To the u. S. Taxpayers a year to maintain these bases. Good evening, i am bradley graham, the coowner of politics and prose, on behalf of the staff, thank you. It is terrific to see so many people out here. We underestimated a little bit. That is wonderful. I hear like half of American University is here. And there is a good chunk of people from sid well as well where david used to go to school. A few quick administrative notes. Now is a good time to turn off our cell phones or anything that might go beep later. When we get to the q a part of the session, try to make your way to the microphone because we have cspan, booktv here, and we would like to pick up your question on the tape. And at the end, before you rush up here to get all of your books signed, our staff would appreciate it if you would fold up up the chairs you are seated in and lean them against a pillar or book case somewhere. It is really, really a pleasure to be hosting david vine this evening. David is an associate professor at American University. His studies of the workings of human cites have ranged rather widely. He has researched topics as disparate as gentrification in brooklyn, basketball in the washington, d. C. , environmental refuges, homelessness, and environmental illness. But for the past decade, he has taken an interest in military bases and military activities. Island of shame, his previous book that came out six years ago, told the story of the people from the island of diego and their expulsion. And he has worked with teaming with combat brugades. He examines the 800 military bases in more than 70 countries in his new book. To be precise, the pentagon counts only about five dozen Major Military instillations abroad. But david has widened the definition of base to include any facility or place regularly used for military purposes. Setup at the end of world war ii, at the end of the cold war, the bases cost more than a 100 billion a year to maintain. They were intended to shore up security, but they came under scrutiny and criticism amid concerns they may be making america less safe and causing more harm than good. The deterrant value has diminished according to critics while at the same time the damage to economies is worsening. They reinforce images of america as an occupying power. With the end of largescale u. S. Troop involvement in iraq and afghanistan, david contends now is a good time to reexamine the tenants of this decades old Forward Strategy of stationing u. S. Forces in many places overseas. A review in circus, commends his book as a frank and significant assessment, and Publishers Weekly called it eloquent and persuasive. Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming david vine. [applause] thank you for everyone i paid or guilted into coming. It is a dream to get a chance to present at politics and pros having grown up in the area it is amazing to see friends and people who i have gotten to know at many parts of my life. Thank you, bradley, for that introduction. He did the book more justice than i could with the summary he provided. Thank you to everyone here at politics and prose. I want to thank friends from au. My parents, of course,. My mom got me this framed picture of politics and prose storefront. My dad and step mom are racing to see who can finish the book first after receiving it yesterday in the mail meanwhile. Thank you to ever within at henry holt, my editor, Rachel Sullivan and many more who helped make this book possible. Over the past six years, i have been lucky enough to get to travel around the world to visit the 800 military bases the United States maintains outside of the 50 states. I was able to go to japan, it y italy, germany, south korea, britain, guam, and the northern mariana islands. And i want to thank members of the u. S. Military, family members of military personal, and i want to thank locals i met along the way who live in communities around our bases overseas. And i want to thank so many here in the United States, experts of various kinds who helped speak with me and helped make the book possible in many ways. I would like to start at the back of the book oddly with that if you dont mind and read a short part from the acknowledgments. I am profoundly grateful for everyone who helped me compete this book given the breadth of the books subject and Geographic Scope i could not have written it without the assistance of hundreds of people. Thank you to everyone who spoke with me about my research, who hosted me during my travels, and who helped arrange visits, interviews, access to research materials, meals, lodging, transportation and other critical pieces of the project. The authorship rightly belongs to all of us collectively. We then continue by toying this is not a book about military bases. This is not a book about military bases at face. Face nation is about the lives of people who have been affected and all too often harmed by our military bases overseas. The book tells the stories of families and locals living around the bases, probase and an antibase activist and many more. It introduces people to the lives of people who live around the bases. Hopefully most folks have a handout. On one side you will see one of the fabulous maps kelly martin made for the books. You will see a map depicting the spread of u. S. Military bases overseas today. You will see a photograph of the air station in japan on the other side. This is a base that is surrounded entirely by a very large urban area. The area is around 1200 acres. So picture an area larger than central park, entirely surrounded by local people, schools, child care facilities, housing, and the like with helicopters and planes landing there every day. This is an area about eight times the size of the national mall. A u. S. Military base surrounded there. I think it is worth thinking about whether we could conceive of living