Showing posts sorted by date for query consistent. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query consistent. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Monday, January 26, 2026

Moral Collapse in DHS/ICE Killings

Lawrence Powell reflects on The Moral Collapse That Killed Renee Good and we contemplate the immorality in the killing of Alex Pretti. What we are witnessing is something deeper and more disturbing: the surrender of moral agency in exchange for belonging.


Bystander video captured from multiple angles appears to show another fatal confrontation between U.S. federal agents and an individual in Minneapolis on Saturday. Federal officials said the man was armed and that agents fired at him in self-defence. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz criticized the Trump administration and its immigration enforcement campaign, saying it is creating 'chaos' in his state.



History does not judge people only by what they do with their own hands, but by what they permit, excuse, and normalize. And it is unforgiving to those who confuse obedience with virtue and cruelty with order. (Powell, n.d.)


The Incident Management Intervention Model (IMIM) is what RCMP officers use to assess and manage risk in all encounters with the public. It helps to determine what intervention is needed, such as verbal de-escalation or the use of another method. 


Police officers must also clearly explain what happened before, during and after the incident. This process is called "legal articulation." This articulation will include the officer's risk assessment, helping people who were not there understand what the officer saw, what it meant to them, as well as how it made them feel.


An officer's intervention is measured against what a reasonable, trained, prudent police officer would do faced with a similar set of circumstances.




In April 2021, the RCMP updated the Incident Management Intervention Model (IMIM) annual re-certification training as well as the Incident Management Intervention Model graphic to place more emphasis on communication and crisis intervention and de-escalation. Crisis intervention and de-escalation now surrounds the graphic, emphasizing de-escalation as the preferred result of any interaction. Crisis intervention and de-escalation provides police with tools that can often be used instead of physical intervention options.


Six basic principles underlie the Incident Management Intervention Model:

 

  • The primary duty of a peace officer is to preserve and protect life

  • The primary objective of any intervention is public safety

  • Peace officer safety is essential to public safety

  • The Incident Management Intervention Model is consistent with federal statute law and common law authorities and in no way replaces or augments the law

  • The intervention model must always be applied in the context of a careful assessment of risk, taking into account the likelihood and extent of life loss, injury, and damage to property as a result of the intervention

  • Risk assessment is a continuous process and risk management must evolve as situations change (RCMP Incident Management Intervention Model, 2026)


Perhaps the DHS and ICE officers require more intense training in situational awareness, communication, crisis intervention, and de-escalation. The requirement to demonstrate these steps in the investigation of action in cases where lethal force was applied or face prosecution under the Law is very likely to reduce killing as the result of interactions with the public.


References

Powell, L. (n.d.). The Moral Collapse That Killed Renee Good. Facebook. Retrieved January 26, 2026, from https://www.facebook.com/HLawrencePowell/photos/the-moral-collapse-that-killed-renee-good-by-lawrence-powell-to-understand-why-m/10162282889168388/ 

RCMP Incident Management Intervention Model. (2026, January 19). Royal Canadian Mounted Police | Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Retrieved January 26, 2026, from https://rcmp.ca/en/police-intervention/incident-management-intervention-model 



Wednesday, August 27, 2025

Path to a Fascist Nation

Karl J Martin of Netflix, Inc. and works at Marvel Studios and Paramount Pictures has shared a post from

Chris Armitage, Public Policy Analyst, Former Law Enforcement Officer, Veteran, and Author that describes how the path being followed in the United States by President Trump resonates with the tragic history of Fascism.


https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhSBe0QlDP_PxDPADRBp0d5UrbsZCkzrLJD8PFGitzqe5Or7CZa6HnkUZNvAIpPU_deEx9qJTJrAfRB3z_sSq6r2IzYxQvx6bihnJ5L2ioHvJZ3D8vbXzElmeP9QovsyZNcmZmwx77ENNtxOY0GTmKxzbEikzMSVobrSWTBM2H88M9DfDPf24iVfxgv7Z_o


“In 1933, German conservatives thought they could control Hitler. Two years later, they were being executed in their own homes. I spent weeks researching this question, desperately looking for counter-examples, for hope, for any time in history where people successfully stopped fascists after they started winning elections.

Here's what I found: Once fascists win power democratically, they have never been removed democratically. Not once. Ever.

I know that sounds impossible. I kept digging, thinking surely someone, somewhere, stopped them. The actual record is so much worse than you think.

