The Peace Candidate Brings You The Department of War

The White House. graphic from “The White House” congratulates the world Twitter/X post, 23 June 2025. Image via @Whitehouse on X

***

In 1947, aboard the presidential aircraft Sacred Cow, U. S. President Harry S. Truman signed into law the National Security Act, significantly restructuring the way the country conducts its military organization and intelligence. With Cold War tensions rising, President Truman sought to establish a peacetime organization for the military and intelligence. The National Military Establishment included separate branches for the Army and Navy, the brand-new Air Force, the National Security Council (NSC), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Since July 26th, 1947, these institutions have defined U.S. national security policy.

The act also reorganized the old Department of War (DOW), which had its roots in the early Republic, comprising only 10,000 men. During the Civil War, the DOW experienced massive expansion, growing from 16,000 troops in 1860 to over a million soldiers by 1865. The Department of War was with us through both World Wars before being redesignated as the Department of the Army (DOA), which now fell under the larger Department of Defense (DOD). The renaming of the Department of Defense was symbolic of a new era that prioritized defending peace rather than starting war.  

On September 5th, 2025, U.S. President Donald J. Trump signed an executive order “restoring the United States Department of War.” The use of an executive order will only designate the Department of War as a secondary title as a way to circumvent the congressional approval required for a formal renaming. The order requires that all “official correspondence, public communication, communications, ceremonial context, and non-statutory documents within the executive branch” use the name Department of War and the title Secretary of War, rather than its defense-oriented predecessor.

This stark shift toward a war-centered designation may come as a surprise to some people. Much of President Trump’s campaign rhetoric has centered around anti-war sentiment since as early as the 2016 primaries. 

The 2016 Republican Primary debate in Greenville, South Carolina, sparked considerable controversy among the GOP, particularly due to an interaction between Jeb Bush and long-shot candidate Donald Trump. Trump criticized the Iraq war, calling it “a big fat mistake.” He continued, “We spent 2 trillion, thousands of lives— George Bush made a mistake.” This was the moment that Donald Trump uniquely broke from the GOP. It was the spark that ignited the identity Trump would adopt for his campaign.  

Trump’s claim came at a time when the American population as a whole was beginning to see the invasion of Iraq as misguided. The “weapons of mass destruction claim” that the war was predicated on was increasingly considered a false narrative. Trump called this out in a way that no other Republican on stage would. In fact, he did it in a way no politician had dared to do before. Regarding Trump’s comments, American political aide J. Hogan Giddly said, “You get a zinger now and again, but nothing like this. You never see a candidate call another a flat-out liar.” Trump’s bold departure from the GOP narrative and decorum helped distinguish him from the traditional image of an American politician. 

The backlash for Trump was immediate. In the very next poll, he lost four points. Despite this, Trump remained steadfast in his views. Over time, voters began to differentiate Trump from the establishment that informed the opinions of those he shared the stage with. Trump went on to build his base upon the idea that he wasn’t just a regular American politician. The establishment that he opposed quickly became the explanation for the persistence of the issues that Washington, D.C. didn’t want to solve. That initial willingness to break with convention became central to Trump’s campaign, which included his bold opposition to unnecessary wars.

Fast forward to 2023, on the brink of the 2024 election. Another controversial war broke out when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 during the Biden presidency. Trump often claimed that, had he been president, the war would have never started. He believed it was yet another unnecessary war, like Iraq. When asked during a CNN town hall whether he wanted Russia or Ukraine to win the war, he responded, “I want everybody to stop dying. They’re dying. Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” His response was, yet again, popular. It got to the core of what many Americans were feeling: war is an outdated and unpopular method of conflict resolution. Trump got to the emotional heart of the issue. The consistent loss of any life is tragic and unnecessary. His promise to end the war in 24 hours was ambitious, but popular, and it also placed the burden of the bloodshed on the Biden administration for failing to end the war, rather than on Russia for starting it. With his promise to end unnecessary conflict, he became the self-proclaimed “peace candidate.” 

On January 6th, 2025, “the peace candidate” took office. It would be sufficient to say the initial 24 hours did not see the end of the Ukraine war. As the end of September draws nearer, the war in Ukraine seems no closer to ending. Trump’s frustration has increased over the past months. He recently gave Putin a two-week deadline to start peace talks with Ukraine which was not fulfilled.

Trump has continually portrayed himself as the peace candidate. He often brags about having ended seven different wars. He also appears to be seeking a Nobel Peace Prize, harping on how they would never give the Prize to him because they “only give it to liberals.”

So then why would the peace candidate change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War?

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth presented two justifications during the press briefing where this executive order was signed. The first being that those names have meaning, and that the Department of War holds the ethos of a warrior spirit. Hegseth also argued that, under the Department of War title, we remained undefeated in every war we participated in, and that after the name change in World War II, we began to lose. The president indicates that we have not intended to win wars; instead, we have chosen to prolong them. This is perhaps a return to the rhetoric from nearly ten years ago at the fateful Greenville Primary. 

The president also suggested moving away from what he deemed ‘woke’ terminology. Implying that prioritizing defense over simply ‘war’ is a way of sugarcoating its function. And perhaps he’s right. America has been at war for roughly 46 out of the 78 years since the end of World War II, including dozens of officially recognized wars or large-scale military operations.

Is calling it the Department of Defense inaccurate? Maybe the Department of War is a better-suited title. Through the lens that Hegseth offers, can we not ask the question why a candidate who seems so intent on being peaceful would make such a decision? Hegseth’s haunting words come to mind: “[the DOW] is going to fight to win, not not to lose. We’re going to go on offense, not just on defense.” 

Trump certainly capitalized on anti-war sentiment felt during the last election cycle. People are expressly tired of endless conflicts that not only raise our national debt and disadvantage our own country, but also end the lives of millions of service members, opposing forces, and even civilians.

So far, Trump has failed to deliver on his promises of peace. The American people are left to question whether our newly named Department of War will truly bring the peace they voted for.

***

This article was edited by Peter Leyba and Ryan Scriven.