next to the military base. The only reason i came to write base nation and speak to you tonight was because of a phone call i received 14 years ago to the day. On the phone was a lawyer who asked he to conduct research about the people who once lived on islands in the middle of the indian ocean, garcia and the islands surrounding it, and they no longer live on diego garcia because in the late 1960s and early 1970s the u. S. And British Government removed the entire people as part of the construction of the u. S. Military base on diego garcia. The people were uprooted and deported 1200 miles away to the western Indian Islands and have been living there predomantly get back to their home. Let me read from one of the lives touched by the construction of this base on diego garcia and the uprooting of the people. It is a story that i tell in island of shame but i have written a chapter in base nation about these people and what are at least 17 other people who were uprooted, displaced, forcible removed as part of the construction of the bases overseas. Construction on diego garcia began in 1971 in a memo of three words the navy highest ranking admiral confirmed the garcia state must be go. With the help of u. S. Navy cbs british agents began to deportation process by rounding up the dogs and burned them in cargo sheds as the people watched on in horror. Then the authorities ordered the remaining people on to overcrowded cargoshi ships. Most of the people slept on top aboard horse shit. By the end of the journey, vomit and excretions were everywhere. Some compared the conditions similar to slave conditions. Most of the people were left on the docks homeless, jobless and had little money. Most were able to bring only a small box of belongings and a sleeping max. In 1975, the years after the last removal, the Washington Press exposed the story. A reporter found them living in poverty and what victims called massive kidnapping. One of the last to go, came to the area with six children and my mother. We got our house near the cemetery but the house didnt have a door, didnt have running water, didnt have electricity. The way we were treated wasnt the kind of treatment people need to be able to live. And then my children and i began to suffer. All of my children started getting sick. Within two months of arriving, two of her children were dead. The second was buried in an unmarked grave because there was no money for a burial. We were living like animals. Land, we had none. Work, we had none. Our children were not going to school. They had lost almost everything for no reason other than living on an island desired by the u. S. Navy. Most americans rarely think about u. S. Military bases overseas like the one on diego garcia. Since the end of world war ii, or the cold war, since the United States built or acquired most of their bases, americans considered it normal to have military instillations in other countries. The presence of the bases have been accepted without question and treated as good and essential to National Security and global peace. Perhaps the bases register in our consciousness when there is a protest or accident. But they are quickly forgotten. There are no Free Standing bases on u. S. Soil, but around 800 around the world occupied by 800,000 troops. The count of 800 actually comes from the pentagons annual counting of bases overseas. There were 686 outside of the 50 states and washington, d. C. , but their count excludes many wellknown bases like those in kuwait and secret ones in saudi arabia and israel. By my best accounting conducted over the last 14 years and especially the last six while i worked on in on the book 800 is res reasonable. 70 years after the war, there are 174 bases in germany, 113 in germany, and 83 in south korea. Hundreds more in aruba, australia, kenya, and qutar to game a few. Few u. S. Citizens realize we probably have more bases in other peoples land than any other people, nation, or empire in world history. Yet the subject is barely discussed in the media. Rarely does anyone ask if we need hundreds of bases or if we can afford them. Rarely does anyone consider how we would feel about the base on soil. Or how we would react if china, russia or iran built in our area. Even the nicest troops arriving with tanks and high power weaponry making themselves at home in our country is basically unthinkable. The idea the United States needs to maintain troops and bases outside of the United States has been unquestioning of the status go and the tenant of u. S. Foreign policy since the start of the cold war. I am happy to say however there are growing numbers of people across the political spectrum from right to left and everywhere in between and beyond who are beginning to question this status quo. One of the most obvious reason is the cost. Oversea bases are expensive compared to keeping troops on bases in the United States. In 2014, my estimate shows 85 billion a year to maintain bases and troops overseas and that is a conservative estimate. That figure alone is larger than the budget of any Government Agency except the department of defense itself. That doesnt count the bases in iraq and afghanistan the figure probably reaches around 156 billion if you count those. Beyond such financial cost, there are human ones. The family of military personal suffer from the spread of oversea bases given the strain of distant appointments, family separation and moves. They contribute to the shocking rate of sexual assault. Onethree Service Women are sexually assaulted and a large number happen at these bases. In places like south korea you find the exploitive sexual industry relying on human trafficking. The list of problem only grows once you look closer. Widespread environmental damage because of leaks, accidents and disbursement of toxic material. In japan, rapes and other crimes have been committed. In