Let's start with Germany because everyone thinks they know this story. Franz von Papen, the conservative politician who convinced President Hindenburg to make Hitler Chancellor, said ‘We've hired him’ in January 1933. He thought he was so clever. Within 18 months, the Nazis were machine-gunning von Papen's allies in their homes during the Night of Long Knives. Von Papen himself barely escaped to Austria with his life. Every single conservative who thought they could ‘control’ or ‘moderate’ Hitler was either dead, in exile, or groveling for survival by 1934.

Italy was even dumber, if that's possible. October 1922, Mussolini announces he's marching on Rome with 30,000 blackshirts. Except here's the thing: they were poorly armed, disorganized, and the Italian military could have crushed them in about three hours. The King had his generals ready. He had martial law papers drawn up. The military was waiting for the order. Instead, he invited Mussolini to form a government. Just handed him power. Twenty-three years later, partisans hung Mussolini's corpse upside down at a gas station while crowds beat it with sticks. The king died in exile. Hundreds of thousands of Italians died for that moment of cowardice.

Spain might be the worst because everyone saw it coming. Three years of escalating fascist violence. Actual assassination attempts. Then in 1936, Franco and his generals launch a straight-up military coup. The Spanish Republic begged for help. France said "not our problem." Britain said ‘both sides are bad.’ America declared neutrality. The result? Franco ruled for 39 years. He died peacefully in his bed in 1975. They're still finding mass graves in Spain. Still.In 2025.

Want something more recent? Look at Hungary. Orbán won democratically in 2010. By 2011 he'd rewritten the constitution. By 2012 he controlled the media. By 2013 he'd gutted the judiciary. It's 2025 and he's still in power. The EU has been ‘very concerned’ for fourteen fucking years. They've written strongly worded letters. They've held meetings. Hungary is now a one-party state in the middle of Europe and everyone just...accepts it.

Okay, but surely someone, somewhere, stopped them?

Finland 1932 is the only clean win I can find.


The fascist Lapua Movement tried an armed coup before they'd secured government power. The military stayed loyal to democracy, crushed the rebellion, and banned the movement. That's it. That's the success story. One time out of roughly fifty attempts, fascists were stopped because they were stupid enough to try violence before winning elections.

France in 1934 looked like a victory for about five minutes. Fascist leagues tried to storm parliament on February 6th. Six days later, twelve million workers went on general strike. Twelve million. The entire country stopped. No trains, no factories, no shops, nothing. The fascists backed down. Great victory, right? Except those exact same fascists enthusiastically collaborated when the Nazis invaded six years later. They just waited.

Portugal's fascist regime finally fell in 1974. After 48 years. How? Military officers launched a coup. Democratic resistance had been crushed for five decades. International pressure meant nothing. The dictator Salazar died in 1970 and his successor just kept going until the military said enough. That's your success story: wait half a century and hope the military gets tired.

The pattern is so consistent it's almost funny if it weren't so terrifying. Every single time it goes like this: Conservatives panic about socialism or progressives or whatever. They ally with fascists as the ‘lesser evil.’ Fascists take power. Fascists immediately purge the conservatives who helped them. Then it's 30-50 years of dictatorship. This happened in Germany, Italy, Spain, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Greece, Portugal, Croatia, Romania, and Hungary.

Want to know how many times conservatives successfully ‘controlled’ the fascists they allied with? Zero. Want to know how many times fascists purged the conservatives after taking power? All of them. Every single time.


And here's the part that breaks your heart. Violence works. For them. Fascists use violence while claiming to be victims. They create chaos that ‘requires’ their authoritarian solution. Then they purge anyone who opposes them. Meanwhile, democrats keep insisting on following rules that fascists completely ignore. They file lawsuits. They write editorials. They vote on resolutions. And fascists just laugh and keep consolidating power.

The statistics are brutal. Fascist takeovers prevented after winning power democratically: zero. Average length of fascist rule once established: 31 years. Fascist regimes removed by voting: zero. Fascist regimes removed by asking nicely: zero. Most were removed by war or military coups, and tens of millions died in the process.

I'm not allowed to make the obvious contemporary comparisons, but you're already making them in your head. ‘We can control him’ is being said right now, in 2025, by people who apparently never cracked a history book.

Based on the historical record, there are exactly three ways this goes.

