The Undeclared War: How the Lend Lease Actof 1941 Signaled America’s Entry into WorldWar II
Aaron Griffin
History
Faculty Advisor: Dr. Vaughn Scribner

In December 1940, President Roosevelt took a much-neededcruise through the Caribbean. With a successful third-term victorybehind him and the perils of Europe still ongoing, Roosevelt needed togather himself and contemplate the future of the United States’ aid to
Britain’s war effort. Winston Churchill, the British Prime Minister, sent
a letter to Roosevelt while he was on vacation, expressing that Britain
could no longer afford to pay for American military aid with cash.
Wanting to help Britain, Roosevelt knew the request from Churchill was
valid and thought of ways to help Britain while also appeasing
isolationists and abiding by the Neutrality Acts. By the end of his
Caribbean cruise, Roosevelt developed a possible plan where the UnitedStates could lend and lease military aid to Britain. Roosevelt would
eventually use his fireside chats to convince the American public that
this possible lend lease program was vital for the survival of Britain andto keep the United States out of the war.1

1

Lynne Olson, Those Angry Days (New York: Random House, 2013), 271-273.

CLA Journal
6 (2018)
pp. 60-74

61

Though the view of the United States coming to the rescue ofBritain seemed second nature to Roosevelt, groups such as theAmerican First Committee remained against America entering WorldWar II. The idea of the United States claiming neutrality but still arming
Britain signaled to them an inevitable entry into the war for the UnitedStates. The American First Committee resisted aid to Europe’s war
effort, especially if a large amount of American military equipment andsupplies were in Europe and not at home, where they believed such
resources belonged.2 President Roosevelt understood the struggle hefaced to implement the Lend-Lease Act into American foreign policy,
and this reality required him to portray aid to Britain as essential forpeace to the American public. Roosevelt argued, “There is far lesschance of the United States getting in the war if we do all we can now to
support the nations defending themselves against attack by the Axis.”
He continued, “You can nail any talk about sending armies to Europe asa deliberate untruth.”3 President Roosevelt’s comments wereparamount due to America’s strong isolationist stance in 1940. During
this particular year, Roosevelt gauged the American public about how
they felt about containing Hitler’s unchecked behavior. When
Roosevelt realized his hints toward restraining Germany were not
popular he exclaimed, “It’s a terrible thing to look over your shoulder
when you are trying to lead—and find no one there.”4 As time
progressed, this aid program was hotly contested despite sympathy
growing for the Allied powers, in particular Britain.5
Clay Judson, “Document 4—Clay Judson to Robert E. Wood September 24, 1940,” In Danger
Undaunted The Anti-Interventionist Movement of 1940-1941 as Revealed in the Papers of theAmerica First Committee, ed. Justus D. Doenecke (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1990),
92-93.
3
Olson, Those Angry Days, 274.
4
Steven Gillon, Pearl Harbor FDR Leads the Nation into War (New York: Basic Books,
2011), 8.
5Gillon, Pearl Harbor, 9.
2

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

62

The Lend-Lease Act evinced various reactions after its
implementation in March 1941. Some asked—whether the United States
shared a heavier burden than other countries, while others wondered
what the United States gained from this act, and still others questioned
if the United States’ allies were ungrateful. Scholars, moreover, havelargely sidestepped the possibility that the Lend-Lease Act officially put
the United States on the Allied side of World War II. Beth F. Scott,Lieutenant Colonel James C. Rainey, and Captain Andrew W. Huntportray the Lend-Lease Act as an economic savior, arguing, “Further,
the lend-lease program was vital for the preservation of life and thegeneral economic survival of our Allies fighting to defeat Germany,
Italy, and Japan.”6 Robert W. Coakley and Richard M. Leighton missthe significance of the Lend-Lease act in their contention that the,“Lend-Lease was in its conception largely a means of overcoming
financial and legal barriers to the continuance of aid to the British.”7
Historians like Martin Folly and Niall Palmer have also largely
ignored the Lend-Lease Act’s manifestation of a declaration of a pseudo
war by the United States onto the Axis powers—Folly and Palmer
exclaimed, “Lend-Lease did draw the United States closer to war anddid identify it closely with Allied cause, though it did not itself bring
direct involvement.”8 Thus, even historians who have considered theLend-Lease’s importance have not investigated the true weight thisprogram carried in the United States and abroad.
This paper argues that the Lend-Lease Act (March 1941), whichgave military aid to Britain and other allied nations, was the catalyst for
6

