From defence to offence: Trump's quest to revive the warrior spirit

US President Donald Trump is unusual both as a man and as a president; he loves to shock. He has mounted what Russian geopolitical thinker Alexander Dugin termed a “Trump Revolution” to dismantle the remnants of liberal globalism. He symbolises the success of the New Right movement in the conceptual West, which is ‘traditionalist’ in protecting the essence of European-ness.

In his address to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on September 23, 2025, he advised Europe to stop “destroying your heritage” by being ‘nice’ or ‘politically correct’ to foreigners. “It is time to stop the failed experiment of open doors,” he said.

He warned, “Your countries are going to hell … If you don’t stop people that you have never seen before, that you have nothing in common with, your country is going to fail.” He declared, “I love Europe. I love the people of Europe. And I hate to see it being devastated by energy and immigration – that double-tailed monster.”

Within the United States, Trump worked to remove immigrants and even boasted, “I’m really good at this stuff.”

Military reorganisation

Trump was also reorganising the military both within and outside the United States. He made this clear in a meeting on September 30, 2025, which his Secretary of Defence, Pete Hegseth, convened, involving 800 top generals and admirals from all over the world at the Marine Base Quantico, Virginia.

Hegseth referred to himself as the Secretary of War rather than of Defence as a way of liberating American warriors. The new name, Department of War, was not new in itself; it was the original title before 1947, when President Harry S.

Truman called for unity among the armed services – comprising the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines – under the Department of Defence. Truman also created the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

Although Trump and Hegseth had not told the generals what the meeting was about, there appeared to have been three reasons for what Trump called “a little bit of expense” to assemble America’s top commanders at Quantico. The first was to dismantle Truman’s defence structure and whatever the Democrats had established in the post–Second World War period.

The second was to respond to China’s assertion of military might and its declaration of readiness for war. The third was to reorient America’s defence posture to deal with domestic civil disobedience. Trump’s purpose, therefore, was to assert his vision of what the US military should be. He told the generals, “If you don’t like what I’m saying, you can leave the room. Of course, there goes your rank, there goes your future.”

Dismantling the Truman defence structure required new military thinking, which explains the questioning of Truman’s logic. The new thinking was to embrace military involvement in two types of war: external and internal. Changing the name from ‘War’ to ‘Defence’,

Trump argued, “was probably the first sign of wokeness.” Reviving the Department of War, he said, “is going to stop wars”, would “reawaken the warrior spirit”, and would stop the military from being “woke”. He wanted that warrior spirit applied to American cities that questioned Trump’s policies. He stated, “This is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room. That’s a war too. It’s a war from within.” He added, “I told Pete … we should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military National Guard.”

He had already deployed the military in Washington DC and Portland, Oregon, despite opposition from local authorities. This deployment infringes the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which bans presidents from making the military perform police work or act as sheriffs.

Hegseth asserted, “We embrace the War Department … We are preparing every day to win, not just to defend … Defence is inherently reactionary and can lead to overuse, overreach and mission creep.” He took pride in dismissing top military officers, complaining about “fat generals and admirals” who, he said, looked bad. He told them, “If the words I’m speaking today are making your heart sink, you should do the honourable thing and resign.”

The second reason for the meeting at Quantico was a reaction to China’s ability to realign world geopolitics—and to boast about it. The meeting was, therefore, intended to send warning signals to China, which had earlier sent similar warnings to the United States. The widely covered parade in Beijing, showcasing Chinese armaments, made China appear cocky. Leading Chinese officials, having abandoned Deng Xiaoping’s advice to hide power, warned the United States not to underestimate China.

China challenge

Foreign Minister Wang Yi criticised Trump’s “America First” doctrine as a return to the “law of the jungle” and urged the US to honour its obligations. He said China “resolutely opposes power politics and hegemony … We will resolutely respond to unilateral bullying practices of the US.”

Victor Gao boasted of China’s triad nuclear missile-launching capacity from land, sea, and air as “invincible” and capable of hitting any part of the world within 20 minutes. He added, “China just wants to exercise its leadership … You cannot defeat China. You cannot impose war of any kind.” Although China would not be the first to use nuclear weapons, the aggressor, he said, would not get a second chance to strike.

Trump could not ignore the Beijing parade and had to respond with something of equal or greater magnitude. Claiming that Xi, Putin, and Kim had conspired against him, he vowed that “America is going to re-evaluate.” Apart from staging a fighter-jet air show over the White House—what Putin termed “wonderful and very good”—he held the Quantico meeting to explain his idea of war as both external and “within.”

Dismantling the Truman defence architecture meant redefining enemies. Traditionally ‘enemies’ were foreign, but Trump added a new category of “enemies within” which the military had to defeat. He argued that policing “the far reaches of Kenya and Somalia while America is under invasion from within” made no sense.

Replacement theory

The idea echoed the “replacement theory” championed by Trump supporter Charlie Kirk, founder of the white nationalist Turning Point USA. Kirk claimed that white people risked demographic replacement by “illegals”, alleging that “prowling blacks go around for fun to target white people,” and even endorsed whipping immigrants.

In this context, those resisting anti-immigrant harassment—particularly in cities with large black populations—became the “enemy within.” Trump wanted the military to stop worrying about enemies abroad when there were enemies “within” in American cities.

While focusing on “internal enemies” and hinting at abandoning Kenya and Somalia—where the US has bases in Lamu and Mogadishu—Trump also seemed willing to let Turkey’s President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, expand influence in Eastern Africa.

Besides being allies in the New Right movements, both men view themselves as their nations’ greatest leaders and would not mind altering constitutions to suit their whims. Among Erdogan’s ambitions is reviving the Ottoman Empire, extending southwards towards Eastern Africa.

Turkey has a military base in Mogadishu, trains the Somali National Army, and its navy patrols East African waters. Erdogan’s “drone diplomacy” has enabled him to press vulnerable governments to close Hizmet schools and repatriate Turkish dissidents.

Should the US abandon its Manda Bay base in Lamu, Turkey would likely take over, partly because Erdogan gets along with both Trump and Kenyan President William S. Ruto. With Turkish training, Kenya acquired six Bayraktar TB2 drones for intelligence and counter-terrorism.

Although Trump loves to shock and overhaul institutions, long-term geostrategic interests might not allow the US to leave East Africa. His statement therefore reflects American domestic politics, shaped by two people he dislikes: Barack Obama, son of a Kenyan, whose presidency inspired Trump’s political rise, and Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a Somali, who often questioned his policies. His cheeky offer to “donate” Omar to Somalia was, unsurprisingly, rejected.