The moral responsibility of the arms industry in just war theory

One of the difficulties surrounding this question is the identity of the arms industry as a non-combatant industry. According to the Principle of Non-combatant Immunity (PNCI), non-combatants are protected from attack in war because war is an activity between combatants, and not between combatants and non-combatants. However, a query for the PNCI is that there are non-combatants who make significant contributions to war, and I argue that the arms industry falls into that category.

Thus, using moral and legal principles and theories within just war theory, I answer the research question in the affirmative, that the arms industry can be liable to harm, liable for reparation, and liable to punishment. Nonetheless, if some non-combatants can incur liability that affects their non-combatant status, then there are significant implications for the PNCI, including a redefinition of the PNCI to exclude certain persons or a re-categorisation of some contributors to war into a more apt category than the umbrella term of ‘non-combatants’.<br><br><i>Thesis is embargoed until 31 December 2028</i>.