Mission Logs

Complicity is knowingly taking part in others' wrongdoing; its categories are direct complicity (actively contributing), beneficial complicity (profiting from the violations) and silent complicity (failing to speak up and use one's influence). * The three categories of complicit...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

(a) Prohibited, sanctioned goods: companies must comply, since evading sanctions is illegal and morally wrong. (b) Explicitly permitted essential goods: supplying them is legitimate and can even be a moral duty. (c) Implicitly permitted non-essential goods: allowed, but in tensio...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

Direct complicity covers companies that take part in the war or supply goods, services or financing that can be used for it, such as weapons, arms production or military logistics. Beneficial complicity covers companies that profit from the violations, such as by buying and resel...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

The EU aims at Russia's elites, assuming they can influence the government's decisions; but none of the core groups in Putin's inner circle has an interest in pushing him to end the war, so the luxury ban is an unlikely lever for policy change. Non-essential goods are generally l...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

Because companies are not obliged to speak out when the state threatens retaliation they cannot realistically fend off, and Russia criminalises even calling the war a "war", with up to 15 years in prison. The argument for silent complicity is that multinationals are powerful, so...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

Because states deliberately keep essential goods off their sanction lists to spare civilians; a general exodus turns targeted sanctions into immoral comprehensive ones, with unpredictable humanitarian consequences, and escalates sanctions beyond the control of the sanctioning sta...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

Directly complicit companies must stop the violations, make amends and end all relations with the violators, and beneficiaries should compensate victims. International guidelines don't normally demand leaving the country. The tax argument extends complicity to every company, sinc...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

Because it amounts to a comprehensive economic embargo, and comprehensive embargoes cause huge humanitarian harm to the civilian population, hitting the weakest and most vulnerable groups hardest. If every company leaves, the effect is the same as a total economic embargo. Such e...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

Comprehensive sanctions hit a country's economy as a whole; targeted sanctions burden only the state representatives responsible for the war or the human-rights violations. The shift came because comprehensive sanctions harm civilians, which violates the principle of discriminati...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026

Whether multinational companies are morally obliged to leave an aggressor state such as Russia simply because they operate there; it answers with the theory of complicity and the theory of sanctions, both framed by just war theory. After Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine...

Quiz: ETHIK / Companies in Aggressor States: Stay or Leave? | updated: Nov 01, 2026