Trump Plans to Rebrand Defense Department as ‘Department of War’

The incumbent U.S. President, Donald Trump, intends to enact an executive order on the upcoming Friday. The aim is to rebrand the Department of Defense, thereby leaving his indelible mark on the government’s most sizeable body—an insider from the White House confirmed on Thursday. With this change, the Department of Defense will assume the name ‘Department of War’.

Upon approval of this order, the top officials within the Defense Department—including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth—will be allowed to adopt alternative titles such as ‘Secretary of War’, ‘Department of War’, or ‘Deputy Secretary of War’. These secondary titles would be applicable in all formal correspondences as well as public communications.

This initiative presents a mandate for Hegseth to propose any necessary legislative or executive actions that would cement the renaming process permanently. Ever since his inauguration earlier this year, President Trump has expressed a desire to rename a variety of places and institutions. He’s also intent on reinstating the original appellations of military bases that underwent naming alterations in light of racial justice demonstrations.

However, alterations to department names are not frequent occurrences and necessitate the nod of approval from Congress. Despite being a rarity, there’s a chance that this proposal might pull through, given the Republicans’ slight majority in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

The historical context illuminates the fact that up until 1949, the U.S. Department of Defense was known as the War Department. Post-World War Two, in a bid to unify the Army, Navy, and Air Force, Congress decided on renaming the department. The change in name aimed at conveying a clear message— in the age of nuclear weapons, the U.S stood firmly committed to warding off wars.

An impending change in nomenclature would inevitably lead to more expenses, consequently warranting updates of signs and logos. The change would affect not just the officials at the Pentagon situated in Washington, D.C., but also military installments worldwide.

A past instance includes an attempt by former President Joe Biden to rename nine bases honoring the Confederacy and Confederate leaders, which resulted in an estimated expenditure of $39 million by the Army. Ironically, Hegseth overturned this decision early this year.

Moreover, the Trump administration has been on a mission to streamline the government, thus aiming for budget cuts at the Pentagon. When questioned about the allocation of funds, Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth— an armed forces veteran and Senate’s Armed Services Committee member— highlighted the need for the money to be utilized towards supporting military families or hiring diplomats with expertise in conflict prevention.

‘Why invest this money in military families or in educating diplomats adept at preventing the outbreak of conflicts?’ she voiced out in an interaction with news agency Reuters. Lambasting Trump, she stated, ‘It appears that trump prefers playing politics with our armed forces rather than bolstering our nation’s security, or offering support to our courageous soldiers and their families’.

There are those who point out that this proposed name change not only escalates expenses but also acts as an unnecessary distraction for those within the Pentagon. Nonetheless, Hegseth advocated for the change in name, stating, ‘It’s about more than just terms; it’s about fostering the warrior spirit.’

Earlier in the year, one of Trump’s close allies in Congress presented a bill aiming to facilitate the President’s ability to modify and rename agencies more seamlessly. ‘We are determined to move forward with this. I am confident that given the need, Congress will cooperate. Being too defense-oriented is not our aim. While we do aim to be defensive, we also aim to be offensive when required,’ Trump expressed his thoughts in the previous month.

Possibly presaging the present scenario, Trump discussed the potentiality of renaming the Department back in June. He even speculated that the initial renaming might have been a move to adopt more ‘politically correct’ stance.