Beth F. Scott, James C. Rainey, and Andrew W. Hunt, eds., The Logistics of War (Maxwell
AFB, Gunter Annex, Ala: AF Logistics Management Agency, 2000), 249.
7
Robert W. Coakley and Richard M. Leighton, Global Logistics and Strategy, 1943-1945(Washington, D.C.: Center of Military History, United States Army, 1995), 76.
8Martin H. Folly and Niall A. Palmer, The A to Z of U.S. Diplomacy from World War I throughWorld War II (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2010), 207.

CLA Journal 6 (2018)63

much political strife during the years leading up to the Japanese attackon American forces at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii (December 7, 1941).
Though the United States still claimed neutrality, this aid bill was
considered, by its opposition, to be a pseudo declaration of war on the
Axis powers—because it was. This is evident through political debate
over the Lend-Lease Act, Axis warnings towards the United States ofpassing the Lend-Lease Act, and strong British approval of the LendLease Act. Ultimately, this paper demonstrates that America's entrance
into World War II was more complicated than conventional accounts ofJapan's attack on Pearl Harbor and America's subsequent military
aggression suggest.
Concerning the political debate surrounding the Lend-Lease Act,a brief history of its evolution will be covered. Following will be three
examples of this political debate that pointed to the notion that thepassage of the Lend-Lease Act was a declaration of a pseudo war. Next
the warnings that the Axis directed toward the United States due to theLend-Lease Act will be examined through three separate examples andfollowed with proper analysis. Lastly, the strong support voiced by the
British in favor of the Lend-Lease Act will also be covered. Two strong
evidences will be analyzed to show that the British support of the LendLease Act helped initiate the United States into the war unofficially. All
the evidence will lead to the conclusion that the Lend-Lease Act was asoft declaration of war by the United States onto the Axis powers.
Before the Lend-Lease Act declared a pseudo war on the Axis
powers, its evolution and eventual passage inflicted much political strife
in the United States. During the last half of the 1930s and early part of1940-41, the United States watched as the Axis powers, particularly
Japan and Germany, seized territories from East Asia to central Europe.
With each conquest, the American people sat quietly and observed theunforgiving aggression of the Axis war machine. Under the provisions

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

64

of the Neutrality Acts, the United States not only abstained from thewar, but also placed trade embargos on all shipments of arms to theoffending nations. This detail of the Neutrality Acts was the source ofmuch frustration for many American leaders including Secretary ofState Cordell Hull. On two separate occasions, Hull requested that
Congress repeal the arm embargo requirement in the Neutrality Acts.
He reasoned that the best way to prevent the Axis aggressors fromcontinuing their onslaught of total war was to allow nations such as
Britain be allowed to purchase arms from the United States. Despite
support for the repeal of the Neutrality Acts, especially the arm
embargo, growing and the fall of Poland to Nazi Germany in 1939, thearm embargo provision remained.9 The debate to amend the Neutrality
Acts spread all over the nation. In Arkansas, congressmen all over thestate supported the amendment to the Neutrality Acts be made, andthey petitioned Congress to make it happen. Representative James R.
Campbell of Hot Springs embodied the feeling of interventionists in
1939 when he made this statement regarding the arm loan amendment,“I think it is time for the United States to realize that it cannot pursue anisolation policy.”10 In November of 1939, the idea Representative
Campbell shared with other Americans prevailed as Congress passed“cash-and-carry” into law.11
The amendment of “cash-and-carry” worked for the British andFrench governments until the disaster of Dunkirk and the fall of France
in 1940. The British were left alone as the continent of Europe fell under

9

Edward R. Stettinius, Lend-Lease: Weapon for Victory (New York, NY: Macmillan
Company, 1944), 17-20.
10“Asks Congress to Amend U.S. Neutrality Act Legislators Also Want Foreign Loan Act
Changed,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), February 2, 1939, Daily ed.
11
Stettinius, Lend-Lease, 20.

