Journal of Military Ethics
Taylor and Francis
This paper counters Michael Walzer’s argument against tight blockades. It shows that the interdiction of food shipments need not violate the principle of noncombatant immunity. Whether it is morally permissible to impose a strict blockade depends on the circumstances of the target state. The more self-sufficient a country is, the more acceptable it should be for a belligerent to cut the enemy’s external lines of supply. The Allied blockade of Germany during the First World War illustrates the argument. Fault in this case should be assigned to the German government for the loss of civilian lives.
Mayer, Robert. Noncombatant Immunity and the Ethics of Blockade. Journal of Military Ethics, 18, 1: 2-19, 2019. Retrieved from Loyola eCommons, Political Science: Faculty Publications and Other Works, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15027570.2019.1622257
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
© Taylor and Francis, 2019.