EXCLUSIVE: Donald Trump Slammed for 'Plotting to Turn Washington Monument Into Weapons Tower'
Sept. 21 2026, Published 11:33 a.m. ET
Donald Trump is being accused of turning his latest ambitious Washington building project into a "weapons tower" after revealing his planned triumphal arch would house drones, snipers and ammunition, RadarOnline.com can reveal.
The US president, 80, announced on Sunday, September 20, the proposed 250-foot monument near Arlington Memorial Bridge would double as what he described as a military complex, dramatically expanding the purpose of a project already facing legal and architectural scrutiny.
Trump's Arch Plan Sparks Legal Battle
Trump said the arch would become 'a top grade Military Complex/Triumphal Arch.'
The plan follows Trump's argument his $400million White House ballroom project also serves national security purposes.
Trump said: "There will be no facility like this anywhere in the World."
The president added the arch would become "a top grade Military Complex/Triumphal Arch" capable of housing and rapidly deploying "large numbers of drones," with snipers positioned on its roof and plaza and ammunition stored inside.
The announcement immediately intensified the controversy surrounding the project, which would be constructed between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery.
Three Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian have sued over the plans, arguing congressional authorization is required before construction can proceed.
Attorney Slams Trump's Security Justification
Trump raged there 'will be no facility like this anywhere in the world.'
Nicolas Sansone, an attorney with the Public Citizen Litigation Group, which represents a group of Vietnam War veterans who have sued to stop construction, said Trump was "trying to paper over a patently unlawful project by giving it a veneer of national security justification."
He added to the New York Times the project continues to be illegal "with or without this concocted justification" – adding: "It simply has no legal foundation whatsoever unless and until Congress passes a law saying he can build it."
Trump's proposal has also raised aviation questions because of its proximity to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.
The latest national security argument echoes Trump's defense of the White House ballroom being constructed where the East Wing previously stood.
The president has argued the ballroom development includes security improvements, including work connected to the bunker beneath the complex.
Trump Defends Arch's Military Role
Trump's arch raises aviation concerns near Reagan Airport.
Trump has repeatedly invoked national security while pursuing policies during his second administration, including military deployments at the US-Mexico border and decisions affecting federal workers and energy projects.
The arch was facing opposition before Trump disclosed its proposed military function.
Critics have argued its scale could disrupt the historic landscape linking the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery, while supporters of the project have advanced it as a major new national monument.
Trump, however, has presented the expanded design as both ceremonial and defensive – combining the monumental arch he has championed with facilities capable of storing and deploying military equipment.
A defense source said: "There is an obvious question about why a new monument in the center of Washington needs to perform a military role when the region already has extensive defense infrastructure, and some are referring to Trump's arch proposal as a plot to turn it into a weapons tower.
"Once you start talking about adding drones, snipers and ammunition to it, this becomes a very different proposition from the ceremonial arch originally presented.
"Calling the arch a national-security facility doesn't automatically make the legal questions surrounding it disappear. The central argument from opponents remains whether the administration has the necessary authority to build it, and describing it as military infrastructure doesn't settle that dispute."
Security Source Questions Arch's Military Purpose
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Critics have argued its scale could disrupt the historic landscapes.
Another security source added: "What is striking is how dramatically the purpose of this project appears to have evolved. It was presented primarily as a monumental addition to Washington, and now the president is talking about storing ammunition there and positioning drones and snipers around it. That inevitably changes the debate.
"There are clear parallels with the White House ballroom because national security has become an important part of the administration's defense of both projects. Critics are going to ask whether these security arguments reflect requirements that were always central to the plans or have assumed greater importance as scrutiny has increased.
"This was already an unusually sensitive location for a structure of this scale. You have major national monuments, large numbers of visitors and one of the country's busiest pieces of airspace nearby. Adding drones, ammunition and armed personnel creates another set of practical questions that planners would have to consider.
"The unanswered question is what operational requirement this is actually intended to meet. The president says the military requested the conversion, but without a fuller public explanation from the Pentagon there are inevitably going to be questions about precisely what capability is needed and why this location has been chosen.
"Opponents will argue that changing the stated function of the arch cannot simply resolve their underlying objections about authorization. The administration disputes their interpretation, so ultimately that is a legal argument that will have to be determined through the appropriate process.
"There is something highly unusual about combining the symbolism of a triumphal arch with the practical functions of a military installation. Once you introduce drones, snipers and ammunition, people will inevitably view the building differently because it is no longer being discussed purely as a monument."