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

65

Nazi rule.12 This placed the British government under an extensive
financial strain.
When Americans began to question how Britain could pay for
American arms, President Roosevelt replied:
Suppose my neighbor’s house catches fire, and I have alength of garden hose four or five hundred feet away. If
he can take my garden hose and connect it up with his
hydrant, I may help him to put out the fire. Now what do I
do? I don’t say to him before that operation, Neighbor, mygarden hose cost me $15; you have to pay me $15 for it.
What is the transaction that goes on? I don’t want $15—I
want my garden hose back after the fire is over.13
Cleverly, Roosevelt placed the idea of lending weapons to Britain andother Allied nations not for the desire of money, but with the intention
that Britain would defeat the Axis powers and then return the leased
military equipment back to the United States. Though Roosevelt was aninterventionist, it was paramount his analogy demonstrated that thelender (the United States) did not physically get involved in the firefighting (War) but only the person leasing the hose (Britain). In 1940,
two political sides on the war existed in America—the interventionists
and isolationists.
American isolationists believed it was a mistake to involve theUnited States into any war, especially in Europe, that did not directly
benefit the United States. They argued that once the Nazi invasion of
Britain failed, it would only be a matter of time until the British fully
prepared for war and could strangle the Germans via their naval

12
13

Stettinius, Lend-Lease, 26-32.
Stettinius, Lend-Lease, 1.

CLA Journal 6 (2018)66

superiority.14 When “cash-and-carry” was enacted into law in 1939, oneof the isolationists, a Republican leader in Congress named Senator
Vandenberg lamented in his diary, “In the name of ‘democracy’ wehave taken the first step, once more, into Europe’s ‘power politics’…
What ‘suckers’ our emotions make of us.”15 This quote shows thatisolationists sensed that the “cash-and-carry” law would eventually
evolve into the Lend-Lease Act and drag America into another
European war, something American isolationists did not want.
On the other side of the debate, interventionists claimed it was
America’s duty to aid the remaining Allied nations before the Axis
powers conquered the world, which would leave the United States
extremely vulnerable to invasion. In his statistical analysis of the war,
economist Fritz Sternberg stated, “If Britain obtains such support asquickly as possible, then, and only then, may we hope that the UnitedStates will remain at peace.”16 Though idealistic, many Americans
disagreed with this statement because while claiming neutrality, theUnited States was claiming a side in this world-wide conflict.
A statement by Democrat Senator Clark of Missouri in 1941
exemplified how Americans considered the Lend-Lease Act to be a
declaration of a pseudo war. The Log Cabin Democrat reported on
February 18, 1941 that, “Senator Clark, Democrat Missouri, expressed
belief in the senate today that enactment of the pending British aid billwould be ‘equivalent to a declaration of a state of war,’ which
ultimately would have to be followed up by sending troops abroad.”17
14

Fritz Sternberg, Five Fold Aid To Britain To Save Her and Keep Us Out of War (New York:John Day Company, 1941), 9-10.
15
Alan P. Dobson, U.S. Wartime Aid to Britain 1940-1946 (New York: St. Marin’s Press,
1986), 15.
16
Sternberg,, Five Fold Aid To Britain, 12.
17“Aid Bill is War Measure, Says Senator Equivalent to Declaring War, Asserts Clark,
Opening for Opposition,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), February 18, 1941.

