Not quite, not globally since WWII and even then it was localized to conflict zones (India/Bengal included due to the fighting in Burma on the Indian border). Also even Stalin just starved Ukraine while exporting their wheat (to use the money from it to build the Donbas industry among other industrial centers).
Well yeah, that is what war does, and has always done, unfortunately.
Not quite, not globally since WWII and even then it was localized to conflict zones (India/Bengal included due to the fighting in Burma on the Indian border). Also even Stalin just starved Ukraine while exporting their wheat (to use the money from it to build the Donbas industry among other industrial centers).
I am not sure what 'globally' means. I am sure there are other instances. Didn't Nigeria blockade Biafra into starvation, and intentionally so?
Globally means we actually probably never had such a situation where a global supplier of food is being blockaded.
Like by the time the Germans occupied Ukraine it was back to (barely) feed the Soviet Union.
Btw some 2 million Soviets starved already after the war ended, because of the war.
Probably. But does that have an effect as to the actual legality of a blockade?
Quite incredible, especially as IIRC the authorities were even exporting food and sending it to Eastern Europe ass well.