  • Option one: Stop them before they take power.
  • Option two: War.
  • Option three: Wait for them to die of old age.


But here's the thing: we already missed our chance. The window isn't closing; it's closed.

The Supreme Court declared Trump above the law. He's threatening to arrest political opponents. He's already sent the FBI after elected officials when they haven’t committed crimes. Congress is his. Most state governments are his. Billionaire oligarchs openly coordinate with him. The window slammed shut.

So let's stop pretending we're in the ‘prevention’ phase and start talking about what you do when fascists already control the institutions but haven't fully consolidated power yet. Because historically, nobody's been here before, not like this.

No wealthy democracy with nuclear weapons has ever fallen to fascism. The 1930s examples everyone cites were broken countries. Weimar Germany was weakened by World War I and hyperinflation. Italy was barely industrialized. Spain was largely agrarian. They didn't have the world's reserve currency. They didn't have thousands of nukes. They didn't have surveillance technology that would make the Stasi weep with envy.

America has all of that. Plus geographic isolation that makes external intervention impossible. Plus a population where 30-40% genuinely wants authoritarian rule as long as it hurts the ‘right people.’ The historical playbook is useless here. We're in unprecedented territory.

But that also means the old rules about what's possible might not apply.


Option 1: The Blue State Coalition

California's economy is bigger than the UK's. New York controls global finance. The blue states collectively represent over 60% of America's GDP. They could, theoretically, make the federal government irrelevant.

Imagine if California, Oregon, Washington, New York, Massachusetts, and others started coordinating directly. Ignoring federal mandates. Creating their own interstate compacts for everything from climate policy to civil rights. They already started this with climate agreements when Trump pulled out of Paris. But I'm talking about going much further.

State-level cryptocurrency to avoid federal monetary control. State-funded healthcare systems that ignore federal restrictions. State-level immigration policies that simply refuse to cooperate with ICE. Make the federal government have to physically enforce every single policy, stretching their resources to breaking.

The precedent? The way Northern states nullified fugitive slave laws in the 1850s. The way states are currently ignoring federal marijuana prohibition. But coordinated and comprehensive.

Option 2: Selective Compliance and Irish Democracy

The Irish called it ‘Irish Democracy’ when they were under British rule, the silent, dogged resistance of millions who simply ignored laws they found illegitimate. Don't protest. Don't riot. Just don't comply.

Red states need blue state money. Blue state taxes fund red state governments. What if millions of people in blue states simultaneously decided to claim exempt on their W-4s and simply... stopped paying federal taxes? Not as protest but as a coordinated ‘forgetting.’ Overwhelm the IRS. Make enforcement impossible.

Doctors in blue states could ignore abortion restrictions. Teachers could ignore curriculum mandates. State police could refuse to enforce federal laws. Not dramatically, just... incompetently. ‘Sorry, we couldn't find them.’ ‘The paperwork got lost.’ ‘Our systems are down.’

Make every single act of authoritarian control require physical enforcement, then make that enforcement impossibly expensive and difficult.

Option 3: Secession

We already have two incompatible visions of what America should be. One side wants a multi-ethnic democracy with a social safety net. The other wants a white Christian ethnostate with unlimited corporate power. These cannot coexist indefinitely.

What if blue states started seriously discussing secession? Not threatened as political theater but actually planned. Constitutional conventions. Referendums. Negotiations for national debt division. Military base transfers. Currency agreements.

Yes, the last time states tried to leave it caused a civil war. But that was over slavery, with clearly defined geographic boundaries and two relatively equal economic systems. This would be the economic powerhouses leaving the welfare states. What would the red states do, invade California? With what money?

The mere serious threat might be enough to force structural changes. Quebec nearly left Canada twice and got massive concessions both times just from credible threats.

Option 4: International Intervention

This has never happened to a nuclear power, but there's a first time for everything. Blue states could request UN election monitoring. They could sign their own climate agreements with the EU. They could create alternate diplomatic channels.

California could request Canadian peacekeepers for ‘election security.’ New York could invite European observers for ‘financial transparency.’ Make it embarrassing. Make America's collapse visible to the world. Force the international community to pick sides.

No, the UN can't invade America. But they can isolate it. Sanctions work. Ask Russia. International humiliation works. Ask South Africa under apartheid.

We're past normal. The fascists already won round one. They control the institutions. They have their judges. They have their media ecosystem. They have their army of true believers who will excuse anything.

