The following list of bases are designated for NATO and American use in the UK.

A recent Parliamentary written question asking “in which constituency each (a) base, (b) garrison and (c) barracks of each of the armed forces in (i) England, (ii) Wales, (iii) Scotland and (iv) Northern Ireland is located; and which of those bases are designated for use by (A) NATO and (B) US visiting forces” was submitted, the following is the answer.

Bases designated for use by NATO in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are as follows:

  • Allied Maritime Command (MARCOM) – Northwood Headquarters – South West Hertfordshire
  • NATO Joint Electronic Warfare Core Staff (JEWCS) – Royal Naval Air Station Yeovilton – Yeovil
  • NATO Intelligence Fusion Centre (NIFC) – Royal Air Force Molesworth – North West Cambridgeshire
  • Deployed Communication Module Delta (DCMD), part of 1 NATO Signals Battalion – Blandford Camp – North Dorset
  • Head Quarter Allied Rapid Reaction Corps and Head Quarter 1st Signal Brigade – Imjin Barracks – Tewkesbury

Bases designated for use by the United States Visiting Forces (USVF) in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are as follows:

  • Royal Air Force Alconbury – Huntingdon
  • Royal Air Force Barford St. John – Banbury
  • Royal Air Force Croughton – South Northamptonshire
  • Royal Air Force Fairford – The Cotswolds
  • Royal Air Force Feltwell – South West Norfolk
  • Royal Air Force Lakenheath – West Suffolk
  • Royal Air Force Menwith Hill – Skipton and Ripon
  • Royal Air Force Mildenhall – West Suffolk
  • Royal Air Force Molesworth – North West Cambridgeshire
  • Royal Air Force Welford – Newbury
  • Blenheim Crescent – Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner
George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

39 COMMENTS

  1. And the supplementary question should be: ” What is the diplomatic status of the US personnel at the bases listed especially regarding criminal acts?”

    • Another supplementary question would be why doesn’t the UK extradite cyberterrorists, engaged in cyberwarfare against US forces stationed in the UK, to the US even when the US complies with the extradition treaty between the two countries? That’s not only a supplementary question it’s a hundreds of billions of US dollars and resources question.

        • If i understand correctly we signed the extradition treaty and put it into law but the US did not, so it is a one one treaty and we don’t have the guts to pull out of it, which we should if they don’t play fair.

          • As I understand it- because of the way the US system of government works- POTUS may sign international treaties on his own authority, and they then take effect. However- where a treaty has implications for US domestic law, the appropriate national legislation then has to be ratified by Congress- who don’t always do what POTUS tells them, because he’s not an absolute monarch. This can result in treaties being technically in effect, but unenforceable at the US end.

          • I remember this now – he was the youngster (was he under or over 18?) who hacked into the Pentagon. I think he had learning difficulties or mental health issues – either way, hardly a state actor or real threat. US wanted him extradited and I don’t think we obliged. The point is about Anne Sacoolas is that there’s no chance of a custodial sentence, simply the deceased’s family wants to know what happened and want closure. A court case is more of a humanitarian action for the family rather than anything which will end up with her doing any time at Her Majesty’s pleasure. But historic examples will always be used I guess, even if the circumstances are totally different. It’s the family I feel sorry for…pawns in a power struggle.

          • He found evidence of “non terrestrial officers” and “USN ships” that did not exist. Suggesting some sort of in orbit craft as opposed to naval ones.

            He was looking for evidence of the Pentagons involvement of UFO’s. What he found was similar, but different.

            The reports he was on cannabis / is autistic / special needs, and so on are all pushed of course to discredit.

            Standard procedure.

          • The issue with Anne Sacoolas is that she, and her husband, are either NSA or CIA.

  2. While I’m very happy to see American forces in the UK. I must admit I do feel un easy at seeing American service personnel with rifles, doing security on British soil.

    • I found it strange in the 80s/90s, that we would let the US keep nuclear weapons without dual key on UK soil, but ban US marines on guard duty from having a .38 revolver.

    • why? even for their own bases? seems reasonable to me assuming they are better trained than the average US cop

      • Just something a bit of putting seeing foreign armed troops on your soil. I get the reason and know they mean no harm. Not to mention their rather restricted. Its just weird.

        • Do you remember stagging on in Sennelager or Paderborn in the 80’s? 9mm SMG with full mags. The Germans didn’t mind at the time.

          • What an utterly bizarre take on it. When does a country lose its ‘defeated nation’ tag ?

          • Well no because I was born after the sterling was retired. But a few points 1 different situation German was facing the threat of invasion, 2 not every German was happy with it and 3 yes I do think its weird the almost 3 generations of Brits lived almost completely in Germany.

          • Different situation. As I said I understand why they do it, but I can still think its weird seeing American military personnel in the uk.

    • Where Harry? Inside or outside the wire. Inside is fine. Outside, that is what the MoD Police are for.

    • Don’t worry. When the US and China finally go head to head the US will be transferring most of their assets to the Pacific front. Although when that happens Putin will probably make a move on the former Soviet states. At least that’s what I’d do. And when that happens Germany and a few other NATO members will be wishing they spent real money on their own militaries.

      • Germany’s current military expenditure is higher than that of the UKs ($49.3B vs $48.7B).

        In last 10 years Germany has increased expenditure by 10%, we have decreased by £15%.

        • Always find it funny when people trot out the “Germany doesn’t spend a lot of money on it’s military” line, as if % of GDP equates to amount actually spent.

          Effectively Germany’s economy is strong enought that they can afford to spend the same amount as Britain or France on their military but still have it only be 1.3% of GDP.

          Here’s the thing: If Germany did spend 2% or more of GDP on the Bundeswehr, it would have the third highest military budget in the world (After the US and China) and to be absolutely frank, a lot of the people who complain about low German defence expenditure would instantly pivot to “Fourth Reich” comments (or EU superpower scare mongering).

          • Totally agree with you Dern. Let’s get our own house in order before we start blaming others.

  3. Never heard of Blenheim Crescent before. Looks like a site that is retained so that they have some office space in London, but not central London. It’s only 6 miles from Northwood and between that and Heathrow. I wonder if thats why they’ve retained it? Otherwise why retain such a small, oddly sited place with all the attendant security concerns.

  4. Would be nice if the Germans would spend some money on their own defense so the American taxpayer wouldn’t have to foot such a huge bill for their defense. But that is wishful thinking I know.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here