Rubber bullets are "nonlethal" but not from point blank range and/or when they hit you in just the wrong spots. The amount of people directly killed by the aver

Rubber bullets are "nonlethal" but not from point blank range and/or when they hit you in just the wrong spots. The amount of people directly killed by the average EMP will almost always be much lower than the same amount of energy pumped into fragmentation and/or thermal effects. In any case, I took the question to be more of a "should we mandate nonlethal weapons for wars", not really a question about whether EMPs are nonlethal or not in the strict sense. The point is that countries (especially the type of country already willing to start offensive wars) would be unwilling to honor the outcome of the non-lethal conflict and fall back on more traditional ways of getting what they want. I'd even argue that in many cases, the wars get started exactly because diplomacy, politics, covert operation and economic influence have failed to achieve the desired effect and more direct means are required.