Wikipedia lists 3, but it's Wikipedia, so take it with a grain of salt. It might be fewer, but rhetorically it's easier to just say 3 so nobody can come in with Wikipedia to say I lied.

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

It's obvious bullshit:

have been characterized by some as a base for the People's Liberation Army Navy

"by some" who? .Citation needed, while there are 4 citations for Cambodia govt saying it's under Cambodian control. I would expect something like posession and usage of naval base would be easy to prove, especially in the age of satellites and cellphones, but alas.

The Chinese and Tajik governments deny the existence of one base, while the other was under construction as of 2024. China funds but does not directly own the bases. According to reports they are intended to support joint operations in response to the security situation in Afghanistan.[17][18][19]

If we say that "joint operations" are the same as direct ownership then by the same logic applied to USA would skyrocket their number of bases to something like every single military base in every NATO country.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 hours ago

I agree, it's almost certainly bullshit.