italy, 20 died after a marine jet severed a gandala cable. Today, guam and puerto rico help p perpetuate the colonialism. Despite rhetoric about spreading democracy, the governments track record for bases shows a preference of maintaining bases in places like qutar. The willingness to partner with the bases tangles the military with mafia organizations in italy. And torture and abuse from Guantanamo Bay to others have tarnished the international repation of the United States and generated anger. Drone strikes have killed hundreds of people. In iraq, afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia Foreign bases are created fertile breeding grounds for radicalism. The presence of bases in the muslim holy land in saudi arabia was a major recruiting tool for alqaeda and part of bin ladens bases for the attacks in 2011. Given the track record it is Little Wonder the base nation has generated grieveiances, protest, and antagonistic relationships with others. Less crucially, i want to point out it isnt at all clear that u. S. Bases overseas protect security and global peace as it has been claimed. During the cold war, there is an argument that u. S. Bases in europe and asia played a defensive role. In the argument bases many thousands of miles from u. S. Shores are necessary to defend the United States or allies is harder to sustain. The Global Collection of bases has been offensive in nature making it too easy to choice and resulting in disasters costing millions of lives from vietnam to afghanistan to iraq. Beyond that, foreign bases heig heighten military tension and discourage diplomatic resolutions to conflict. They are becoming the main tool in the tool box and placing forces near the border of russia, china and iran increase threats to their security and only encourages them to respond by boosting their military spending. Again, imagine how u. S. Leaders would respond if iran were to build a single base anywhere near u. S. Borders perhaps in mexico, canada ear the caribbean. Or the creation of new u. S. Bases to protect against an alleged chinese or russian threat runs the risk of becoming a selffulfilling prophecy. They may create the threat they are designed to protect. Far from making the world a safer place, u. S. Bases overseas can make war more likely and america less secure. The major motivation for the book is to begin to the discussion and debate about the bases that have been unquestioned for so long. I am looking forward to that debate. But i want to conclude with the story of Russell Madden who was a soldier in germany who died in afghanistan in 2010. I became aware of his story when i conducted research in italy where part of his unit was based. He grew up in kentucky, a thousand of 6,000 and was a High School Football star, he enlisted in the army because he needed Health Insurance to cover treatment for his four year olds son. He joined because he knew parker would be taken care of no matter what maddens sister said. I hoped to speak with a member of russells family for several years. It was a poingant story of someone joining the military to get Health Insurance for a sick child. I found russells mother online eventual eventually. He said russell signed up for the army soon after his son was turned away from the mayo clinic. No one will ever send my son away again she remembers russell saying. After russells death, peggy received a condolance letter. I am deeply saddened to hear about your son and our nation will never forget the sacrifice. Peggys response was if my son found a sufficient employer and Health Insurance in this great land my son would not have had to sacrifice his life for his son. Peggy sent the letter to the white house and hasnt received a reply. Russells story is a reminder of the life and death decisions connected to the military. Unlike all advanced countries in which we have bases in, the United States does not guarantee health care for all of its citizens even if it has been expanded to some extent in recent years. The idea of doing so is dismi dismissed as too expensive but the nation spends sums supporting the base structure born from the cold war that ended decaddecades ago. Health care is not the only area we made questionable tradeoffs. I was struck by the impressive Public Transportation systems found in the countries hosting our basis such as germany, japan and south korea. Even in italy where many criticize the train system, for good reason in many cases, the speed and efficiency of Transportation Options are far superior than those in the United States. I included this observation as a side to think from the main subject of my research. It was only later i realized the interrelated nature of the two. The United States overseas base infrastructure and host Public Transportation infrastructure. We can see similar patterns when it comes to schools, housing and other forms of infrastructure. Countries like germany, japan and italy have spent large amounts supporting the bases on the soil, their military spending has been accompanied by impressive investments in the lives of their citizens s. Meanwhile, we have neglected transportation, housing, infrastructu infrastructure and hillary clinton. Think about half of the base Health Care Funds being spent on the American People and what changes that could make. Thank you. I look forward to taking questions about any aspect of the book, specific places, anything you want to take on. And just a reminder that bradley put out at the beginning do come up to the mike so we can hear you. If you cannot get up, you can still ask your question and i will repeat it for everyone. It seems to me that i recall when i worked on capitol hill, which admittedly was in the 70s, there was discussion about closing bases overseas and primarily people referred to germany. We were told the germans wanted the bases to stay open for their own