Zkuq said:
OK, thanks for the clarification! All this makes a lot of sense to me, although the pretending to negotiation a truce/alliance part still surprises me somewhat. |
So worth noting a lot of these warcrime concepts formulated in the 19th and early 20th centuries following a period of centuries of almost constant warfare on the European continent where it was observed that backroom deals and deceptions and secret negotiations and exploitation of the common rules of war and such consistently amplified the destructiveness of conflicts. This gave rise to informal rules about general conduct in warfare that were codified beginning in the mid 1800s.
If neither side can trust the other to negotiate in good faith, accept a surrender, offer a surrender, distinguish themselves from civilians, etc, then the only logical course is wars of annihilation. That is why perfidy is a war crime.







