How does the same man claim to have stopped seven wars to date to institutionally adopt the most aggressive term? His new executive mandate – the 200th of the assumption of his duties – to rename the Ministry of Defense to a Ministry of War is attributed to his particular temperament or the attempt to embark on a more traditional, male -based perception of what the Republicans call “Republicans”. But there are second readings, with particular interest.
Why Trump renamed the Ministry of Defense to “war”
Initially, the decision to change the name of the ministry that is by definition tasked with the operation of their armed forces was perceived as yet another small “battle” in Trump’s war against political correctness. “They changed his name to the ministry when we began to become a little more politically correct,” the US president emphasized last April, referring to the previous renaming, which took place in 1947 under the presidency of Harry Truman and “sealed” and a symbolic level.
Of course, Truman had no idea of political correctness and Woke Agenda, but the connection of the past with the present and the tooling of history is a game that politicians like, especially those who promise to “make America again”. “It doesn’t sound right to me,” Trump’s responsible Defense Minister, Pitt Hegshe, had also conquered during a cabinet, giving a more personal tone.
Are they only weird? Truman and… the psychological dimension of renaming
But are the political expediency and strangeness enough to explain this initiative? A retrospective of the history of the changes in this ministry gives an additional dimension. Given that Truman’s initiative took place two years after two devastating milestones -the end of World War II and the throwing of the atomic bomb by the Americans into Hiroshima and Nagasaki -the ministry’s name was called upon to adapt to the new, post -war reality.
In this context, Washington sought to establish itself at a first, abstract level, as an international factor in stability and prosperity, through the necessary positive conjunctions created by the concept of deterrence and defense.
Today, with the US focusing on partial withdrawal from the Cold War system of international relations as we knew it, the concept of war comes back not as pre -economy of aggressive movements but as an attempt to eliminate the concept of defense from the mentality of policy pursuit. This stimulation of the ego of the American superpower may cost somewhat expensive and become more for psychological reasons.
There are already estimates that the small and large acts that will accompany the new name – will need to change hundreds of signs and printed versions of facilities around the world – they will cost tens of millions of dollars.
Why are strategic analysts worried
“The tens of millions could be used for markings and headlines to be channeled into training and weapons so that the US military soldiers could fulfill their missions faster and safer,” commented the Director of the Center for Military Forces of the New York Foundation.
On the other hand, political analysts say that the fact of renaming is in a difficult position, who are reserved to criticize the move for fear of being described as less patriots.
What other legislative surprises, capable of creating their own noise, will the White House tenant launch? Considering that we are talking about the man who renamed the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, nothing should be excluded.
