The Theory of Absolute Contraband
George P. Politakis · 2018
This chapter focuses on what seems a logical absurdity, for professing neutrality and yet supplying arms to belligerents seem mutually exclusive. The legal problems of neutrality and the traffic in arms have been gathering dust ever since the Hague Conferences. The eight-year-long Iran-Iraq War provides a perfect illustration of such inconsistency between words and deeds. At the peak of the Gulf War’s frantic demand for arms, most western states were prepared to pervert their alleged neutrality through the argument that abstention could be equated with strict impartiality in supplying both sides. Traditional rules have codified the neutral state obligation not to furnish munitions of war to belligerents, but have also expressly provided for a neutral private right of trade in arms. The twentieth century roman-fleuve of American neutrality commences with the Wilsonian proclamation of 1914, which committed the United States to detachment with regard to the First World War.