TA的每日心情 | 开心 2023-3-1 00:08 |
---|
签到天数: 2397 天 [LV.Master]无
|
本帖最后由 MacArthur 于 2013-4-2 14:07 编辑 . Z# `3 [4 t+ ^$ K5 V( A; s
天边一只猴 发表于 2013-4-2 13:14
- X( ]7 N# F4 C3 i& d9 n7 G日内瓦公约只是定义了战俘的身份和对战俘的待遇。没说啥样的是间谍,也没说啥样的该杀。身份标识不清的人 ...
) i3 W. e' m( C多谢澄清。查了一下,是这样的:日内瓦第三公约定义“战俘”的身份,并没有明确规定一定要穿己方军装。也就是说,穿对方军装,仍有可能按“战俘”待遇处理。
9 y: X8 L+ T2 Q( _, R5 \/ G) ~1 c+ v+ |. a5 C9 ?
但是那个“穿敌人军装按间谍处死”的说法,也并非没有来由 -- 大约是在二战起初,德军入侵法国和低地国家时,有流言云身着敌军制服的德国伞兵从天而降大肆破坏,搞得西欧人心惶惶,法国政府遂宣布“凡身着联军制服的德国伞兵可安间谍罪名,依军法处死”。德国政府自然要极力否认。但这种做法一直就被当作一种“常规”,通行于二战的战场之上。英军在克里特岛处决德国伞兵、德军处决苏军游击队、美军处决渗透德军、意大利军队枪决被俘英军伞兵,都依此为“据”。
( L) y% R8 C7 z Q' {. b7 K
5 f4 Y# F T2 H' `* s3 r% o0 @1 k+ V战后同盟国们也意识到这个法律“依据”并不是那么理直气壮,遂起草了《日内瓦第四公约》,规定为保护平民起,军人在战斗中须明确标识:
+ ` L- Z; U3 o0 BModern laws of war regarding conduct during war (jus in bello), such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, provide that it is unlawful for belligerents to engage in combat without meeting certain requirements, among them the wearing of a distinctive uniform or other distinctive signs visible at a distance, and the carrying of weapons openly. Impersonating soldiers of the other side by wearing the enemy’s uniform is allowed, though fighting in that uniform is unlawful perfidy, as is the taking of hostages. |
|