Maciek Zając
@maciekzajac.bsky.social
Ethics of war, wrote a doctorate on autonomous weapons, currently a postdoc at Polish Academy of Sciences. All things ethics, philosophy and history. English language account focused on scholarly stuff. Still on Twitter for UA and PL policy matters
So Trump does not and will not back a sanctions bill, he just backs a meaningless effort that leaves everything to his whim - and we know how his anti-Ukrianian and anti-European policy works
November 18, 2025 at 10:22 AM
So Trump does not and will not back a sanctions bill, he just backs a meaningless effort that leaves everything to his whim - and we know how his anti-Ukrianian and anti-European policy works
@woodnathang.bsky.social one of the most efficient ways to help rn
November 12, 2025 at 12:13 PM
@woodnathang.bsky.social one of the most efficient ways to help rn
Reposted by Maciek Zając
Meanwhile, here's part of the amicus brief from the military brass also filed today in the same case, in support of neither party, but definitely not in support of Trump.
October 9, 2025 at 12:03 AM
Meanwhile, here's part of the amicus brief from the military brass also filed today in the same case, in support of neither party, but definitely not in support of Trump.
September 30, 2025 at 5:51 AM
I have of course brutally simplified these arguments to fit a thread - would be happy to get your opinion on their more sophisticated, in-text versions!
September 22, 2025 at 11:55 AM
I have of course brutally simplified these arguments to fit a thread - would be happy to get your opinion on their more sophisticated, in-text versions!
3) Even if AWS adoption was on balance likely to make any given country too aggressive, eschewing AWS adoption would not be the only option to counter this trend, let alone the best one. Direct restraint through systemic changes seems far better than indirect way of denying oneself key mil tech
September 22, 2025 at 11:55 AM
3) Even if AWS adoption was on balance likely to make any given country too aggressive, eschewing AWS adoption would not be the only option to counter this trend, let alone the best one. Direct restraint through systemic changes seems far better than indirect way of denying oneself key mil tech
2) It is at best unclear whether nations likely to respond to moral argument are currently too little or too much restrained as far as making war is concerned. Unwillingness to intervene to stop genocide or support Allies led to much tragedy post 1989. There is a case for a more interventionist EU.
September 22, 2025 at 11:55 AM
2) It is at best unclear whether nations likely to respond to moral argument are currently too little or too much restrained as far as making war is concerned. Unwillingness to intervene to stop genocide or support Allies led to much tragedy post 1989. There is a case for a more interventionist EU.
Consequently AWS introduction would affect mostly actors already powerfully restrained by other factors, making it less likely to produce significant effects.
September 22, 2025 at 11:55 AM
Consequently AWS introduction would affect mostly actors already powerfully restrained by other factors, making it less likely to produce significant effects.
These other restraints - risk of defeat, modern conflict's unprofitability, and moral aversion to aggressive war - are quite powerful, especially for actors also affected by casualty aversion. Actors unaffected by these shrug casualties off, like Russia does in Ukraine.
September 22, 2025 at 11:55 AM
These other restraints - risk of defeat, modern conflict's unprofitability, and moral aversion to aggressive war - are quite powerful, especially for actors also affected by casualty aversion. Actors unaffected by these shrug casualties off, like Russia does in Ukraine.
1) It is not enough to claim AWS would make armed conflicts more likely - they would need to make it more likely to a morally significant degree. The latter involves comparing the strength of the restraint AWS supposedly erode - casualty aversion - with other restraints on war making
September 22, 2025 at 11:55 AM
1) It is not enough to claim AWS would make armed conflicts more likely - they would need to make it more likely to a morally significant degree. The latter involves comparing the strength of the restraint AWS supposedly erode - casualty aversion - with other restraints on war making
@woodnathang.bsky.social I suggest you follow this account
September 9, 2025 at 6:22 AM
@woodnathang.bsky.social I suggest you follow this account
Yup, Trump got us into this, potentially allowing a pan-Middle Eastern proliferation, I agree. But since we are here, and since I can imagine a different Israeli government being confornted with teh same dilemma, I try to approach it from the viewpoint of ethics and actual practice
June 13, 2025 at 11:18 AM
Yup, Trump got us into this, potentially allowing a pan-Middle Eastern proliferation, I agree. But since we are here, and since I can imagine a different Israeli government being confornted with teh same dilemma, I try to approach it from the viewpoint of ethics and actual practice
Sure, that should be a first instinct, we had this with Iran, Trump ruined it. What when diplomacy utterly fails, as it had in teh case of North Korea? Do you have an answer to such a scenario?
June 13, 2025 at 10:09 AM
Sure, that should be a first instinct, we had this with Iran, Trump ruined it. What when diplomacy utterly fails, as it had in teh case of North Korea? Do you have an answer to such a scenario?
The key question ethically is "was Iran really attempting a nuclear breakthrough?" I do not trust the Netanyahu regime to answer this question truthfully, but if the law ignores it, requiring instead that everybody waits until nuclear capabilities mature, the law is both wrong and out of touch
June 13, 2025 at 8:46 AM
The key question ethically is "was Iran really attempting a nuclear breakthrough?" I do not trust the Netanyahu regime to answer this question truthfully, but if the law ignores it, requiring instead that everybody waits until nuclear capabilities mature, the law is both wrong and out of touch
While I do not doubt this article is correct in describing what the ad bellum law is, it is also hard not to read it as an expose of the lex lata's limitations. If non-UN-approved military action against nuclear proliferation as such is illegal no matter its context, then the law is flawed
June 13, 2025 at 8:44 AM
While I do not doubt this article is correct in describing what the ad bellum law is, it is also hard not to read it as an expose of the lex lata's limitations. If non-UN-approved military action against nuclear proliferation as such is illegal no matter its context, then the law is flawed
Did the other commenters not immediately inform him that you are in fact a Jew? I thought the comments section would infallibly deliver on that aspect ;)
May 9, 2025 at 8:57 AM
Did the other commenters not immediately inform him that you are in fact a Jew? I thought the comments section would infallibly deliver on that aspect ;)