security, for the economic impact. By no means am i arguing with you at all, although i am afraid even if we saved the money, it would not be put to better domestic uses. But i do recall there was discussion then so i wondered whether it is universal now that everybody wants them out gone . A number of Great Questions there. I guess i would begin by saying the book is not calling for the immediate closure of every base overseas. Instead it is asking for a very careful examining of the need of every single base and on a regular basis which congress hasnt done and the pentagon doesnt do on a regular basis. I think we have to, with base closures, which i hope we will see in the future, i think we have to demand that money is used more wisely. There is the larger problem with the whole military budget running into the hundreds of billions of dollars. And i think we need to question those investments as well. To go to your question about the closures in the 70s, there was a time in the wake of the war in vietnam when there were calls to pull troops and bases back into the United States and some to extent there was a drawdown after the war in vietnam. Shortly after in the 80s, there was a buildup especially in the persia gulf, and we see that today, the feelings of locals on the bases you see a wide range of opinions. Many locals are quite happy to have the bases. Many work on the bases. Have businesses that benefit from the presence of the bases. But the Economic Impacts are complicated and there are many, as i pointed to, in places like japan and elsewhere that are very much opposed to having military presence on their soil for a variety of reasons. Just to follow up on the Economic Impacts, research has shown that while people often fear the economic consequences of a base closing, they fear that in places like florida, california, new york, texas, similar fears abroad, Research Shows that generally speaking the economic damage is slight and communities tend to bounce back quickly and in some cases end up better off than they were with the base because they create more viable economies and transform bases in the schools, housing and shopping and many other uses. I think it is great what you are doing. Thank you. Hi, david. Hi, susan. Congratulations on the book. I am a lefty peace nick so i relay. You are not calling me such are you . Not publically. Good. You said there are arguments across the political spectrum. I am interested in what arguments do you think will have the most traction on the right . I think this could be dismissed as the lefty peace nicks are antimilitary. So are there arguments who respect people who want a Strong Military but could still make a drawdown in bases. Dollars and cents. Not surprisingly. None other than donald trump was talking about closing bases overseas. He said why are we spending so much money defending germany . Why are we spending so much money defending japan . And i think it is worth asking how does the base in germany defend the United States or defend germany for that matter or anyone in europe where there is basically no Major Military threat that could conceivable take on the european nato allies. But dollars and cents. We see people like hutchinson who offered words on the back of the book. But others like leaders in montana saying i would love to see the military members coming from from germany and benefit our economy and our state. These are arguments i am hoping will begin to reach out to people more across the political spectrum to build an alliance, bipartisan and multi partisan alliance, to begin asking why so many bases are open and begin closing ones that are not needed. What about things like milita military readiness . Very good question. This is crucial. Many people say if we do this, how would we respond to any crisis in the world. It is important to point out a study by the Bush Administration and the rand administration shows forces can be deployed from the United States and perhaps hawaii just as quickly as it can in every case almost from overseas. The value of overseas Strategic Value has declined. Any time difference that might be gained from a base overseas isnt closely made up for by the hundreds of millions and hundreds of billions of dollars more we spend to maintain the bases overseas. So i think that is another important argument that needs to be embraced. Thank you for doing this talk. It is interesting to me. I have two questions. One is a dub tail off the first question. You mention the Economic Impacts of base closures. I know there is some like in the philippines but what about cultural and social impacts . I was thinking about the base in japan particularly it is so big it seems if it closed suddenly it would be this large, empty space. And you mentioned the correlation between bases and antidemocratic regimes around the world and mentioned bahrain and i know they have the fifth fleet of naval bases and they were an area of the arab springs. And i was wondering, because i dont happen what happened, how the revolutionary or like revolts that occurred, particularly to the arab springs, were affected by or intersected by the bases . At least in the persian gulf or middle east or anywhere else in the world. I would love to hear about that. Great questions. Thank you. Let me see if i can get to them all. Let me go in reverse order. The Obama Administration was very quite, you are right, when it came to the prodemocracy protest in bahrain and they were violent protest that led to death and torture and other repression. So you see a clear case where our bases abroad are actively restraining the process of democracy and aiding and propping up repressive regimes which should be tribaoubling to. In my mind, there should not be a military base in any country that is not democratic. Anyone who believes in democracy shouldnt be supporting countries that are not democratic it seems to me. The economic and cultural and social impacts now. Economic impacts when a base gose away. There have been huge protest for deck aped decades. The United States ruled the area of japan we are discussing for many years unlike the rest of japan that gained independence more quickly after world war ii. We have been returning some base land after decades and you see numerous examples of the land being converted into shopping areas, housing, offices, schools, you see similar things in germany, for example. And i think you need to only thing about this area being a beautiful Tropical Island but it is dominated by military bases. 