A major shift in nomenclature is on the horizon for the U.S. military as President Donald Trump is set to sign an executive order on Friday, September 5, 2025, redesignating the Department of Defense with the secondary title of the “Department of War.” This rebranding effort, confirmed by White House officials, will also allow Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to officially use the title “Secretary of War.”
The Executive Order: A Return to the Past
The executive order aims to restore a name that the agency used until 1947 and 1949, when it was reorganized and renamed the Department of Defense following World War II. According to Fox News Digital, President Trump publicly advocated for the change, stating in August that “everybody likes that we had an unbelievable history of victory when it was Department of War.” This sentiment is echoed by Secretary Hegseth, who, according to Newsweek, suggested the shift reflects a “warrior ethos” campaign within the Pentagon, emphasizing, “we’re not just defense, we’re offense.”
“Warrior Ethos” and Projected Image
This move is part of a broader “warrior ethos” campaign spearheaded by the Trump administration, intending to project an image of toughness for America’s military. White House officials indicate that the order will instruct Secretary Hegseth to propose both legislative and executive actions to make the name change permanent, acknowledging that a full legal name change would ultimately require congressional approval. While Republicans currently hold slim majorities in both chambers of Congress, GOP leaders have reportedly shown little interest in opposing the initiative, as reported by The Guardian.
Implementation and Costs
Implementing the name change will necessitate significant modifications. This includes updating public-facing websites and office signage at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and at military installations worldwide. Al Jazeera reports that even the public affairs briefing room at the Pentagon will be renamed the “Pentagon War Annex.” The cost of these widespread changes could run into hundreds of millions of dollars, a point of contention for critics. For comparison, a previous plan to rename nine Army bases, which was later reversed by Secretary Hegseth, was projected to cost $39 million, according to the Associated Press.
Criticism and Opposition
Opponents of the renaming, including Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth, have voiced strong criticism. Duckworth argues that the move represents an unnecessary expense and a distraction from core missions, according to The Independent. Critics also suggest that the rebrand signals a rhetorical shift toward a more aggressive posture and could potentially undermine U.S. diplomatic messaging on the global stage.
Historical Context and Justification
The Department of Defense was established in 1947, merging the previously independent War Department and Navy Department with the newly created Air Force. Historians note that the name change at that time was intended to signal a shift towards preventing wars in the nuclear age. However, President Trump has suggested that the original renaming was driven by a desire to be “politically correct,” according to NPR.
Global Reactions to a “Department of War”
The international community is closely watching this development, with various news outlets providing diverse perspectives. Sky News, Israel Hayom, Anadolu Ajansı, and TRT Global are among the international media outlets reporting on the potential implications of this name change for U.S. foreign policy and global perceptions of American military intentions. The shift towards a more assertive image, as implied by the “Department of War” title, could be interpreted differently across the globe, potentially impacting diplomatic relations and international collaborations.
The “Warrior Ethos” Campaign: A Deeper Dive
Secretary Hegseth’s emphasis on a “warrior ethos” within the Pentagon signifies a potentially transformative shift in military culture. This campaign aims to instill a more proactive and aggressive mindset among military personnel. The long-term effects of this cultural shift on military strategy, training, and international relations remain to be seen. Experts suggest that such a fundamental change could lead to a more assertive approach to foreign policy and a greater willingness to engage in military interventions.
Congressional Approval and Legislative Hurdles
While the executive order can initiate the renaming process, a full legal name change ultimately requires congressional approval. The current slim Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress may not guarantee smooth passage, as some GOP members could be hesitant to support a move that could be perceived as politically divisive or financially irresponsible. The legislative debate surrounding the name change is likely to be intense, with Democrats expected to voice strong opposition and potentially attempt to block the initiative.
Financial Implications and Resource Allocation
The projected costs of implementing the name change, potentially running into hundreds of millions of dollars, raise concerns about resource allocation within the Department of Defense. Critics argue that these funds could be better used to address critical needs such as modernizing military equipment, improving troop training, or supporting veterans’ programs. The financial debate surrounding the renaming is likely to focus on the opportunity costs of prioritizing a symbolic gesture over more pressing operational requirements.
Conclusion: Weighing Image and Reality
The renaming of the Department of Defense to include “Department of War” represents more than just a cosmetic change; it signifies a potential shift in the U.S. military’s image and strategic outlook. While proponents argue it reflects a “warrior ethos,” critics warn of unnecessary expenses and a potentially more aggressive global posture. The coming months will reveal the true impact of this controversial decision.
