US military bases in Asia. As part of the latest round of tariff talks with Japan and South Korea, he has demanded that both countries shoulder more of the financial burden for hosting American troops.
“Here’s a much better idea: close the bases and return the US servicemen to the US,” Sachs wrote.
The United States currently maintains about 50,000 troops in Japan and 28,500 in South Korea, backed by large bases such as Yokosuka Naval Base, Kadena Air Base, and Camp Humphreys—the latter being the largest US overseas military installation, with construction costs exceeding $11 billion, mostly borne by South Korea.
Historical context and misplaced threat perceptions
Sachs, a professor at Columbia University and a senior UN advisor, challenged the premise that US bases are necessary to protect Japan and South Korea from China, citing a millennium of largely peaceful coexistence.
“The US acts as if Japan needs to be defended against China. Let’s have a look. During the past 1,000 years, during which time China was the region’s dominant power for all but the last 150 years, how many times did China attempt to invade Japan?” Sachs asked rhetorically.
“China has never invaded Japan—not even once in the last 1,000 years, except during the Mongol-led Yuan dynasty,” he noted. In contrast, Sachs recalled several historical invasions by Japan into China, including the devastating 1937 invasion that marked the start of the Pacific theater of World War II.
Similarly, he contended that the only time China militarily intervened in Korea was during the Korean War in 1950—when the US military approached the Chinese border. “General Douglas MacArthur even proposed using atomic bombs on China, a plan fortunately rejected by President Truman,” Sachs noted.
US bases: Deterrents or destabilisers?
While acknowledging the threat posed by North Korea’s growing nuclear arsenal, Sachs argued that the US military presence exacerbates tensions rather than mitigating them.
“South Korea needs deterrence against North Korea, to be sure, but that would be achieved far more effectively and credibly through a regional security system including China, Japan, Russia, North Korea, South Korea,” he suggested.
The US, he argued, has fueled North Korea’s weapons buildup by presenting itself as a hostile power through joint military exercises and sanctions.
Military analysts often support the notion that US bases are strategic assets for American dominance in the Indo-Pacific. But Sachs sees this posture as provocative. “These bases are perceived by China and North Korea not as defensive but as offensive—enabling a potential ‘decapitation strike’ and reducing response times to any provocation or misunderstanding,” he warned.
This echoes concerns raised by Moscow over NATO expansion eastward—culminating in heightened tensions over Ukraine. Sachs drew a direct comparison: “NATO placed missile systems dangerously close to Russia. The result? Active participation in the Ukraine war, through weapons, intelligence, and strategic support.”
Sachs noted that Trump is currently fixated on two modest port facilities in Panama operated by a Hong Kong-based company, alleging they pose a threat to US national security and pushing for their sale to an American firm.
“The US, on the other hand, surrounds China not with… major military bases in Japan, South Korea, Guam, the Philippines, and the Indian Ocean near to China’s international sea lanes,” he pointed out, questioning the strategic rationale of this decision,
Costly global footprint
Beyond geopolitics, Sachs pointed to the economic cost of America’s military reach. The US currently operates around 750 military bases in over 80 countries. According to a 2021 study by the Quincy Institute, the Pentagon’s overseas military posture costs the US taxpayer approximately $150 billion annually.
Meanwhile, the US federal budget deficit has soared past $2 trillion annually, amounting to over six percent of GDP. “Closing overseas bases would help ease this fiscal burden while reducing global tensions,” Sachs said.
He referenced Trump’s early efforts to reassess military spending but noted that Congressional Republicans pushed instead for increased defence budgets. “Trying to get host countries to pay for a presence that doesn’t help them—or the US—is a waste of diplomacy, time, and resources,” Sachs asserted.
From Asia to the Middle East: A call for real diplomacy
Earlier this month, Sachs attended the fourth Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Türkiye, where he issued a searing rebuke of US and Israeli policies in the Middle East. He claimed that wars in Syria, Libya, Lebanon, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan were the result of a “long-term strategy” pursued by both nations to reshape the region through military interventions and regime change.
“We will not have peace in this region until we have public diplomacy that is based on real diplomacy, not on CIA operations,” he told an audience at the forum.
Sachs called these conflicts “wars of choice, not necessity,” placing blame squarely on American imperial ambition and unwavering support for Israel. “Israel could never do these wars on its own. These are American wars,” he emphasised. “Israel couldn’t fight for one day without US backing.”
He proposed a straightforward remedy: granting Palestine full membership at the United Nations.
“All that is required, in my view, is the United States change its veto of Palestine as the 194th UN member state... and the wars all across this region would stop,” he declared. “Until that stops, we’re not going to have peace.”
New Syrian leadership sparks hope, but sanctions and foreign interventions threaten fragile stability, say regional experts at Antalya Diplomacy Forum 2025.
A new diplomatic paradigm?
For long-term regional and global stability, Sachs called for a reciprocal arrangement among global powers such as the US, China and Russia: “You keep your military bases out of our neighbourhood, and we’ll keep ours out of yours.”
He cited the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962—when Soviet nuclear deployments in Cuba nearly triggered a nuclear war—as a cautionary tale.
His recommendation aligns with growing calls for reducing global militarisation amid heightened risk of escalation. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists recently set the Doomsday Clock to 89 seconds to midnight, the closest ever to global catastrophe.
“Closing US military bases across Asia and basic reciprocity among the major powers would save trillions of dollars of military outlays over the coming decade and, more importantly, would push the Doomsday Clock back from 89 seconds to nuclear Armageddon,” Sachs concluded.
