When will Fort Liberty become Fort Bragg and how much will it cost? Here's what we know
Hear this story
AI-assisted summary
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the renaming of Fort Liberty back to Fort Bragg, honoring Pfc. Roland L. Bragg, a World War II veteran.
The name change will likely require additional funding from Congress, with costs for the previous renaming exceeding $6 million.
While the timeline remains unclear, the Army will need to present its implementation plans, including resource requirements, to the Department of Defense.
The timeline for renaming Fort Liberty to Fort Bragg was unknown as of Tuesday, and the costs associated with the process could exceed $6 million.
The Department of Defense announced Monday evening that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth signed a memo to change Fort Liberty's name to Fort Bragg to honor Pfc. Roland L. Bragg, who served locally.
Fort Bragg was established as Camp Bragg in 1918 — after World War I — and was initially named for Braxton Bragg, an artillery officer who served in the Mexican-American War and later served as a Confederate general. He is also associated with being a slave owner and losing battles during the Civil War.
The installation is the largest in the world by population and home to the Army's airborne and special operation forces and the nation's immediate response force that deploys worldwide within 18 hours of notification.
In June 2023, the installation's name was changed to Fort Liberty, after a congressional mandate ordered that all military installations and assets named for Confederates be renamed. The renaming process involved a national and local committee and community input.
Hegseth's Monday night memo states that the secretary of the Army shall take all the necessary steps and appropriate actions to implement the directive in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
The Army shall inform the undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment of its plans, including timelines and resource requirements to implement the change, the memo continues.
What do military officials have to say?
The Office of the Secretary of Defense on Tuesday referred questions about the changes to the Department of the Army.
A spokesperson for the 18th Airborne Corps and Fort Liberty also referred most questions to the Army.
A statement from the 18th Airborne Corps says that renaming Fort Liberty to Fort Bragg is an opportunity to honor one of the Corps' 'own heroes.'
Who is Pfc. Roland L. Bragg?
According to Hegseth's memo, Pfc. Roland L. Bragg was assigned to the 513th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 17th Airborne Division, 18th Airborne Corps and was stationed at Fort Bragg during World War II.
He served in the European theater of operations, received a Purple Heart for wounds during the Battle of the Bulge and also earned the Silver Star, the memo states.
'We are honored to have our installation in his namesake,' the 18th Airborne Corps statement reads. 'We have already begun coordinating with Department of the Army on the way forward. More details will be forthcoming.'
As of Tuesday, the name Fort Liberty remained on the installation's website and social media pages.
How much will renaming cost?
Renaming Fort Bragg to Fort Liberty cost more than $6 million in federal funds, with the bulk of the costs being sign changes and technology costs for the installation's website.
In a statement Tuesday, North Carolina Department of Transportation spokesman Andrew Barksdale said the cost to change about 80 state highway and interstate signs from Fort Bragg to Fort Liberty cost about $160,000.
The former signs were recycled, he said.
Barksdale said that with expansions to Interstate 95, the cost to make a change again would be about $200,000 to the state agency.
'We do not have a timeline of when we would make the changes again, and we would still work and coordinate with the DOD about the costs for making these changes again,' he said.
Is Hegseth legally allowed to issue the name change order?
In a video statement posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Monday, Hegseth said he directed the name change based on Title 10 and Section 113 of the U.S. code.
The code states that the secretary of defense 'has authority, direction, and control over the Department of Defense.'
The directive will ultimately require money to implement the name change, and Congress is in charge of the budget, Dr. Christopher Cronin, a political science professor for Methodist University and head of the university's Social Sciences Division, told The Fayetteville Observer in November.
The Army usually starts making its annual budget requests to Congress in March to early spring.
The same code that Hegseth cited Monday also includes Congress' 2021 provision in the defense budget that required removing military assets that honor the Confederacy and its leaders.
The legislation further prohibits the secretary of defense or secretary of a military department from naming a new asset or renaming an existing asset in honor of the Confederacy, which is why a new Fort Bragg would be in honor of Roland Bragg and not Braxton Bragg.
