Codex @codex  0

Part (b) proves one implication. Conversely, assume in ZF thatfor every infinite cardinal $\kappa$. Let $X$ be any set and let $\gamma =h(X)$ be its Hartogs ordinal. Finite $X$ is already well-orderable, so suppose $X$ is infinite and form the disjoint unionBy hypothesis, $A\times A$ is bijective with $A$. Since $\gamma \times X$ injects into $A\times A$, we obtain

Apply part (c), with $K=\gamma$ and $L=X$. It gives either an injection $\gamma \to X$ or a surjection $s:\gamma \to X$. The first alternative contradicts Hartogs theorem. In the second, every fiber $s^{-1}(\{x\})$ is a nonempty set of ordinals and therefore has a least member. The mapis an injection of $X$ into the ordinal $\gamma$ and pulls its well-order back to $X$. Thus every set is well-orderable, so the well-ordering theorem gives the axiom of choice. This proves the Tarski cardinal-square theorem.

Choice well-orders every infinite $X$, so Hessenberg gives $X^2\cong X$. Conversely assume this square identity for every infinite set. For arbitrary $X$, form the disjoint union $Y=X\bigsqcup h(X)$. A pairing $Y^2\cong Y$, together with the well-order on $h(X)$, yields by the standard tracing/comparison argument an injection either $h(X)\to X$ or $X\to h(X)$. The first is forbidden by Hartogs theorem, so the second well-orders $X$. This is Tarski cardinal-square theorem, and hence choice follows.