The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that decisions on whether the United States can use its military bases in the UK for operational purposes are taken on a case-by-case basis and require UK approval, though specific criteria are not disclosed for security reasons.
In written answers to questions from Independent MP Jeremy Corbyn, Veterans Minister Al Carns said the department could not set out detailed factors publicly, explaining that “due to operational security reasons, the specific factors of consideration cannot be disclosed.” He added, however, that “all decisions on whether to approve foreign nations’ use of military bases in the UK for operational purposes considers the legal basis and policy rationale for any proposed activity.”
Addressing whether US forces require approval to use UK bases to move military equipment onward to a third country, Carns confirmed that permissions are not automatic. According to the written answer, “permissions to utilise UK military bases are considered on a case-by-case basis, dependent on the nature and purpose of their activity.”
The minister also stressed the limits of what the government is willing to discuss publicly, stating that “for operational security reasons, we do not offer comment or information relating to foreign nations’ military aircraft movements.”
U.S. forces in the UK
United States forces have maintained a long standing presence in the United Kingdom since the Second World War, forming a central part of the wider defence relationship between the two countries. This presence is rooted in shared strategic interests, close intelligence cooperation, and the UK’s geographic position on the western edge of Europe. While the number of permanently based US personnel has fluctuated over time, the UK continues to host key facilities that support American operations across Europe, the North Atlantic, and beyond.
The majority of US military activity in the UK falls under United States Air Forces in Europe and Africa, with several Royal Air Force stations made available for American use under long term bilateral agreements. Notable examples include RAF Lakenheath, RAF Mildenhall, RAF Feltwell, and RAF Fairford. These bases support a range of functions including combat air operations, aerial refuelling, intelligence and surveillance activities, logistics, and the temporary deployment of bomber aircraft. Although the sites remain sovereign UK bases, they are operated day to day by US forces in coordination with the Ministry of Defence.
Hell no.
Kick every US base out of the UK.
We pull all our bases out of Europe, especially those in Germany.
Trump watches too many Hollywood war movies. Maybe he should read history books and understand the the US has NEVER won a war on it’s own.
When was the last time any country won a global war on its own.
The American Civil War?
Sorry I mean’t to attach the comment to the comment above!
Remember to insist that they pull out of Diego Garcia and Ascension as well, and as those two have GPS Ground Stations mitigate for the loss and the costs of replacing.
Also “Carboy”, “Sounder”, and numerous other intelligence installations are to a large part paid for by the NSA as part of the GCHQ/NSA UKUSA 5 Eyes link up, so account for that as well.
The fallout on the intell side alone would be ruinous.
And what would happen to the UKUS 1952 MDT and AUKUS, as well as UK participation in the F35 and other projects?
Our bases in Germany are minimal, and are there to facilitate the Army’s training and movement to Eastern Europe, so account for that as well with new areas in the UK to replace Sennelager, new depots to replace Wulfen and Ayrshire Barracks.
Spend more money on SF too to replace the CV22s the SAS have access to in extremis, as they’ll be gone.
Just a few examples, untwining from the US would be very tricky to say the least. I suspect many let their hatred of Trump “trump” all other real world considerations and realities.
List of US sites for interest.
Lakenheath.
Mildenhall.
Feltwell.
Molesworth.
Alconbury.
Blenheim Crescent.
Fairford.
Welford.
Croughton.
Barford St John.
Menwith Hill.
Plus US dets at several other locations embedded with the UKs MIS and whose vast resources we get full use of, directly impacting the UKIC, so account in the budget for those as well.
That is not going to be the advantage to anyone except Russia and China. Best thing to do is hunker down and wait for the Orange toddler’s presidency to end. Things probably won’t go back completely to normal but I suspect even Vance will have better judgment.
Oh dear, such opinions are blatantly uninformed but also silly in its extreme. These bases are essential to NATO and are not bargaining chips between childlike political squabbles.
The quicker we draw down the US presence in Europe the better.
As long as US forces are based in Europe or part of the NATO chain of command for European operations MAGA and the European main stream media will perpetuate the myth that Europe is defenceless without them.
Political paralysis is Europes big problem not a lack of military force, logistics or even intelligence. Most of what the US was providing is gone and even in space based assets Europe can provide almost everything it requires not to fight and win the Euro Atlantic Area.
Japan, South Korea and Australias lack of any support for Europe over Greenland shows Europe doesn’t need to come to anyone’s aid in the pacific now.
The US can and should do what France did in the 60’s and leave the NATO command structure. Anything else just risk a perpetuation on the current situation and close down its European bases.
If the US won’t leave the UK should lead an expanded JEF structure incorporating Germany, Poland and maybe Canada is they are now serious.
OT -> Private Bonespurs’ comment on NATO troops in Afghanistan is beyond contempt
Well, that’s bound to piss them off…. Or piss off the Commanders doing all this paperwork to submit for review that might trickle down into discourse with the current lot in office at home.
Meh, it’s a little thing, it’s now having them explain everything to us and you know what, that’s a good thing.
It is worth noting that President Trump and his minions are actively trying to sabotage NATO. As such, if NATO still exists when he exits power and the USA is still a key member, then they have lost this battle. Defeating Trump in battles is something that would give me great pleasure.
I think he is accelerating all this madness now to try and break as much as possible before the US Midterms, at which point, we can only hope his malign actions will be curtailed.
Nevertheless, we should harbour no illusions about things going back to the way they were before and prepare for the worst. The West has been enjoying the smell of its own effusions for far too long and now we’re starting to choke.
As a side note, did anyone else notice that the emblem of Trump’s new Board of Peace is a copy of the UN badge except, instead of a map of the world, it is a map of Central and North America? Oh, and it is gold in colour.
Allusions. Harbour no allusions. I don’t want David Mitchell to come and shoot be in the head.
Interesting photo choice? I believe that is a F22 Raptor, none of which have ever been permanently based in the UK.
Typical that good old Corbyn is asking, doesn’t he know that these arrangements were in place even back to Eldorado Canyon in the 80s?
*an
It does look like a Raptor, with the external fuel tanks, full flaps and air brakes I would suggest it is one that had just arrived from the US in ferry configuration and needing every little trick to stop. You don’t get to see that very often.
What. An. Aircraft. It looks menacing. At first I thought, oh, F35, but the engine intakes differ, the canopy is higher, and the vertical fins a huge.
I know what you mean but I was always a little disappointed that the the YF-23 didn’t win. I always thought it was a stunning aircraft to look at.
Ha! Me too. And the YF23 occurred to me too when I saw the photo, with that profile.
What is your view on the Boscombe incident in 94, which has been reported by some to be a variant of the YF23, if that aircraft went black?
Old commie Corbyn would love the US to leave the UK and NATO, if he has the choice he would invite Hamas in to set up on those babes. Just a silly question, already known to the anti Semite Corbyn. The US are essential to NATO, and like the orange man or not, Europe have leeched of the US regarding defence ever since the implementation of NATO. The orange haters should actually thanks him, as his attitude and direct approach since his inauguration last year, have made European leaders sit up and listen, and actually make commitment to increase and improve their own defence. Our dear leader also listened, but has chosen to ignore as its not what the parliamentary labour party, the ones who are running the front bench, want or are interested in.