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

67

Clearly, Senator Clark demonstrated that the passage of the Lend-Lease
Act would be placing the United States officially on the side of the Allies
in the war, and it would not only require valuable military resources
but American soldiers on foreign soil as well.
Another example to illustrate American concerns of
encroachment into World War II because of the Lend-Lease Act took
place when Senator Robert Taft of Ohio interrupted a speech by Senator
Burton Wheeler. Senator Wheeler told the senate, “That the time was‘not far distant’ when the President should use his high office in an
attempt to bring about peace in Europe.”18 Senator Taft objected, “It
might not be actively engaged in shooting, but when the British lost aship they could take one from the American fleet to replace it.”19 This
concerned Senator Taft because the interventionists supported theaction of aiding Britain to a new degree and setting a dangerous
precedent, which was a direct lease to Britain in real time. Isolationists
like Senator Taft understood that a policy like this meant placing
American warships in combat zones, which would not keep the UnitedStates at peace.
On another occasion in February of 1941, the former 1940
Republican nominee for President, Wendell Willkie, proposed that
America provide five-to-ten destroyers (naval warships) to Great Britain
every month. Willkie passionately testified before the Senate foreign
Relations Committee that, “England desperately needed more
destroyers”.20 Upon hearing this statement, Secretary of the Navy,
Frank Knox, disagreed: “We haven’t anymore destroyers to spare than
“Fear U.S. Navy May Be Joined With Britain,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR),
March 1, 1941.
19“Fear U.S. Navy May Be Joined With Britain,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR),
March 1, 1941.
20“Knox Opposes Sparing More Destroyers,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR),February 12, 1941.
18

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

68

we need for a balanced fleet.”21 This is significant because it indicates
Secretary Knox believed it was important the United States maintain abalanced fleet. It can therefore be inferred that he was implying, as thehead of the United States Navy, that the United States would need her
Navy in the event of an entry into the war. One can surmise that theaddition of American destroyers to the British fleet gave naturalconcerns that the Lend-Lease Act, if passed by Congress, would
instigate a conflict with the Axis powers since we were aiding theirenemies to attack them.22
The political debate in America demonstrated the divisivenessthat the Lend-Lease Act caused as at it slowly evolved to its eventual
passage in March of 1941.23 The intense debate between the isolationists
and interventionists, though they were in complete ideological
opposition with each other, came from the same desire that both sides
wanted the United States to have peace, but it is clear the passage LendLease Act did spark the beginnings of a pseudo war with the Axis
powers, as the isolationists theorized.
After the passage of the Lend-Lease Act, Axis powers warned theUnited States that the passing of this aid bill to Great Britain would
signal to them that the United States had chosen a side in the war.
Despite these warnings, the United States government determined topass the Lend-Lease Act which triggered a pseudo war with the Axis
powers.

“Knox Opposes Sparing More Destroyers,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR),February 12, 1941.
22“Knox Opposes Sparing More Destroyers,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR),February 12, 1941.
23“Lend-Lease Bill Passed by Senate,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March 10,
1941.
21

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

69

On the same day Congress passed the Lend-Lease Act, the Fascist
editorial spokesman, Virginio Gayda, detested its passage by saying,“The British aid bill was ‘open intervention in the war against the Axis’”
and he also went onto say, “Roosevelt’s gesture is a deliberate,unprovoked move toward war.”24 These two comments on the passageof the Lend-Lease Act demonstrate that the Axis powers considered it
an unofficial entry into the war for the United States. Thus, reinforcing
the notion that the Lend-Lease Act declared a pseudo war on the Axis
powers by the United States.
A second example proving that when the United States passed
the Lend-Lease Act it enacted a pseudo war against the Axis powers
came from a warning by the Nazi government. With the Lend-Lease
Act passed by Congress, Germany knew the war supplies and naval
support from the United States would only increase. Thus, a Nazi
spokesman responded, “We are determined to torpedo everything thatapproaches England.”25 This showed Germany’s complete disregard for
the United States’ supposed position of neutrality, and thus, validates
that the Axis considered the passage of this aid bill to be an unofficial
declaration of war by the United States.
Finally, on March 17, 1941, the three major Axis powers gave
warning statements towards the United States for passing the LendLease Act. The general consensus of each warning was summarized by
one Axis press, “Plainly it is now a world war.”26 The statement thatcame from the Berlin press aggressively attacked President Roosevelt:“He conceals aggressive and offensive intentions by the pretext of“Rome Warns U.S. of ‘Surprises’ in the Pacific, Lend-Lease Bill Called Move Toward War,”The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March 10, 1941.
25“Says Germany Will Block British Aid,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March
12, 1941.
26“British, Axis Editors Say U.S. is in War,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March
17, 1941.
24