Staff writer Rachael Riley can be reached at rriley@fayobserver.com or 910-486-3528.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail
At second-annual CartCon conference in Napa Valley, CA, the tone was electric with anticipation but also laced with urgency. Billed as a summit for the company's expansive ecosystem of brands, vendors and strategists, the event served as both a product showcase and a pressure valve. Nowhere was that tension more visible than during one of the conference's hardest-hitting panels, a deep dive into the complexities of tariff policy and its ripple effects on global sourcing, consumer pricing and retail resilience. The panel consisted of three voices with rare insight into the collision of policy and commerce: Chris Smith, president of Summit Global Strategies; Tim Manning, former White House supply chain coordinator under President Joe Biden; and Nick Stachel, logistics strategy adviser at Izba Consulting. What followed was not a high-level overview, but a granular exploration of the legal, political and operational forces shaping how, and where, products are made, moved and sold. From globalization to geo-economics Smith opened the discussion by tracing the historical arc of U.S. trade policy. For decades following World War II, American trade strategy revolved around multilateralism. The U.S. saw global trade not just as an economic imperative but as a geopolitical tool, creating allies, raising standards of living and preventing conflict. But in 2016, that long-standing consensus fractured. The bipartisan abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership signaled a sharp pivot. As Smith explained, the political center collapsed under the weight of the 'China Shock,' a term describing the decimation of American manufacturing towns due to offshoring. Smith described President Donald Trump's tariff policy as a psychological reset. Before Trump, U.S. tariffs averaged around 2%. Within months, they jumped to 18% in key categories. This wasn't just an economic strategy, it was anchoring. 'It's like burger sizes,' Smith said, relating back to Wendy's psychological marketing strategies. 'Before Trump, we had singles and doubles. Now the triple is on the menu, and everything else looks small by comparison.' Tariffs, he added, have become Trump's 'cat toy' — a provocative distraction wielded without consistent strategy. Even if future administrations soften tariff policy, Smith warned, the structure of global trade has already shifted. Retailers and manufacturers alike are building permanent workarounds. Inflation, particularly in consumer goods, is the slow-burning consequence. While Smith provided the philosophical backdrop, Manning broke down the legal tools underpinning today's tariff landscape. The real disruption, Manning emphasized, has come through the use, and misuse, of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Originally designed as a tool for national security sanctions, IEEPA has been repurposed by the Trump administration to enact sweeping tariffs with little congressional oversight. Manning described the legal and logistical chaos for businesses from these tactics. In just six weeks, the Trump administration issued 17 executive orders using IEEPA authority, stripping trade policy of its usual predictability and process. For businesses, this has been catastrophic. Sourcing strategies built over years have unraveled in days. 'We're in a volatile environment,' Manning said. The cost of doing business now includes factoring in the potential for abrupt, unexplained swings in tariff exposure. Long-term investments have become high-risk bets, and in many cases, they're simply not being made. On-the-ground retail strategy Bringing the policy talk down to the warehouse floor, Stachel outlined how brands are actually coping with this new reality. In the short term, some are fast-tracking inventory from China before new tariffs hit, relying on expedited ocean freight and cross-docking at West Coast ports to minimize delays and avoid customs bottlenecks. Others are making subtler moves — like holding prices steady on high-visibility products – say, a gaming console – while raising prices on accessories and add-ons to recoup margin. Stachel noted that many brands have moved beyond the now-familiar 'China Plus One' strategy, opting instead for a 'China Plus Three' approach. They are spreading risk across Vietnam, India and Mexico, often working with global manufacturing giants like Foxconn that can seamlessly shift production across borders without retooling or retraining labor. In essence, brands are outsourcing flexibility itself. For those planning beyond the current election cycle, geographic diversification is no longer enough. Brands are factoring in port access, transportation infrastructure, exposure to natural disasters and local workforce stability. Some are eyeing countries like Morocco, Colombia and Thailand as next-generation sourcing hubs. Nearshoring to Mexico has particular appeal, not just because of its proximity to U.S. consumers, but because of the downstream economic benefits. 