Identifiability of multivariate instrumental variable model I'm interested in estimating the effects of $X_1$ and $X_2$ on $Y$ in the directed acyclic graph below. $U_1$ and $U_2$ are unobserved confounders. Based on Definition 7.4.1 on p. 248 of  Causality 2nd Ed. by Pearl, $\boldsymbol Z = \{Z_1, Z_2, Z_3\}$ is not admissible as an instrumental variable for estimating the effects of $X_1$ and $X_2$ on $Y$.
This is because, for example, to estimate the effect of $X_1$ on $Y$, we need to block the path between $\boldsymbol Z$ and $Y$ by conditioning on $X_2$, but doing so opens the collider $\boldsymbol Z \rightarrow X_2 \leftarrow U_2$, violating the exclusion assumption.
Is it nevertheless appropriate to use two stage least squares (2SLS) for estimating the effects of $X_1$ and $X_2$ on $Y$ for this DAG? Are there any additional assumptions that could make this problem identifiable?


I think this is a case where you have to consider all the variables at once, instead of one-at-a-time. Consider the classic setup for instrumental variables:

Here $U_Y$ is unmeasured. The rule for $I$ being an instrument is that it is $d$-connected to $X$ in the original graph above, and $d$-separated from $Y$ in this graph:

The $d$-separation occurs because $X$ is an unconditioned collider, which prevents information flow.
Now all of these considerations hold in your case, although they only hold in the aggregate. That is, the sets
\begin{align*}
Z&=\{Z_1,Z_2,Z_3\}\\
X&=\{X_1,X_2\}
\end{align*}
obey these rules, taken as a whole. The set $Z$ is $d$-connected to $X,$ clearly. Now what happens if you delete all the arrows from the set $X$ to $Y?$ The set $X$ acts as an unconditioned collider for any causal information that might want to go from $Z$ to $Y.$ Hence $Z$ is $d$-separated from $Y$ in the modified graph. Therefore, $Z$ is an instrument for $X.$
