Evening star., 1941-04-19

equally explicit David Lawrence.
statement unless attacked"
What today would constitute IAN
attack" on the United States? Both
Houses of Congress, by almost
unanimous vote, have just passed
resolution declaring that the
United States will not permit any
new non-American power to occupy
any American country. In pur-
suance of that resolution the United
States has planted her flag in
Greenland as a matter of protection
for American interests. If the Nazis
should in any way attempt to in
terfere with American planes or
ships plying between the United
States and Greenland. this would
be construed as an attack" and
American armed forces would re-
sist.
But such an incident might bring
into play an entirely different utter
ance by President Roosevelt from
that which he made to both Houses
of Congress in June, 1910, when
discussing the defense policies of
the United States. After sketching
airplane hops from West African
bases to the two American con-
tinents, the President said that un-
der modern conditions it becomes
necessary sometimes ito attack an
aggressor on his route" This sig
nificant phrase was little noticed at
the time.
Could Seize Dakar.
Thus, if the Nazis should eStab-
lish themselves in the naval and air
base at Dakar on the west coast of
Africa and ignore the fact that this
is supposed to be a neutral port of
France. the United States military
authorities could consider such
action as the beginning of a poten-
tial "attack" and instead of waiting
for Nazi planes to hop across to
South America, the Washington
Government might conceivably or
der the seizure of Dakar as a pre-
Cautionary move.
The occupation of Dakar would
then be considered here not to be
an offensive action on the part of
the United States but a defensive
step. 1t could be taken under the
existing constitutional powers of
the President which make him the
commander-in of the Army
and Navy and as such charged with
the duty of "repelling invasion" The
words quoted are in the Constitution
itself and there is no need for the
calling of Congress to sanction steps
before they are taken to "repel in
vasion" The words "repel attack"
and 'repel invasion" are regarded
as synonymous in international par
lance
There is still another sense in
which the constitutional power of
the President can be invoked with
out any particular law or resolution
by Congress. 1t is in protecting the
rights and interests of American
citizens on the high seas. This is
a historic right which also emerges
from the broad statement that it is
the duty of the executive branch of
the United States Government to
repel invasion or attack. Wherever
the American flag flies on the high
seas is supposed to be American
territory in the sense that the seas
are free to all.
While it is true that the present
neutrality laws forbid American YES
sells to enter combat zones in Europe
as proclaimed by the President, it
is also true that in the same legisla-
ton is to be found provision to
the effect that the United States
thereby did not relinquish any of
her rights under international law.
Precedents Available.
In all the diplomatic notes and
memoranda exchanged by the
United States and the German gov
ernments between 1914 and 1918
not a single phrase can be found
which puts the United States on
record as agreeing to the present
mode of submarine warfare. On the
contrary, the United States holds
that to attack any merchant ship
without warning and to sink it or
to put the lives of American sailors
in jeopardy is an illegal act and an
attack on the rights of American
citizens.
The United States has held that
unarmed merchant ships flying the
flag even of a belligerent country
cannot be attacked without warm
ing. If, therefore, the Washington
Government desires to stand on the
precedentS for which American SOL
diers and sailors sacrificed their
lives in 1917 and 1918, the record is
there. No act of Congress Is neces-
sary for the immediate use of armed
forces to repel such attacks or to
resist any attempts to seize Amer
ican-owned cargoes unless taken
into ports in the customary way pre-
vailing before Germany started her
illegal use of the submarine and
now the airplane bomber at sea.
These precedentS may not neces-
sarily be the very ones that will
actually be invoked to justify armed
action by the United States in the
present war, but they are cited to
show that an immensely broad
power is possessed by president
of the United States and how the
promise not to engage in war "un-
less attacked" can, if American pub
lie opinion so desires it, become the
basis for actual participation in the
war without a formal declaration.
Once hostilities have commenced, of
course, the chances are Congress
would ratify the initiative of the
Executive.