CLA Journal 6 (2018)70

protecting democracies against dictators. He is not so much concerned
about ‘the security of the democratic system’ as for satisfying his own
lust for power.”27 This media attack was obviously a clear message that
the Axis considered the United States not only in the war but a present
danger, and President Roosevelt was portrayed as the main perpetrator
due to his support for the British aid bill. From Rome, the Italian press
simply said, “An announcement of American participation in thewar.”28 Here, the Italian government plainly stated that they considered
the United States officially participating in the war due to America’s aidof Britain. Lastly, Tokyo media stated this about the President and his
support of the Lend-Lease Act, “Plainly it is now a world war of thetotalitarian nations with the Axis on one side and the democratic
totalitarians on the other.”29 Interestingly, Japan considered what theUnited States was doing to be a totalitarian type of action, and in themessage, they also made it clear they considered America apart of thewar saying, “It is now a world war.”30 These warnings from Axis
powers cemented the concept that the passage of the Lend-Lease Act
was considered a declaration of the United States unofficial entry into
this world conflict—thus, it was a declaration of pseudo war.
The final piece of evidence that displays the passage of the LendLease Act triggered a pseudo war between the United States and the
Axis powers derives from the strong British approval of this aid bill.
The British strongly approved of this aid bill because without it they
believed defeat was imminent for themselves and the struggling Allied“British, Axis Editors Say U.S. is in War,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR),
March 17, 1941.
28“British, Axis Editors Say U.S. is in War,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March
17, 1941.
29“British, Axis Editors Say U.S. is in War,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March
17, 1941.
30“British, Axis Editors Say U.S. is in War,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March
17, 1941.
27 27

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

71

powers. Churchill tried to convince Roosevelt that if Britain fell to the
Nazis, then all of Europe’s industrial power would be dedicated todefeating the United States.31 Thus, Roosevelt and the interventionists
aided Britain. It can be inferred through the following examples that
Britain desired only one thing besides American weaponry andsupplies—American official entry into the war. This is why theirapproval of the Lend-Lease Act helped trigger the United States’ pseudo
war against the Axis powers.
As the Lend-Lease was officially passed by Congress andimmediately signed into law by President Roosevelt, Prime Minister
Churchill addressed the United States government with this thank you,
“The most powerful democracy has in effect declared in solemn statutethat they will devote their overwhelming industrial and financial
strength to insuring the defeat of Nazism…”32 Churchill’s thankful
address to the United States sounds as if America had denounced her
neutrality in that exact moment. This was no doubt on purpose. Britain
most likely intended this statement to show the Axis powers that theUnited States was now on their side of the war. This furthers the notionthat Britain’s approval of the Lend-Lease Act aided in the creation of thepseudo war between the United States and the Axis powers.
In London, the British people were ecstatic as the United States
passed the Lend-Lease Act. After President Roosevelt presented thisinformation to the country in his speech, Britons celebrated because
Roosevelt emboldened Americans in a pro-Allied manner, “The British
cheered his exhortation to Americans to give unstintingly to ‘all-out aid’
to nations fighting aggressors.”33 This was the type of news Britain had
31

Dobson, U.S. Wartime Aid to Britain, 20-21.
“U.S. Thanked for Passing Aid Measure Appreciation Expressed for His Government by
Prime Minister Churchill,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March 12, 1941.
33“British, Axis Editors Say U.S. is in War,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March
17, 1941.
32

