Pentagon Report says China is looking for military bases in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. What is your most up-to-date and in-depth assessment?
IP-100, Indo-Pacific Chief:
Here’s the most up-to-date and geopolitically grounded assessment of what the 2025 Pentagon report really indicates about China potentially seeking military bases in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and elsewhere — and what it actually means on the ground:
1) What the Pentagon report actually says
The Pentagon’s Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2025 report does not confirm signed military base agreements in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, or Bangladesh. What it does state — based on U.S. Department of Defense intelligence — is that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is “actively considering” and planning for additional overseas military logistics facilities in a range of countries beyond its sole current base in Djibouti to support naval, air and ground forces. Pakistan is explicitly listed as one of those countries where China has “likely considered” establishing a base, and Bangladesh appears on a broader list of potential locations cited by U.S. sources. But consideration is not the same as existing basing rights or formal agreements. The Economic Times+1
- The report frames these as potential military logistics facilities — which may include ports, support infrastructure, or nodal access points — rather than fully operational bases with a permanent PLA garrison. The Economic Times
- The motivation for such facilities, according to the report, is to allow the PLA to project and sustain power at greater distances and protect sea-lines of communication, especially near strategic chokepoints like the Malacca Strait and Indian Ocean littoral. The Economic Times
2) Pakistan: the most advanced contender — but still unconfirmed
Pakistan is singled out in the report because of deep China-Pakistan defence ties, joint infrastructure projects (e.g., CPEC), and existing access at Gwadar port. Beijing’s outreach there — both economic and military logistics — logically positions it as the most likely candidate for some form of PLA facility in South Asia. However:
- No formal, publicly acknowledged PLA base exists there yet. No signed basing agreement has been confirmed by Pakistan or China. The U.S. description that China has “likely considered” basing in Pakistan is intelligence assessment language, not declaration of an existing PLA base. The Economic Times
- Pakistan’s strategic calculus is delicate: while it values China’s security umbrella and arms supply, Islamabad also manages internal political pressures and the risk of antagonizing India — which sees Chinese military presence near its western borders as a red line.
3) Sri Lanka: political denial and local sensitivities
Sri Lanka is on lists of potential host countries in U.S. assessments, but:
- Sri Lankan officials have publicly rejected claims that they will host a Chinese military base and reiterated that no such discussions are underway, emphasizing sovereign control over foreign military access. Daily Mirror
- Sri Lanka’s geostrategic position at the Indian Ocean crossroads makes it attractive for logistics and port access (e.g., Hambantota), but Colombo is wary of overt military entanglement that could destabilize relations with India or the West.
4) Bangladesh: emerging interest, but early stage
Bangladesh frequently appears in U.S. analyses and earlier studies as a possible site because of its strategic location along the northeastern Indian Ocean and its improving ties with Beijing. However:
- There are no credible reports of active negotiations or formal basing agreements with China in Dhaka.
- Bangladesh traditionally balances relations with China, India and the U.S., and hosting an overseas military base would represent a major strategic shift.
5) Broader Indo-Pacific context: strategic ambitions vs. realpolitik
China’s overseas basing ambitions — as described by the Pentagon — must be understood in the wider context of the PLA’s evolving doctrine and maritime interests:
- Overseas military facilities are envisioned as part of a logistics and sustainment network, not simply port leasing deals. They would enable longer enforcement of PLA Navy (PLAN) presence and shore-based support for expeditionary operations if needed. The Economic Times
- China’s only confirmed overseas base — at Djibouti — remains limited in size and scope and plays mainly logistical and antipiracy roles.
- Most of the cited potential host countries have not agreed to permanent PLA basing rights, and some (like Sri Lanka) actively deny such plans. Daily Mirror
- U.S. assessments typically use cautionary language (“likely considered”, “could seek”) because basing negotiations are inherently secretive and many overtures do not lead to agreements.
6) Strategic implications
- For India, even the possibility of PLA facilities in Pakistan or Bangladesh would be seen as a strategic challenge to its western and northeastern flanks, complicating maritime and land security planning.
- For the U.S. and its allies, these developments justify deeper forward presence, partnerships, and deterrent planning in the Indo-Pacific.
- For China, pursuing overseas facilities is part of a long-term effort to protect its expanding economic footprint and secure sea-lines of communication — but it must balance host-nation sovereignty concerns, local politics, and regional reactions.
Bottom line: The Pentagon report highlights consideration and planning by China for possible future military/logistics facilities in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and other countries — not confirmed, operational military bases in those states. Islamabad likely tops the list due to existing defence cooperation and strategic alignment with Beijing, but no public basing pact has been signed. Colombo and Dhaka maintain a careful balancing act, denying any commitment to Chinese military bases despite U.S. intelligence assessments. The real strategic pivot lies not in formal bases today, but in the expanding pattern of logistical access, port infrastructure deals, and PLA operational reach. The Economic Times+1
If you’d like, I can break this down into a concise strategic risk matrix for regional actors (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, U.S. and China).
IP-100, Indo-Pacific Chief
Three Corporate