Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Which countries have US military bases?
Executive Summary
The sources present two competing tallies: a cluster of 2024–2025 summaries that count about 128 known U.S. overseas bases in roughly 49 countries and a different set that reports a much larger footprint of roughly 750 facilities across about 80 countries and territories. Both portrayals are current to mid-2025 but rely on differing definitions—one emphasizes identified “bases” catalogued in a Congressional-style mapping exercise, while the other aggregates a broader set of U.S. facilities and postings ranging from large installations to small operational sites—which explains the major numerical divergence [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. The Two Competing Counts That Change the Story
Two distinct narratives run through the materials: one frame counts 128 discrete overseas bases in 49 countries, portraying a more limited but concentrated overseas posture; the other compiles ~750 installations across 80 countries, showing a dispersed global footprint that has declined in facility count since the Cold War even as the count of host nations increased. The 128-base count appears tied to a specific mapping exercise and a 2024 Congressional report, which treats larger, named bases as the unit of measurement and therefore produces a smaller figure [1]. The ~750 figure derives from sources that include forward operating sites, small logistics nodes, ship-borne deployments, and other facilities that the Pentagon and researchers sometimes aggregate as “bases” or “facilities,” yielding a far higher total and a different policy implication about U.S. global reach [3] [4]. The difference in scope—named major bases versus every known facility or presence—explains why both counts can coexist in reputable reporting without being logically inconsistent.
2. Where the Troops Concentrate: Japan, Germany, South Korea
All sources converge on the same regional pattern even as they disagree about totals: East Asia and Europe host the largest concentrations of U.S. forces. Japan repeatedly emerges as the single largest host by troop numbers, with troop estimates in the low 50,000s and a significant cluster of bases, followed by Germany and South Korea with tens of thousands of service members each. These figures are reported from data current to 2024–2025 and draw on Defense Manpower data and Congressional summaries; the specific numbers vary somewhat across pieces but consistently show Japan, Germany, and South Korea accounting for the lion’s share of overseas personnel and larger installations [1] [4]. The reliance on troop-count datasets for that conclusion means these rankings are robust to whether the broader 750-facility definition is used.
3. Middle East, Americas, and a Shifting Operational Focus
Beyond the entrenched presences in Europe and East Asia, the materials highlight a growing operational emphasis in the Middle East and a persistent presence in the Americas. The mapping pieces note key partner hosts such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, and the enduring, politically contentious facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The broader-coverage sources emphasize that while the total number of facilities has fallen since the Cold War, the U.S. maintains operational footholds throughout the Middle East that respond to regional contingencies and partner requests, which can make the footprint look larger when forward operating sites and rotational deployments are included [5] [6] [3]. This framing matters for policy debates: counting only permanent bases underestimates contingency capabilities, while counting every temporary or small site may overstate a steady-state burden.
4. Methodology Matters: Counting Bases, Facilities, or Footprints
The primary reason for divergent numbers is methodological: what qualifies as a “base” varies across sources. The 128-base figure emerges from identification of named overseas installations documented in a mapping project and a 2024 Congressional compilation, implying stricter criteria and emphasis on long-term, established facilities [1]. The ~750 figure intentionally casts a wider net, including smaller facilities, cooperative security locations, logistics hubs, and rotational sites—categories that defense analysts and some NGOs fold into a single inventory to illustrate overall global reach and annual cost estimates [3] [4]. Both methodologies are defensible for different questions: the smaller count suits legal and bilateral-host analyses, while the larger inventory better captures operational flexibility and the totality of U.S. logistics and contingency capacity.
5. What This Means for Public Debate and Policy Analysis
For policymakers and the public, the takeaway is that both counts are informative but answer different questions: ask whether the U.S. maintains permanent, sovereign-like bases and you get the ~128 figure; ask how many facilities, sites, and operational nodes the U.S. can use around the world and the number approaches ~750. Reporters, analysts, and advocates should cite which definition they use and note the underlying data vintage—most figures cited here derive from 2024–2025 data and Defense Manpower or Congressional reporting—and recognize potential agendas: narrower counts can downplay global reach, while broader inventories can be used to argue for either the necessity or excess of U.S. overseas posture [1] [2] [3].