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

72

longed to hear, and with this news the British press exclaimed, “Here is
the final pledge America is in this war with us.”34 Britain’s strong
approval of the passage of the Lend-Lease Act by the United States
demonstrated that this was the news they had been longing to hear, andit was the one thing they desired most because the United States had
unofficially entered into a war they eventually had to make official.
The Lend-Lease Act (March 1941) gave military aid to Britain andother allied nations. It was the reason for intense political debate until
its passage, and it experienced bipartisan support once the attack on
Pearl Harbor transpired (December 7, 1941). The United States
professed to have a neutral stance in the war, but this aid bill was a
pseudo declaration of war on the Axis Powers. This is evident throughthe political debate over the Lend-Lease Act, Axis warnings towards theUnited States of passing the Lend-Lease Act, and strong British
approval of the Lend-Lease Act. These evidences reinforce the complex
nature of America's entrance into World War II. Moreover, the Japanese
attack on Pearl Harbor was not the primary basis for which the UnitedStates declared war on the Axis powers.

Works Cited“Aid Bill is War Measure, Says Senator Equivalent to Declaring War,
Asserts Clark, Opening for Opposition,” The Log Cabin Democrat(Conway, AR), February 18, 1941.
“British, Axis Editors Say U.S. is in War,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR), March
17, 1941.
34

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

73“Asks Congress to Amend U.S. Neutrality Act Legislators Also WantForeign Loan Act Changed,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway,
AR), February 2, 1939, Daily ed.
“British, Axis Editors Say U.S. Is In War,” The Log Cabin Democrat(Conway, AR), March 17, 1941.
Coakley, Robert W., and Richard M. Leighton. Global Logistics andStrategy, 1943-1945. Washington, D.C.: Center of Military
History, United States Army, 1995.
Dobson, Alan P. U.S. Wartime Aid to Britain 1940-1946. New York: St.
Marin’s Press, 1986.
Doenecke, Justus D. In Danger Undaunted: The Anti-interventionist
Movement of 1940-1941 as Revealed in the Papers of the America First
Committee. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1990.
“Fear U.S. Navy May Be Joined With Britain,” The Log Cabin Democrat(Conway, AR), March 1, 1941.
Folly, Martin H., Niall A. Palmer, and Martin H. Folly. The A to Z of U.S.
Diplomacy from World War I through World War II. Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Press, 2010.
Gillon, Steven M. Pearl Harbor: FDR Leads the Nation into War. New York:
Basic Books, 2011.

CLA Journal 6 (2018)

74“Knox Opposes Sparing More Destroyers,” The Log Cabin Democrat(Conway, AR), February 12, 1941.
“Lend-Lease Bill Passed by Senate,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway,
AR), March 10, 1941.
Olson, Lynne. Those Angry Days: Roosevelt, Lindbergh, and America’s FightOver World War II, 1939-1941. New York: Random House, 2013.
“Rome Warns U.S. Of ‘Surprises’ In The Pacific, Lend-Lease Bill Called
Move Toward War,” The Log Cabin Democrat (Conway, AR),
March 10, 1941.
“Says Germany Will Block British Aid,” The Log Cabin Democrat(Conway, AR), March 12, 1941.
Scott, Beth F., James C. Rainey, and Andrew W. Hunt. The Logistics ofWar. Maxwell AFB, Gunter Annex, Ala: AF Logistics
Management Agency, 2000.
Sternberg, Fritz. Five Fold Aid To Britain To Save Her and Keep Us Out of
War, New York: John Day Company, 1941.
Stettinius, Edward R. Lend-lease, Weapon for Victory. New York:
Macmillan Company, 1944.
“U.S. Thanked For Passing Aid Measure Appreciation Expressed For
His Government By Prime Minister Churchill,” The Log Cabin
Democrat (Conway, AR), March 12, 1941.

CLA Journal 6 (2018)