20 of the main island are nearly covered by u. S. Military bases. Again, just think about 20 of rhode island, for example, covered by a Foreign Military presence. Beautiful, Tropical Island bases dont tend to encourage tourism. If you return the land, suddenly you often have literal beachfront opened up that can be developed for tourist purposes and many others. The cultural and social impacts are complicated. You would think being an anthrpologist i would Pay Attention to this and do i do. They range from military personals and locals, romantic and otherwise. Some produced thousands of offspring, many of whom have been abandoned. At a lighter level you see interesting culinary infusions. But that is a theme i think runs throughout the book. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much for all of your excellent work on this fascinating topic. I am curious to know if any indepth cost benefit analysis is being performed on significant parts of the u. S. Foreign based system over the past five years by congress, the department of defense, or independent military experts. If there have been, what do you think of the quality of the meth methods and conclusions that resulted from those and why do you think there hasnt been more pressure for justifying the existing network and for taking action to assess it and adjust it on a costbenefit basis . Bills of dollars of new bases in europe at the same time we are closing bases in europe . So there are encouraging signs s there. In terms of costbenefit analysis, i would point to the rand corporation. Hardly a bunch of leftie peace cann ics. The governmentfunded rand corporation. Referred to the study before, showed that bases abroad do not allow the United States to deploy military forces any faster on the whole than bases in the domestic United States. To the excellent is any benefit when it comes to time, they are farout weighed by the costs of maintaining bases overseas. Again, the other similar study was carried out by the Bush Administration, hardly lefties peacenics. Thank you. I want to ask you a general question. When we got into afghanistan and iraq, we pulled in a bunch of reserves out of using this massively globally deployed army. I wondered why firstrank soldiers, welltrainedwerent brought into a fight and instead we relied on reserves, and you dont see from the bases, another least overtly, interventions in domestic conflicts in these countries, and when isis popped up, you dont see any action from any of these bases. Instead we put ships in the care caribbean the ocean there and we fly sorties against these people. Im at a loss why we waist an incredibly amount of freaking money on something that seems to be ineffective. Very good question. I think we have to look at the larger u. S. Military budget, which i think frankly speaking is totally out of control. We have a budget that in 2010, reached the heights of that we saw in the cold war, and yet there is no super power enemy. The budget is totally out of proportion to any threats face egg the United States. In fact, taking money away from threats facing the United States. Various kinds. From any terrorist threats to threats to our health and education and other forms of wellbeing. So, thats certainly part of the problem. Its not so well known but the pentagon billions of dollars go missing or cant be accounted for, thats treated as part of everyday business. The pentagon cannot pass an audit. The only Government Agency that cant pass an audit. This should be profoundly disturbing to us, but just get the path. If the Food Stamp Program lost six dollar, people would be up in arms. Of course thats a slight exaggeration, but you get the point. Theres not that level of criticism or level of critical analysis when it comes to the pentagon budget generally, pentagon activities globally, and just base infrastructure. Thank you. I set up the next speaker is actually a relative, and i have primed him. This is totally unfair. So, disclosure. Thank you for paying me to show up. Im joking. Im curious to know if you could search look for or search for benefits of bases abroad, and did you identify any benefits . Imjust curious to know if there are in i benefits and a second question unrelated. Can you tell us the st. Of the jorge four . Interesting. Im not even sure pops up in the book. I guess a very brief mention. So, the second question first. The u. S. Military had a presence in ecuador, up until 2009. And slight aside at the president of ecuador pointed to the bryantness that people in the United States have to bases overseas when he said that he would renew the base on one condition, that the United States allow ecuador to put a base in miami. He said, if theres no problem having a use u. S. Base in ecuador, why should there be a problem have can an ecuadorian base in miami . We have to put yourselves in the shoes of People Living next to our bases around the world. What i would it would be like to happen helicopters, planes flying overhead . Danger of crashes, extents that do happen. Okinawa in the past week or two. So, in ecuador, there were a number of Fishing Vessels that were number of things happened with u. S. Naval vessels intercepting the Fishing Vessels