But they don't have the money. They don't have the cities. They don't have the educated workforce. They don't have the young. And most importantly, they don't have legitimacy in the eyes of the majority.

The historical record says once fascists gain power, they stay for 30-50 years. But the historical record doesn't have examples of fascists taking over a country where their opposition controls most of the economy, technology, and cultural production. We're in uncharted territory, which means we need unprecedented responses.

The question isn't whether these options are extreme. They are. The question is whether we're ready to admit that normal is already gone. The window to prevent fascism closed. But the opportunity for something else, something unprecedented, might just be opening.

The German conservatives who said ‘we can control him’ were all dead or fled within two years. We're just months into our version of this story. The question is: are we going to be the first generation that finds a new way out, or are we going to be another cautionary tale future historians write about?

At least we're finally asking the right questions.”

- Chris Armitage




References

Martin, K. J. (n.d.). White Rose Resistance. Facebook. Retrieved August 27, 2025, from https://www.facebook.com/whiteroseresistanceofficial/ 




Friday, December 6, 2024

Stop the Genocide

If the IDF is killing Palestinians because they are Palestinians, that action is evidence for a charge of genocide against the State of Israel. If the IDF is ignoring their responsibility to exercise discrimination and proportionality in their attacks in Gaza then there is evidence for violation of International Humanitarian Law and charges of war crimes against those responsible for conducting the war. In recent months, the assessment of some human rights organizations and moral leaders has been leaning to accusations of genocide and war crimes at the hands of the armed forces of Israel.


(
Photo by Eyad BABA / AFP via Getty Images)


Muhammad Abu Salmiya, Director of Al-Shifa Hospital, in an article with supporting references in the Lancet concludes that more than 85% of Gaza’s population have been displaced, at least 33,000 Palestinians have been killed, and 70,000 civilians have been injured.


Since the attacks by Hamas against Israel on Oct 7, 2023,1 the Israeli retaliatory strikes, bombings, and strict sieges have almost never stopped. So far, more than 85% of Gaza's population have been displaced,2 and as of April 13, 2024, at least 33 000 Palestinians have been killed (more than a third of them are children)3 and 70 000 civilians have been injured.4 Approximately 7000 Palestinians are reportedly missing—most are likely dead.3,4 This massacre has taken place in just 180 days and is still ongoing.3 Gaza has now been described as a graveyard of children by the UN.4 According to WHO and Médecins Sans Frontières, hospitals in southern Gaza are at “breaking point” while all the hospitals in northern Gaza have been destroyed and are out of service.5 There is very limited access to ambulances, electricity, and clean drinking water, and injured patients are being transferred to medical institutes by donkey carts.6 The UN announced that the number of health-care workers killed by Israeli strikes is the highest in any single conflict in the organisation's history.7 Josep Borrell, a High Representative for the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, has described the destruction in Gaza as being proportionally greater than that which Germany experienced in World War 2.8

A key aspect of this war is the deliberate targeting of civilians by the Israeli military—for example, in just one investigation by Amnesty International, US-made munitions were found to be used by the Israeli military in two deadly, unlawful air strikes on homes containing civilians in Gaza.9 These air strikes were either direct attacks on civilians or civilian objects or indiscriminate attacks and Amnesty International is calling for them to be investigated as war crimes.9

(References cited above are detailed in web article) (Abu Salmiya, n.d.)


Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International, reports that Amnesty International’s research has found sufficient basis to conclude that Israel has committed and is continuing to commit genocide against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip.


The report, ‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza, documents how, during its military offensive launched in the wake of the deadly Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel on October 7, 2023, Israel has unleashed hell and destruction on Palestinians in Gaza brazenly, continuously and with total impunity.



“Amnesty International’s report demonstrates that Israel has carried out acts prohibited under the Genocide Convention, with the specific intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza. These acts include killings, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and deliberately inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction. Month after month, Israel has treated Palestinians in Gaza as a subhuman group unworthy of human rights and dignity, demonstrating its intent to physically destroy them,” said Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International.



“Our damning findings must serve as a wake-up call to the international community: this is genocide. It must stop now. (Callamard, n.d.)


On 14 November 2024 the UN Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices* said in a new report that Israel’s warfare in Gaza is consistent with the characteristics of genocide, with mass civilian casualties and life-threatening conditions intentionally imposed on Palestinians.


