US military bases abroad routinely avoid environmental standards mandated by US law

Evidence

The military offered no count of toxic sites abroad, but there is little reason to believe its record there is any better. In fact, it’s likely that the situation overseas is considerably worse. After all, as we have seen, in the minds of many military leaders, one of the advantages to having bases abroad is the freedom they offer—and part of that freedom is in not being constrained by environmental regulations. Some countries, such as Germany, have strict environmental protection laws and “status of forces” agreements requiring high levels of environmental compliance for U.S. bases. But in most other host nations, environmental protection in local laws and status of forces agreements is often weak or nonexistent. In many cases, the military does not have to meet standards that would be required under U.S. law. — David Vine, Base Nation_ How U.S. Military Bases…, 391

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the book’s earlier frame of overseas bases as zones of legal exemption and to the reader’s prior material on bases harming host nations.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — David Vine, Base Nation_ How U.S. Military Bases…, 391