they suspected of trafficking drugs. This one vessel that ethan was referring to, disappeared. Sunk, presumably, and all the fishers onboard died, leaving behind a group of widows who have been organizing and struggling for some first of all, truth and justice when it comes to the fates of their husbands. I was able to meet the widows in ecuador. They suspect that the u. S. Military sunk the ship, and i havent seen enough evidence yet to firmly conclude that, but there is certainly some circumstantial evidence that is in fact the case. Benefits. Benefits to bases. Again, i think during the cold war there was a legitimate argument that bases in germany or italy were protecting western europe. So, you can certainly consider those benefits. I think at a different level, we have seen a range of very positive interactions between u. S. Military personnel and locals. Of course, also, we sadly have u. S. Military personnel committing crimes and being involved in accidents that have caused deaths. Another grievous damage. But we do see very encouraging forms of engagement. One argument over the book that i think these bases that we generally dont pay much attention to here in the United States, are a major way the which the United States is engage withing the rest of the world. And i think we need to begin to think about and find other forms of engagement. The argument is not to close all the bases and go home and retreat to some isolationist United States. Instead the argument is that if were going to be closing bases overseas, as i hope we begin to do with increasing rapidity, we also need to boost our diplomatic engagement. As were bringing troops home, we need to send more Foreign Service officers abroad and find other ways of social diplomatic, economic, forms of engagement. Thank you. David. Peter. The book looks great. Cant wait to read it. When i was in okinawa last summer i met with the u. S. Consular general. The top official there, to discuss the base situation, and he said that the base relocation was essential. The most important strategic piece of real estate for the United States because of its location related to china and korea and the philippines. He said that even though that the okinawan people are irrational but were going to force them to accept us. Now, that seems to be u. S. Policy, of course. One disturbing thing is obamas approach to this. When hatayama was elected prime minister, it liked like in would be change in japan, obama destroyed him. He ran on blocking the base relocation, and obama insisted upon it and that brought down the government. So, im curious about what you see as obamas attitude about this. I missed the beginning so you might have gone into this. Also curious about biden and clinton, and you said some, donald trump or rand paul have been decent. Are any democrats making any sense on this question . A lot of Great Questions. So, i can refer again to the handout which i hope most people were able to look at or maybe could share. On the back you see this base that completely surrounded by the city in okinawa, and for 20 years now, theres been a plan to close the base, which some describe thats worlds most dangerous base, and build a new base in okinawa. Remember that the u. S. Military controls 20 of okinawa already. Build a new base in honoko, and this has generated intense opposition and really almost universal opposition among oak okinawans that a new base would be built there at this point some construction is started but actually theres a onemonth moratorium right now and the base may never get built, and i certainly hope it never gets built. The the marines in particular are the predominant force in okinawa, argue that must be there, we are a deconcern force, this deterrent force, this is an incredibly strategic position. But there are growing numbers of people in the political spectrum, includes the u. S. Military, who say a base located so close to the asia mainland is actually extraordinarily vulnerable given the increased range of north korean or chinese missiles. Now, i dont see north korea, impoverished nation, that would base tremendous face tremendous retribution were it to attack okinawa. But the point is that there are a growing number of people questioning the Strategic Value of the bases in okinawa, and as i discussed in my chapter, the the discussion of the chapter called masters of extortion. One way to understand the marines really holding on to the bases in okinawa is that they fear for their existence. If you force the marines to leave okinawa, many within the service fear that people would begin questioning the reason for the marines which has been called into question in the war in afghanistan and iraq. Effectively has become a second army. So this has been a symbolicways for the marines for decades, going back to world war ii. I think complicated, and i address the complicated relationship with okinawa and japan in this chapter. To get to your other question about democrats, ron paul, the former republican candidate for president , was another who spoke out against u. S. Bases overseas, and questioned and called for the closure of many bases. You dont see all that many prominent democrats making similar calls. I think there are some people trying to push Bernie Sanders in this direction, but as far as i know he hasnt said anything yet about overseas bases. Thank you. I did just remember one other thing. You might have noticed a discrepancy between the figures i provided for the cost of bases and troops overseas, and the figures you see on the flip side of the map. Thats because i updated the figures from what you see in the book. To provide a more recent estimate. Hi. Thanks so much for a great presentation. What i imagine is a wonderful book i look forward to reading. I just wanted to push you from the political realist perspective and see what your response