During President Donald Trump’s first term, the Pentagon resisted his desire to hold a military parade in Washington, aiming to keep the armed forces separate from political displays.
However, in his second term, that barrier has vanished. This year, a military parade is scheduled to coincide with the president’s 79th birthday.
The planned event promises a grand spectacle in downtown Washington: 28 M1A1 Abrams tanks, each weighing 70 tons and among the heaviest active combat vehicles, 28 Stryker armored personnel carriers, over 100 other military vehicles, a World War II-era B-25 bomber, 6,700 soldiers, 50 helicopters, 34 horses, two mules, and a dog.
Critics argue that this parade exemplifies the increasing politicization of the military under the current administration.
The Army estimates the parade’s cost between $25 million and $45 million, though expenses could rise as the military has committed to repairing streets damaged by the event, and costs for cleanup and policing remain uncalculated. While $45 million represents a small fraction of the Pentagon’s proposed $1.01 trillion budget for fiscal year 2026, the parade comes amid government plans to drastically reduce funding for education, healthcare, and public assistance.
“It’s a significant amount of money,” acknowledged Steve Warren, an Army spokesman. “But I believe it’s a modest price to honor 250 years of service and sacrifice by the U.S. Army.”
The Army refers to the event not as the president’s birthday parade but as the Army’s birthday celebration. The Continental Army was officially established on June 14, 1775, marking 250 years this year.
Coincidentally, June 14 also marks the president’s birthday.
When the Army marked its 200th anniversary in 1975, no large parade took place in Washington. The wounds from the Vietnam War were still fresh, and while smaller celebrations occurred at military bases nationwide featuring dinners, barbershop quartets, and cakes, few wanted to glorify the military so soon after events like the Kent State shootings. The nation was also preparing for its bicentennial celebrations the following year.
Some lawmakers suggested a more subdued ceremony this time, perhaps at Fort Myer across the Potomac River in Arlington, Virginia, where the Old Guard could march alongside veterans. Senator Jack Reed, top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, noted this would be a fitting tribute for the Army’s oldest active infantry unit.
“But this is about the president,” Reed said recently. “It fits with much of what he is doing.”
Army officials confirmed the parade will pass before the president’s viewing area on Constitution Avenue near the White House on the evening of Saturday, June 14, as part of a larger celebration on the National Mall.
Soldiers participating in the parade will be housed in two government buildings, sleeping in military cots with their own sleeping bags—a detail that has drawn attention in late-night television segments.
The parade will include Paladin self-propelled howitzers and historical nods, with some soldiers dressed in uniforms from earlier conflicts such as the War of 1812 and the Spanish-American War.
For more than two years, the Army has been planning a broad array of events—national, global, and even interstellar. An Army astronaut aboard the International Space Station is slated to make a phone call during the festivities, Warren revealed.
Initially, celebrations were focused on festivals, a commemorative postage stamp, fun runs, and military band performances. At some point this year, a military parade in Washington was added to the plans.
Officials say there are currently no plans to sing “Happy Birthday” to either the president or the Army during the parade. However, one proposal includes Golden Knights parachutists landing amid the festivities to present a flag to the president.
In 2017, during his first term, the president attended France’s Bastille Day parade with President Emmanuel Macron and returned inspired to hold a similar event. However, the Pentagon at that time opposed the idea. Then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis reportedly said he would “rather swallow acid” than support such a parade, according to a book by a former Mattis speechwriter.
Mattis acknowledged the president’s respect for the military but indicated the Pentagon was exploring options to present for White House consideration.
General Paul Selva, then Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reportedly told the president that military parades were something dictators do.
After Mattis departed, the president revisited the idea. His successor, Mark Esper, responded with an aerial parade on July 4, 2020, featuring fighter jets and warplanes flying over East Coast cities that played key roles in the American Revolution.
Officials in the president’s first Defense Department resisted the parade suggestion—never a direct order—fearing it would politicize the military, a stance historically upheld by the Pentagon.
Now, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and military leaders seemingly more willing to support the concept, the parade is moving forward.
This raises the question of whether the U.S. Army is celebrating the president himself, according to Risa Brooks, an associate professor of political science at Marquette University.
“Having tanks roll through the capital does not align with the tradition of a professional, highly trained military,” Brooks said. “It seems more like a politicized force focused inward, emphasizing internal adversaries rather than external threats.”
The United States has held significant military parades before, but the last occurred nearly 35 years ago to commemorate the end of the Gulf War. Traditionally, such parades follow major conflicts like the Civil War and the World Wars. Smaller military parades also took place during three presidential inaugurations in the Cold War era, and local communities sometimes honor military personnel with displays of armored vehicles and troops.
“I don’t actually see a problem with a military parade,” said Kori Schake, a former defense official in the George W. Bush administration and head of foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. She believes more Americans need to see the soldiers serving their country.
“If seeing fellow Americans in uniform fosters public awareness and connection or inspires volunteerism, that would be a positive outcome,” Schake added.
Ultimately, Peter Feaver, a political science professor at Duke University who has studied the military for decades, believes the armed forces will not resist the parade, even if they disapprove.
“The president’s second-term team is better at delivering what he wants, regardless of whether it’s best in the long term,” Feaver said.
0 Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!