“Renaming the Pentagon won’t cause Congress to suddenly change its ways, but at least it is a reminder that the powers the Pentagon exercises are subject to legislative oversight.  If those troops are commanded by the War Department, rather than the Defense Department, might it prompt more opposition to their deployment?  Perhaps it can be followed by clearer thinking about the military’s role at home and abroad.” (Washington Post editorial, September 6, 2025)

The mainstream media, particularly the Washington Post, have come to the bizarre conclusion that changing the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War will suddenly lead to clearer thinking about the use of force, less use of military power, and greater congressional involvement and oversight of the Pentagon.

What could be more counter-factual and counter-intuitive than this conclusion?  After all, we are talking about the United States, an aggressive colonial power, that has been at war for most of the past 35 years, managing conflicts in the Middle East, the Persian Gulf, and Southwest Asia; engaged in record-setting defense spending that equals the defense spending of the rest of the world; and sponsoring regime change and the use of torture and abuse in its war against terror that has taken on a permanence and acceptance that is unchallenged.  The bipartisan majorities that support these policies are unique; no other policy can brandish such a mandate.

In one of its most ludicrous editorial statements, the Post argues that, by renaming the Department of Defense to the Department of War, there may be more opposition to the deployment of using National Guard troops for domestic purposes—in D.C. and perhaps other cities soon.”  Conversely, the name change could mean that the Trump administration is one step closer to invoking the Insurrection Act so that Trump can place more armed troops in Blue cities with Black mayors.

The United States, after all, is the world’s leader in using the military to carry out its national security and foreign policies and not merely protect the borders and the people of the nation.  Only the United States has the lethal and maneuverable power that can reach every corner of the globe.  With more than 700 military bases and facilities around the world, the United States can project power anywhere.  When Robert Gates resigned as secretary of defense in 2011, he cited his opposition to the restrained national security policies of President Barack Obama, which meant the Unites States could go to”fewer places” and do “fewer things.”  Gates couldn’t “imagine being part of a nation, part of a government…that’s being forced to dramatically scale back our engagement with the rest of the world.”  Yet the Washington Post believes that changing the name of the department may lead to less engagement.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States has been the most aggressive military power around the world.  Losing wars have been fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, and today the Trump administration is misusing the military at home in American cities and abroad in the Caribbean.  Trump’s politicization of the military and intelligence communities over the past nine months does not augur well for less use of the military.  Nor does the investment in the Golden Dome, the so-called national defense system supported by the Post, or the unnecessary investment in expanding our strategic nuclear arsenal, also endorsed by the Post.  Meanwhile, the bellicose secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, is one happy fellow, immediately renaming himself the secretary of war.

A day after endorsing the Department of War, the Post editorialized that it was “time to rattle Russia” by “turn[ing] the screws on a recalcitrant” Vladimir Putin.  “To bring peace to Ukraine,” the Post argues, “Trump will have to rattle the Russians.”  Greater sanctions and more sophisticated military weaponry have not rattled the Russians, but have led to greater Ukrainian losses of citizens, infrastructure, and urban areas.  Just as there are signs of a greater willingness to extend security guarantees to both Ukraine and Russia, the Post argues for “allowing Ukraine to strike deep into Russia with Western weapons.”  It appears obvious that, after three and a half years of war, Ukraine cannot win and Russia refuses to lose.

A final thought.  When I joined the faculty of the National War College in 1986, I called the Soviet Embassy to invite Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin to speak to the class of 120 high-ranking military officers.  I had to overcome the opposition of the Pentagon to do so because assistant secretary of defense Richard Perle was opposed to the invitation.  In my call to the embassy, I introduced myself as a professor at the National War College, and Dobrynin’s secretary responded with “what a terrible name.”  It remains a terrible name for the college, and an even more terrible name for the department.  It would signal more—not less—aggressive designs for the Department of Defense.  It is wishful thinking to believe that a new name might “prompt more opposition” to deploying U.S. military forces the world over.

The post The Washington Post Turns Further to the Right appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This post was originally published on CounterPunch.org.