Since taking office, the Trump administration has declared a war on “woke” military naming—yet its solutions have typically been wasteful and counterproductive.

The United States military is no stranger to wasteful spending, but 2025 may have seen the most unnecessary waste of money to date. To paraphrase Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, the Department of Defense’s recent rebranding “hasn’t made us more effective, hasn’t made us more lethal”—but it has wasted an abundance of taxpayer dollars, and continues to do so.

However, to blame Hegseth for the Pentagon’s renaming trouble is perhaps an oversimplification, as the process began while he was still the weekend morning host on Fox News.

Bases Were Renamed Under Biden, Too

During the presidency of Joe Biden, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2021 (FY21) included a provision that would rename around a dozen United States Army installations that were named for officers who fought for the Confederacy during the American Civil War. A “Naming Commission” was even created by the United States Congress to propose new names for the bases.

The name changes were completed in 2023, with Fort Bragg, the largest of the US Army bases, undergoing a name change to “Fort Moore,” costing the Department of Defense (DoD) an estimated $6.37 million. The Naming Commission estimated it would cost the Pentagon approximately $21 million for all of the base changes.

Beyond the dollar cost, the renaming process was wasteful, requiring the removal of old names from all base paraphernalia, including street signs, recycling bin decals, business cards, and stationery.

Still, once it had been completed, that was the end of it—until President Donald Trump returned to the White House, and Hegseth signed a memorandum that directed all the bases be reverted to their former name, requiring the process to be repeated over again in reverse.

The Bases Have the Same Names—Honoring Different Soldiers

It could be asked why it was necessary in the first place. Hegseth said he viewed the prior changes as part of “woke” culture and sought to have bases revert to their older names, but it wasn’t that simple. As Congress authorized the name changes that no longer honored Confederate leaders, it would have been necessary to obtain similar approval from lawmakers to revert the names.

Hegseth skirted the issue by honoring different US soldiers with the same last name.

The aforementioned Fort Bragg had been named for North Carolinian Confederate General Braxton Bragg, who had previously served in the United States Army during the Mexican-American War. It was renamed Fort Moore to honor General Hal Moore, the first soldier in his West Point graduating class of 1945 to be promoted to brigadier general, major general, and lieutenant general.

Moore was a native of Kentucky, not North Carolina, but as he served in the 82nd Airborne Division, he trained at Fort Bragg.

When the base’s name reverted, it was to honor Private First Class Roland L. Bragg, who was awarded a Silver Star for actions during the Battle of the Bulge in World War II. The latter Bragg’s connection to the base was even more tenuous than Moore’s; he was from Maine and likely never even visited the base.

The same story is true of every base that has reverted to the “former” name. Each of them now honors a different soldier, usually with little or no connection to the facility. This isn’t to say that those new men are undeserving of the honor. Still, it remains unclear how honoring Hal Moore, rather than Braxton Bragg, exemplifies “woke” culture—and how naming the base after Private Bragg, rather than General Bragg, addresses this issue. Moreover, the sense of “wink-wink” that the base is really named for Braxton Bragg is hard to avoid.

The “Department of War” Moniker Could Cost Taxpayers $2 Billion

Despite Trump being repeatedly described as someone who hates war and his past criticism of US involvement in Iraq, in August, the president called for the DoD to revert to its former name, the “Department of War” or the “War Department.”

Trump used the argument that the United States shouldn’t focus on defense and that the name change would imply it would engage in offensive actions.

The Department of War was first established by President George Washington in 1789. It was the cabinet department responsible for operations and maintenance of the United States Army, as well as for naval affairs, until a separate Navy Department was established in 1798. The War Department existed until 1947, when it was reorganized by President Harry Truman, and was subsequently renamed the Department of Defense two years later.

Trump moved forward and directed that the DoD would be rebranded the Department of War, with Pete Hegseth becoming the Secretary of War, which likely helped align better with his calls for the US military to return to its core “warrior ethos.”

Yet, as with the base changes, it hasn’t been so simple. The name change requires the approval of Congress, which it is unlikely to receive. So this change is really an “alternative” name for the DoD. At some future point, another president can order it changed back—and as soon as a Democrat is in the White House, that will likely happen.

That doesn’t mean it still isn’t costly now, and won’t be again in the future. According to a report this week from NBC News, citing multiple Congressional staffers, the change “would require replacing thousands of signs, placards, letterheads and badges, as well as any other items at US military sites around the world that feature the Department of Defense name.”

The total costs could be as high as $2 billion, with just the letterhead and signage accounting for around $1 billion.

NBC News added that changes that aren’t actual physical could still be costly, notably the costs associated with updating the digital code on “internal and external facing websites, as well as other computer software on classified and unclassified systems.”

These expensive and unnecessary changes must be seen in contrast to what voters were promised by then-candidate Trump on the 2024 campaign trail—namely a war on wasteful federal spending—as well as what the administration attempted earlier this year with the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

But beyond the money, we should ask, has rebranding the Department of Defense to the Department of War made that institution more effective or more lethal? Or has it simply spent money on something completely wasteful?

About the Author: Peter Suciu

Peter Suciu has contributed over 3,200 published pieces to more than four dozen magazines and websites over a 30-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a contributing writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. He is based in Michigan. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: Editor@nationalinterest.org.

Image: Flickr.

The post The Pentagon’s Name Games Are Costing Taxpayers Billions appeared first on The National Interest.