Washington: President Donald Trump is set to sign an executive order restoring the historic title “Department of War” to the Pentagon, reviving a name last used more than seven decades ago. The move, billed by the White House as a return to “warrior ethos,” has triggered a storm of debate over symbolism, costs, and the broader message it sends to allies and adversaries alike.
According to officials, the order will permit Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and senior leaders to adopt “Department of War” as a secondary title across official communications, ceremonies, and non-legislative documents. While the official name under law remains the Department of Defense, Trump has tasked Hegseth with exploring legislative pathways to make the change permanent a process that would require approval from Congress.
The renaming carries strong historical resonance. Until 1949, the United States operated under the War Department, before restructuring during the Cold War shifted the emphasis toward “defense” and collective security. Critics of Trump’s move argue that reverting to the older title undermines the post–World War II commitment to deterrence and diplomacy. Advocates, however, claim that the word “defense” conveys weakness, while “war” projects strength, clarity, and readiness in a volatile international environment.
The decision has drawn sharp political divides. Supporters in Trump’s Republican base have hailed the change as a long-overdue correction that aligns the Pentagon’s identity with its true mission. But Democrats and some military veterans have denounced the rebranding as an expensive distraction. Senator Tammy Duckworth, a decorated war veteran, called it a “wasteful vanity project” that diverts attention from real issues like military housing, veteran care, and global alliances.
Practical concerns also loom large. Analysts warn that rebranding the Pentagon would entail massive costs, from replacing signage at domestic and overseas bases, to updating websites, letterheads, and official seals. At a time of escalating defense budgets, critics argue that such symbolic expenditures could erode public trust.
Legally, Trump faces hurdles. Only Congress has the authority to formally rename federal departments. His executive order would therefore serve as a temporary overlay establishing “Department of War” as a secondary title but not changing the official designation unless lawmakers pass supporting legislation. Given the Republican majority in both chambers, the proposal may gain traction, though bipartisan unease remains visible.
This renaming attempt fits a broader pattern of Trump’s presidency. He has frequently embraced historical and nationalist branding, from proposing to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America” to restoring Confederate-era military base names reversed by previous administrations. For Trump’s supporters, such gestures symbolize strength and authenticity. For critics, they reflect a fixation on appearances rather than substance.
As Trump prepares to issue what will be his 200th executive order, the controversy underscores a deeper question about the nation’s identity: whether its military should project itself primarily as a shield of defense or as an instrument of war. At a time of rising global threats, the symbolism of a name may carry consequences well beyond the walls of the Pentagon.