What is more noteworthy than the US renaming its Department of Defense? Global Times editorial

By Global Times Published: Sep 08, 2025 

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202509/1342894.shtml

On September 5 local time, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order renaming the Department of Defense to the Department of War, sparking widespread international attention. The White House said that the name "Department of War" conveys a stronger "message of readiness and resolve" compared to "Department of Defense." Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth explained that "we're going to go on the offense, not just on defense. Maximum lethality, not tepid legality." How should we view this?

The US "War Department," established in 1789, used to be the predecessor of the Department of Defense. The US government's reinstatement of this name is a continuation of its campaign to purge supporters of "globalism" within the US political realm. The White House believes that the postwar enthusiasm of "globalists" for interfering in European and Asia-Pacific affairs has led to the US' failure to win a single war in the past quarter-century and is one of the contributing factors to the country's current domestic and international predicament. The "Department of Defense," renamed after World War II, is synonymous with failure.

The "War Department" has specific historical origins. From 1789 to 1947, the US "War Department" expanded the US from a narrow country on the Atlantic coast into a powerful country spanning two oceans through one military victory after another. Native Americans, Mexicans, and others were either conquered or forced to cede vast tracts of land. Under US intimidation, nations like Russia, France and Britain were gradually forced to withdraw from the Americas. The current US administration believes that the US at that time enjoyed strong internal cohesion and a "surging" nationalist spirit, and that the current "loss" of American values and soaring national debt are the fault of "globalists," and for the US to win wars, it must rename the "Department of Defense" and recreate its history of leading the US military to achieve "glorious success."

The US is attempting to continue the logic of the 19th century "Monroe Doctrine" in the 21st century, maintaining its military superiority in the Americas so that it can expand in the surrounding areas at any time and not allow external forces to interfere in regional affairs. It also reflects the US' recognition of its declining global power and its subsequent strategic retrenchment. Making Canada the "51st state" of the US, regaining control of the Panama Canal, and occupying Greenland are all goals publicly announced by the US. 

A draft of the newest National Defense Strategy has been reported to recommend that the US military prioritize protecting the US homeland and the Western Hemisphere. The US has recently significantly increased its military deployments around Venezuela, and there are rumors that the US military is preparing to enter Mexico to combat drug cartels. The first countries to be targeted by the War Department's "fighting and winning" strategy will likely be those in the Americas.

In fact, throughout US history, whether in the name of "defense" or "war," the essence of the US' foreign military intervention has never changed. Relevant data show that since the US declared independence on July 4, 1776, in the nearly 250 years since then, it has been free from war for only less than 20 years. According to some statistics, from the end of World War II in 1945 to 2001, of the 248 armed conflicts that occurred in 153 regions around the world, 201 were instigated by the US, accounting for 81 percent. From the Korean War to the Vietnam War, from the War in Afghanistan to the Iraq War, the US has become the country that has launched the most foreign wars since World War II.

History has proven countless times that mere military superiority and power politics cannot truly strengthen a country or enhance its international standing. On the contrary, they can trigger more conflicts and confrontation, undermining the stability of the international order. The reason why the US has often repeated the pattern of "winning one battle after another but ultimately losing the war" over the past few decades lies not in insufficient US military capabilities, but rather in its foreign policy's lack of respect for the sovereignty and interests of other countries and its lack of due responsibility and accountability in international affairs. If the policy impulse that drives the US to create turmoil and chaos in other regions does not change, and if the American strategic community's habit of viewing crises in other countries as the US' own "opportunities" does not change, reinstating historical names will hardly reverse the fate of continued failure of US foreign intervention.

The name "War Department" may evoke nostalgia for the "glorious history" among some people in the US, but times have changed. Against the backdrop of deepening globalization today, countries are increasingly interconnected and interdependent. Regardless of how the Pentagon's name changes, the international community is focused on the US' actual actions. Will it continue to sow division, undermine rules, and incite conflicts? Or will it return to multilateralism, respect the international order, and participate in global governance? If the US truly pursues "security," it should earnestly reflect on the negative impact its military strategy and foreign policy have had on world peace over the past few decades.

Peace and development are the themes of our times. As a country with abundant resources and strong power, the US should shoulder more responsibilities and become a promoter of peace rather than a spokesperson for war. This year marks the 80th anniversary of the victory in the World Anti-Fascist War. It is hoped that the US will work with the international community to uphold the international system with the United Nations at its core, uphold the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security, resolve differences through dialogue and consultation, address challenges through cooperation, and ensure that multilateralism, rather than unilateral military action, becomes the mainstream of international security. 

If the US uses the name of the "War Department" to militarily coerce neighboring countries or even directly launch a war, it will be firmly opposed by the whole world.