The report documents how Israel’s extensive bombing campaign in Gaza has decimated essential services and unleashed an environmental catastrophe that will have lasting health impacts. By early 2024, over 25,000 tons of explosives—equivalent to two nuclear bombs—had been dropped on Gaza, causing massive destruction and the collapse of water and sanitation systems, agricultural devastation, and toxic pollution.


“By destroying vital water, sanitation and food systems, and contaminating the environment, Israel has created a lethal mix of crises that will inflict severe harm on generations to come,” the Committee said. (UN Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices, n.d.)


The report raises serious concerns about Israel’s use of AI-enhanced targeting systems in directing its military operations, and the impact it has had on civilians, particularly evident in the overwhelming number of women and children among the casualties.


“The Israeli military’s use of AI-assisted targeting, with minimal human oversight, combined with heavy bombs, underscores Israel’s disregard of its obligation to distinguish between civilians and combatants and take adequate safeguards to prevent civilian deaths,” the Committee said. (UN Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices, n.d.)


The concerns of human rights organizations about the possibility of genocide and war crimes being committed by Israel follow similar concern that Giada Zampano from AP Rome reports that Pope Francis has called for an investigation to determine if Israel’s attacks in Gaza constitute genocide, according to excerpts released from an upcoming new book ahead of the pontiff’s jubilee year. 



References

Abu Salmiya, M. (n.d.). Stop the Gaza genocide immediately. thelancet. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)00135-1/fulltext 

Callamard, A. (n.d.). ‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman’: Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza. Amnesty International investigation concludes Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. https://amnesty.ca/gazagenocide/ 

UN Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices. (n.d.). UN Special Committee finds Israel’s warfare methods in Gaza consistent with genocide, including use of starvation as weapon of war. OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/11/un-special-committee-finds-israels-warfare-methods-gaza-consistent-genocide 


Sunday, March 17, 2024

Responsible AI in Gaza against Hamas

The prosecution of the war against Hamas by the IDF is enhanced by artificial intelligence systems ability to select targets and predict civilian casualties. The US State Department has developed a political declaration on ethical military AI.



The military is weighing heavily how to use AI. (Graphic by Breaking Defense, original images via Getty and DVIDS)

Sydney J. Freedberg Jr., writer for Breaking Defense since 2011, deputy editor for the site's first decade, covering technology, strategy, and policy with a particular focus on the US Army, reports on the first of many annual meetings of the countries that signed on to the US ``Political Declaration” on military AI. The countries have shared model policies and best practices on everything from combat robots to back-office algorithms.



Thirteen months after the State Department rolled out its Political Declaration on ethical military AI at an international conference in the Hague, representatives from the countries who signed on will gather outside of Washington to discuss next steps.


“We really want to have a system to keep states focused on the issue of responsible AI and really focused on building practical capacity,” a senior State Department Official told Breaking Defense.


State wants this to be the first of an indefinite series of annual conferences hosted by fellow signatory states around the world. In between these general sessions, the State official explained, smaller groups of like-minded nations should get together for exchanges, workshops, wargames, and more — “anything to build awareness of the issue and to take some concrete steps” towards implementing the declaration’s 10 broad principles. (Freedberg Jr., n.d.)



The endorsing States believe that the following measure should be implemented in the development, deployment, or use of military AI capabilities, including those enabling autonomous functions and systems.


B. States should take appropriate steps, such as legal reviews, to ensure that their military AI will be used consistent with their respective obligations under international law, in particular international humanitarian law. States should also consider how to use military AI capabilities to enhance their implementation of international humanitarian law and to improve the protection of civilians and civilian objects in armed conflict.


Indeed, it’s a hallmark of State’s Political Declaration — and the Pentagon’s approach to AI ethics, from which it draws — that it addresses not just futuristic “killer robots” and SkyNet-style supercomputers, but also other military uses of AI that, while less dramatic, are already happening today. That includes mundane administration and industrial applications of AI, such as predictive maintenance. But it also encompasses military intelligence AIs that help designate targets for lethal strikes, such as the American Project Maven and the Israeli Gospel (Habsora). (Latest-Version-Political-Declaration-On-Responsible-Military-Use-Of-AI-And-Autonomy, n.d.)


