Yes, it is but, at the same time, it is a relatively simple one.
Whilst I praise your article for discussing this issue, it does make a common mistake, that is to conflate or at least not differentiate the difference between morals and ethics. That distinction is particularly important in relation to this issue of end v means. It is also why the question can be seen not as complex but simple.
Ethics are essentially rules. Rules are useful as guides but for many reasons, even if well drafted and appropriate when first conceived, they often become flawed over time. In some cases, of course, they may never have been other than flawed. Ethics are also basically guides to process rather than behaviour. The point is that when they are 'poor', 'wrong' or 'bad' rules - however one would choose to express a rule that is deficient or inappropriate - then it is reasonable for it to be broken, particularly if the problem with it is already recognised and there is movement towards its alteration or elimination. The breaking of that rule may thus be unethical but entirely moral.
Morality is not about process or ethical behaviour, though it can have significant influence on each of those and, indeed, often will.
However, morals are about values and consideration for the good and the well-being of individuals and groups both small and large. Morals are more akin to principles than to ethics for they guide how we think and what we believe about what is appropriate or, for those who think in those terms, what is right and what is wrong.
Both ethics and morals are influenced by particular cultures and the institutions that purvey those cultures. This is certainly also true of ethics. However, morals tend to be universal in their commonality and acceptance, even among or between very different cultures. Morals are also much greater and overarching in their influence, as compared with ethics, which may be confined to relatively small groups and often not even openly available to others, let alone adhered to by those not in the group.
So, while morals can and do certainly influence or are often even causative in devising ethical principles, the same cannot be said for the reverse.
The fact is, therefore, that in pursuing any end, the means must be considered and rejected if they are immoral. This is not an issue of balance for there is no equivalence between between behaviour, actions, intent, and morality. The end can never justify the means in any matter of significance, if at all. Obtaining a result at any cost and by any method can really never be justified and while it is always important to recognise this, it is all the more so when the consequences of bringing about an end are potentially catastrophic or destructive to the well-being of people or the planet.
Roger Hawcroft
Take care. Stay safe. ☮️
