President Trump has unveiled plans to rename the Department of Defense as the Department of War, arguing that the original title conveyed greater strength. “Department of Defense, I don’t want to be defense only. We want defense, but we want offense, too,” he said, adding that the former name “had a stronger sound” and accompanied historic victories: “We won World War I. We won World War II. We won everything.”
White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly explained that the change reflects Trump’s vision of an offensive-minded military, saying, “Our military should be focused on offense, not just defense, which is why he has prioritized warfighters at the Pentagon instead of DEI and woke ideology.” The administration believes the new name will boost morale and signal to adversaries that the United States is prepared to fight, not merely defend.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has supported the idea since March, said plans to rename the agency are “coming soon” and called the shift “common sense.” Since taking office, Hegseth has spearheaded a broader overhaul of Pentagon priorities, reversing Biden-era diversity, equity, and inclusion policies. He has argued that “woke” generals and DEI initiatives weakened the armed forces, leaving them “dangerously weak and effeminate.”
The return to the Department of War name underscores Trump and Hegseth’s push to restore the military’s core warfighting mission over social programs. Following an executive order redefining eligibility, the Pentagon now requires service under one’s birth sex and disqualifies those diagnosed with gender dysphoria. The policy marks a return to traditional military standards.
The Department of War was created by President George Washington in 1789 and retained that name for 158 years. In 1947, President Harry Truman signed the National Security Act, merging the War and Navy Departments with the newly independent Air Force into the National Military Establishment, renamed the Department of Defense in 1949. Truman told Congress the restructuring would “cut costs and at the same time enhance our national security,” arguing that consolidation would reduce duplication and waste.
Some critics now suggest that if Truman justified the Defense Department on cost savings, then returning to the War Department must imply higher expenses. But that logic is misplaced. Truman’s reforms were structural, uniting separate services under one roof. President Trump, by contrast, proposes only a symbolic restoration of the historic name, with no organizational changes to the Pentagon. As such, there is no reason to expect either higher or lower costs. The move is about morale, mission clarity, and projecting strength, not altering the budget.
Another objection raised by critics concerns the legal process. Because the Department of Defense was created and named through legislation, the National Security Act of 1947 and its 1949 amendment, any change would ordinarily require a new law passed by Congress and signed by the president. This is not a constitutional amendment but routine legislative work. In fact, the original renaming from “Department of War” to “Department of Defense” was accomplished by a simple amendment to the National Security Act in 1949.
President Trump, however, has suggested Congress may not be necessary. “We’re just going to do it. I’m sure Congress will go along if we need that. I don’t think we even need that,” he said. The White House is exploring both informal approaches, such as executive action, and formal legislative routes.
Meanwhile, Republican Representative Greg Steube of Florida has already filed an amendment to the annual defense policy bill that would formally restore the “Department of War” name, signaling GOP support in Congress for making the change official.
Katherine Kuzminski, director of Studies at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), has argued that renaming the Department of Defense could complicate the Secretary of Defense’s ability to frame the military’s role in domestic homeland defense missions. This claim is speculative and unsupported by evidence. CNAS has been consistently critical of Trump’s defense policies, opposing his spending priorities and personnel decisions during his first term, and Kuzminski’s statement reflects that political stance rather than a factual assessment of operational capability.
Critics argue that changing the name from “Defense” to “War” sends a more aggressive signal to allies and adversaries. Yet the military is by definition a warfighting force, and projecting strength in defense of the country is fully consistent with its core role and purpose.
Some have also claimed the change undermines Trump’s peace efforts and his supporters’ calls for him to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. That argument does not stand. Peace negotiations are conducted by the President and the State Department, not the Pentagon, and Trump has already secured multiple ceasefire agreements and peace deals this year through direct diplomacy. The department’s name has no bearing on those talks, making this criticism partisan opposition rather than genuine policy analysis.
Trump has said an official announcement on the name change could come “over the next week or so,” and the White House has confirmed plans are moving forward. The administration is pursuing both legislative approval and possible informal methods of implementation.
The proposal reflects a shift in how the Trump administration frames America’s military posture, emphasizing offensive capability and the traditional warfighting mission over defensive positioning and social programs. It is part of a broader effort to restore military values, prioritize warfighters over DEI initiatives, and project strength to adversaries.
The post From Defense to War Department: Trump Ends Woke DEI, Restores Military’s Fighting Mission appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.