Admiral Daryl Caudle, the US Navy’s top operational commander, has made a striking statement, saying there are no immediate plans to return evacuated US troops and their families to Bahrain, and that military officials are even considering arrangements to move the families’ personal belongings and household effects. In an unusually direct remark, he stressed: “We’re not going back there anytime soon.”
These remarks are not merely a military assessment; they constitute a significant acknowledgment of the future of one of the most important centers of US military presence in the region. Bahrain hosts the US Navy’s largest overseas base, and the uncertainty surrounding the return of personnel to such a facility cannot be separated from the direct consequences of developments on the ground.
Media reports further reinforce this picture. Military Times has estimated the damage inflicted on the US base in Bahrain during the war with Iran at nearly $400 million. John Cordle, a retired US Navy officer, went even further, saying the potential loss of the Bahrain air base would effectively be comparable to losing an aircraft carrier.
Previously, NBC reported billions of dollars in damage caused by Iranian missile and drone attacks on US surveillance bases in the region, as well as the lengthy period required to rebuild them. David Petraeus, the former commander of US Central Command, has also acknowledged that, following the attacks, some US bases in West Asia no longer have the capabilities they once did.
From Damaged Bases to the Abraham Lincoln
Alongside these admissions, the fate of the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln also carries a clear message: the carrier ultimately left the region. At the same time, reports about the poor condition of US weapons stocks and munitions depots present a picture of the erosion of Washington’s logistical capabilities in the region.
Taken together, these pieces of evidence raise a serious question: How can a government that, on the first day, spoke of a swift victory and the collapse of Iran now be struggling to maintain, rebuild and even operate its own military infrastructure in the region?
The reality is that the gap between “political image-making” and “the reality on the ground” is becoming increasingly apparent, a gap that even the use of AI apparently cannot bridge.
Resignations Pointing to Trouble Inside the Pentagon
Against this backdrop, the series of resignations and dismissals of senior US military and defense officials takes on a new significance. According to The Wall Street Journal, Daniel Driscoll, the US Secretary of the Army, submitted his resignation to Trump after months of disagreements and tensions with Pete Hegseth, the country’s Secretary of War, and is expected to leave the Pentagon.
His departure would leave the US Army facing a significant leadership vacuum at the top of its management structure, at a time when a number of senior military commanders and officials have already stepped down or been removed from their positions.
The continuation of such a trend amid a military crisis is not merely an administrative reshuffle. These developments could point to deep divisions within the US political and military decision-making structure, divisions that raise serious questions about Washington’s claim of a decisive and cost-free victory over Iran.
Trump, the Hollywood Narrative and Public Opinion
Perhaps it is this gap between reality and narrative that has driven Trump to reproduce an exaggerated picture of Iran’s situation. On Truth Social, he has claimed that Iran has no navy or air force, has no currency, is unable to pay the salaries of its military personnel and police, has inflation of 300 percent, and that the country’s leadership is also confused and incapable.
He even posted an AI-generated video depicting an attack on Khark Island, a video whose credibility was quickly challenged, forcing JD Vance, the US vice president, to characterize it not as an operational strategy but merely as a message to Iran.
The key point, however, is that American society has not necessarily accepted the White House narrative either. The latest Reuters/Ipsos poll puts Trump’s approval rating at 33 percent, a figure that ranks among the lowest levels of his political career.
From this perspective, developments unfolding in the region should be viewed as more than a military dispute. The message of recent developments for the countries of the region is clear: reliance on the US security umbrella is no longer a guarantee of security, and relying on promises from Washington could impose a heavy cost on its neighbors.
Iran, too, has demonstrated that it has moved from “strategic patience” to “punishing the aggressor” and will target any source of threat to its security. Under such circumstances, the future of the region will not be determined by the continued presence of extra-regional powers, but by the emergence of an indigenous security architecture, one for which Iran will warmly clasp the hand of any neighbor that reaches out sincerely for shared security.
NOURNEWS