would be. So, there would be some out there who would say in fact we vitally need these bases. In fact we need them most of all in the auto thattic states because were we to withdraw then china and then russia and other nations who have no trouble dealing with autocrats would quickly move in. Moreover, japan, philippines, other areas in the south china sea, would quickly become prey to the chinese who are already making aggressive overtures and we would simply lose our influence around the world but this is crucial to our economy, our culture, our way of life and if we crede ground we give it over to those who are much more have much fewer screwles than even we had and would only wreak more devastation and destruction on the world. Great question to take on. I always questioned that realist nick term. Realistic to whom . Of course, when sort of have to start there. But i think part of what your question points to is the danger of our continuing to maintain so many bases overseas. Some are predicting this is actually going to lead to what has been referred to as base races. That russia, china, increasingly going to look to build more overseas bases. As far as we know china doesnt have any now but there are some rumblings that might have a first. So, actually, in my mind, a good moment for the United States to begin calling for something of a moratorium on overseas bases except under very strict conditions. Again, im not an absolutist, there should be no foreign bases, and i think there are some circumstances in which it might be entirely appropriate for a foreign pour to be located on an allys soil. I think we need to begin to question, again, the fundamental tenets of our foreign policy, bases are meant to threaten. They get talked about in terms of spreading democracy often, but i think we see in places like some of the autocratic states in the persian gulf are bases popping up, and repressive regimes and helping to stamp down movements for greater democracy. Think, again in pulling out, the solution cant just be pull out and then say goodbye. We would want to continue to engage with those countries and push them in other ways to become more democratic, and to resist the possibility of another power simply taking over. It would not, of course, be much of a benefit in my mind for the world to have the u. S. Pull out of a base in bahrain, for example, and china, just takes its place. Thank you for the Great Questions. Thank you for coming. Two quick questions them first question is, to what extent do you think foreign governments are either complicit in or have been coerced into having military bases in their countries . The second question i guess to what extent too you think these very real consequences on the people of these countries what does that play into u. S. Policymakers . Is that really a big part of their calculus or just about how much its going to cost the american taxpayer. The second question again . To what extent do the real consequences of these military bases does that really considered by u. S. Poll so imakers or is that instead really just looking at the dollar bills, they just look at dollar bills for taxpayers. Great. Thank you. Two Great Questions. So, foreign governments are often deeply complicit in the presence of bases on their soil. It is important to point out that again, the legal or political basis for many of our bases overseas is often secretive not secretive secret agreements in italy, for example. No one has been able to see them since they were sign in the 1950s. Again, i think deeply troubling. But of course, these bases actually serve as a very powerful lever for the United States to put pressure on host nations and host nation governments. The threat of pulling out alone, even though the economic effects are very slight, politically speaking it could come at a great cost to a local politician or National Poll thanksgiving is seen to have allowed the United States to leave. So having u. S. Base in another country, in many ways i see it as providing something of a trojan horse. Once its established, it becomes a lever of power for the u. S. , and from a realest perspective you could argue thats great. We should operate that way in the world. Im not sure that is the image or the the United States we would want to portray and i dont think that is certainly not the country i want to live in. To what extent are the consequences considered . They are considered in the fact that protest is something the u. S. Military doesnt like to have to deal with. The marines are holing on in okinawa, but they are trying to basically have effectively gotten the japanese government to deal with the negative consequences of all that protest. So, certainly protest is a major consideration. I think all too often some of the harmful effects we see on the local populations, displacement, environmental damage, accidents, crime, and the list goes on are not considered. Theyre not seen. I think thats a major part of the problem. Thats one of the major aims of my book, to make visible these bases and what they are doing in the world. David, were just about out of time but let me ask the final question. I didnt want to end with at least clarifying there has been some rather systemic evaluation of u. S. Bases in the last 15 or 20 years. Youre right, that the evaluation of foreign bases is not formally a part but its been done in parallel with the base realignment and closure commission, and in fact if you look at western europe, a number of troops has diminished quite significantly, as well as a number of bases there. You make an interesting point in your book that theres been at the same time theyre downsizing in europe, theyre pouring millions of dollars more into refurbishing and rennovating structures that remain. But there has been an attempt, at least, to grapple with this. Right . There has. Thereas