'We're still benefiting from a cross border perspective, from a transportation trucking perspective, from a warehousing perspective, as these border towns are growing, the economies in the small border towns are growing as well,' said Stachel. These sourcing shifts are backed by hard data prepared by Stachel. According to a comparative analysis of emerging manufacturing markets, countries like Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines are increasingly viable alternatives to China, not only in terms of labor costs but also port infrastructure and U.S.-bound vessel frequency. Vietnam, for instance, operates nearly 50 seaports, including Ho Chi Minh City and Hai Phong, both of which have multiple sailings to the U.S. each week. Indonesia boasts over 100 ports, including Tanjung Priok in Jakarta. Even Cambodia, though limited in scale, has weekly direct sailings from both Phnom Penh and Sihanoukville. These figures underscore the importance of transportation fluidity and market access in sourcing decisions. As Stachel emphasized, brands are no longer optimizing solely for cost, they're optimizing for resilience. Both Smith and Manning cautioned that the real reckoning may be ahead. While tariff impacts are already being priced in at the retail level, the broader inflationary wave has yet to crest. Smith called inflation the 'other shoe,' likely to drop later this summer as new tariffs pass through the supply chain and collide with already fragile consumer sentiment. Uncertainty, they agreed, has become the greatest tax of all. With businesses unable to predict future policy, many are frozen. Manning advised attendees to monitor key macroeconomic signals, including treasury bond activity, consumer confidence indices and safety stock drawdowns. Executive orders posted on he added, are the best early indicators of a sudden policy shift. What retailers are saying – and doing The audience at CartCon also offered candid perspectives. Through real-time polling, attendees offered a rare window into how brands are navigating the chaos. Asked what recent policy had most affected their supply chains, 68% cited China tariffs, with an additional 24% naming de minimis enforcement, or stricter checks on duty-free, low-value imports. In a sign of just how volatile the environment has become, 64% said they revisit their sourcing strategies quarterly. And nearly half, 47%, have responded by raising prices. Twenty-nine percent have changed sourcing countries, while 18% are simply eating the cost. Looking ahead, most brands aren't betting on reshoring. Asked if they expect to source more from the U.S. in five years, 70% said their sourcing would remain about the same, and 30% expected an increase. No one expected to source less. It was a striking rebuke of the idea that domestic manufacturing is due for a renaissance, at least for the retail segment. Tariffs and uncertainty are already impacting consumer demand. Thirty percent of respondents said they expect a consumer slowdown by Q4 2025, while 45% said they're already feeling one. And yet, the vast majority, 82%, said they are not cutting marketing budgets in response. In today's environment, visibility is survival. In a forward-looking poll, 81% of respondents said online shopping will be the dominant channel in the next decade, compared to just 6% for stores. Even more striking, 75% believe direct-to-consumer models can still succeed, suggesting that agility, not abandonment, is the key to survival. The post CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail appeared first on FreightWaves. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Russian billionaire and Putin critic launches AI data centres in the UK
A Russian billionaire and critic of Vladimir Putin is preparing to invest hundreds of millions of pounds in artificial intelligence (AI) data centres in the UK. Nebius, a technology company headquartered in the Netherlands, will invest £200m to establish an 'AI factory' in Britain, deploying 4,000 graphics-processing chips designed to power the latest generation of machine-learning technology. The $12bn (£9bn) business is assessing potential data centre sites in the South East. Nebius was formed as part of a carve-up of Yandex, a company known as 'Russia's Google'. Arkady Volozh, a Russian entrepreneur worth a reported $2bn, founded Yandex in 1997 as a Russian rival to the US search engine. The business later listed in New York and in 2021 was valued at more than $30bn. However, its shares were suspended in 2022 after Russia's invasion of Ukraine and Mr Volozh was sanctioned by the European Union. Over the years Yandex faced growing pressure from the Kremlin to censor online news and search results, and the company was accused by Brussels of helping to spread Kremlin propaganda. In 2023, Mr Volozh labelled Vladimir Putin's invasion 'barbaric' and said he was 'horrified' by the war. He said: 'I am categorically against it. Although I moved to Israel in 2014, I have to take my share of responsibility for the country's actions. 