Harry Davies, Bethan McKernan and Dan Sabbagh in Jerusalem, writing for the Guardian, reports on how Israel uses AI to select bombing targets in Gaza. Concern is expressed over a data driven ‘factory’ that significantly increases the number of targets for strikes in the Palestinian territory.



The latest Israel-Hamas war has provided an unprecedented opportunity for the IDF to use such tools in a much wider theatre of operations and, in particular, to deploy an AI target-creation platform called “the Gospel”, which has significantly accelerated a lethal production line of targets that officials have compared to a “factory”.


However a short statement on the IDF website claimed it was using an AI-based system called Habsora (the Gospel, in English) in the war against Hamas to “produce targets at a fast pace”.


The IDF said that “through the rapid and automatic extraction of intelligence”, the Gospel produced targeting recommendations for its researchers “with the goal of a complete match between the recommendation of the machine and the identification carried out by a person”.


One official, who worked on targeting decisions in previous Gaza operations, said the IDF had not previously targeted the homes of junior Hamas members for bombings. They said they believed that had changed for the present conflict, with the houses of suspected Hamas operatives now targeted regardless of rank.


“That is a lot of houses,” the official told +972/Local Call. “Hamas members who don’t really mean anything live in homes across Gaza. So they mark the home and bomb the house and kill everyone there.” 


However, experts in AI and armed conflict who spoke to the Guardian said they were sceptical of assertions that AI-based systems reduced civilian harm by encouraging more accurate targeting.


“Look at the physical landscape of Gaza,” said Richard Moyes, a researcher who heads Article 36, a group that campaigns to reduce harm from weapons.


“We’re seeing the widespread flattening of an urban area with heavy explosive weapons, so to claim there’s precision and narrowness of force being exerted is not borne out by the facts.”(Davies et al., 2023)


Multiple sources told the Guardian and +972/Local Call that when a strike was authorised on the private homes of individuals identified as Hamas or Islamic Jihad operatives, target researchers knew in advance the number of civilians expected to be killed.


Each target, they said, had a file containing a collateral damage score that stipulated how many civilians were likely to be killed in a strike.


One source who worked until 2021 on planning strikes for the IDF said “the decision to strike is taken by the on-duty unit commander”, some of whom were “more trigger happy than others”.


The source said there had been occasions when “there was doubt about a target” and “we killed what I thought was a disproportionate amount of civilians”.


An Israeli military spokesperson said: “In response to Hamas’ barbaric attacks, the IDF operates to dismantle Hamas military and administrative capabilities. In stark contrast to Hamas’ intentional attacks on Israeli men, women and children, the IDF follows international law and takes feasible precautions to mitigate civilian harm.” (Davies et al., 2023)


Two key components of international humanitarian law are discrimination and proportionality. The advanced intelligence gathering systems of the IDF are capable of distinguishing military combatants from civilians thus enabling the discrimination required. Technology that guides smart proportionally sized munitions to military targets allows the IDF to control the collateral damage to life sustaining civilian infrastructure in Gaza. The nations that have signed the United States “Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence” express the principle that military forces must enhance their implementation of international humanitarian law and to improve the protection of civilians and civilian objects in armed conflict. UN experts have welcomed the suspension of arms transfers to Israel by Belgium, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and the Japanese company Itochu Corporation. The European Union also recently discouraged arms exports to Israel. The post Arms exports to Israel notes that Canada’s Minister of Foreign, Affairs, Mélanie Joly, is reported as being increasingly concerned about the role of Canada in supplying arms to Israel.



References

Davies, H., McKernan, B., & Sabbagh, D. (2023, December 1). 'The Gospel': how Israel uses AI to select bombing targets in Gaza. The Guardian. Retrieved March 17, 2024, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/01/the-gospel-how-israel-uses-ai-to-select-bombing-targets 

Freedberg Jr., S. J. (n.d.). 40-plus countries convening next week to thrash out ‘responsible AI’ for military use. Breaking Defense. Retrieved March 17, 2024, from https://breakingdefense.com/2024/03/40-plus-countries-convening-next-week-to-thrash-out-responsible-ai-for-military-use/ 

Latest-Version-Political-Declaration-on-Responsible-Military-Use-of-AI-and-Autonomy. (n.d.). Political Declaration on Responsible Military Use of Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy. Retrieved March 17, 2024, from https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Latest-Version-Political-Declaration-on-Responsible-Military-Use-of-AI-and-Autonomy.pdf