'There were reasons to stay silent during this long process. While there will anyway be questions about the timing of my statement today, there should be no questions about its essence. I am against the war.' The European Union removed its sanctions of Mr Volozh last year. Nebius was formed as part of a carve-up of Yandex, which spun off its Russian search division in a $5bn deal to Russian investors. Nebius, which is listed in the US, is made up of the remaining European, US and Israeli assets, including several data centres powered by Nvidia microchips and its self-driving car technology. Mr Volozh, Nebius's chief executive, said: 'The UK is where AI is being built, tested, and deployed at scale across industries from fintech to life sciences. Being here puts us closer to the start-ups, researchers, and enterprise leaders shaping what's next.' Nebius's UK investment comes after Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, announced plans to spend more than £1bn to boost the UK's computing power in a speech at London Tech Week alongside Jensen Huang, the Nvidia chief executive. On Monday, the Government announced a series of AI investments ahead of this week's Treasury spending review. These included £1bn for an AI research resource, made up of powerful AI data centres and supercomputers, as well as £187m to boost the technological skills of the UK workforce. On Tuesday, Peter Kyle, the Technology Secretary, also announced plans for a new Turing AI fellowship in a speech at London Tech Week. Backed by £25m, the programme will seek five AI experts who will be offered a substantial package to relocate to the UK and hire a team to conduct AI research. Mr Kyle said: 'We will harness the vast potential of our trillion-pound tech sector to help remake our country for the better.' Sign in to access your portfolio
CBS News
29 minutes ago
- CBS News
Hegeth says National Guard, Marines mobilized to L.A. because "we believe ICE agents should be allowed to be safe in doing their operations"
Washington — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday defended the administration's mobilization of the National Guard and members of the Marine Corps to Los Angeles amid ongoing immigration protests. "We believe ICE agents should be allowed to be safe in doing their operations and we have deployed National Guard and the Marines to protect them in the execution of their duties because we ought be able to enforce immigration law in this country," Hegseth said Tuesday, testifying before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. President Trump called for the National Guard to enforce order in the L.A. area over the weekend amid protests over activity by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, prompting a clash with California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Newsom warned that the move would inflame the situation, while urging that there is no shortage of law enforcement. And California sued the Trump administration Monday, after arguing that the move to call the National Guard without the state's permission was illegal. Later Monday, the military said it was mobilizing an additional 2,000 members of the National Guard, while activating 700 members of the Marine Corps to support the National Guard. Members of the Marine Corps could start arriving in the Los Angeles area as soon as Tuesday, a defense official told CBS News. Newsom's office called the escalation "completely unwarranted, uncalled for, and unprecedented." Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, during a House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense hearing in Washington, DC, on Tuesday, June 10, 2025. Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images Meanwhile, Mr. Trump took aim at Newsom in recent days, sharply criticizing his handling of the protests, while suggesting that his "border czar" Tom Homan could arrest the California governor. "I would do it if I were Tom," Mr. Trump said. "Gavin likes the publicity, but I think it would be a great thing." Homan told CBS News late Monday that "there's no intention to arrest" Newsom. But he defended calling in the National Guard, calling it "absolutely" necessary. The developments come as Hegseth is testifying Tuesday before the appropriations panel on the administration's proposed budget. Asked about the cost of mobilizing the National Guard and Marine Corps to California and the impact on the budget, Hegseth said the Defense Department has the capability to "cover down on contingencies," especially "as important as maintaining law and order in a major American city." The defense secretary's testimony comes months after he endured a bruising confirmation process in the Senate. Hegseth was among the most embattled of Mr. Trump's nominees for top posts in his administration, but the 45-year-old Army veteran and former Fox News host was ultimately confirmed by the Senate in a narrow vote. In recent weeks, he's faced renewed scrutiny over the use of the encrypted messaging app Signal. contributed to this report.
