Which POWs were/are typically treated the worst?

[Ignotus]

@billfish678

I seem to recall someone here posting the factoid that at the end of WWII, Japan had to return the Chinese prisoners of war it still had. All 56 of them :eek:

So, as far as a percentage survival rate, that HAS to rank WAY up there as sucky treatment…and probably going a good darn way back in the past for that matter.

ISTR that the US troops didn’t take a lot of Japanese prisoners either…

[Nansbread1]

Although not at war there has been numerous border clashes between India and Pakistan. There was a report recently that a captured Indian officer was tortured beyond imagination by the Pakstani forces and when his body was handed back it caused a big uproar for he cruelty that was quite clear to see.

[Mr.Kobayashi]

@Ignotus

ISTR that the US troops didn’t take a lot of Japanese prisoners either…

There are a couple of reasons for this, the Japanese used the tactic of ‘I surrender, suckers’, faking surrender then attacking. Although it’s open to interpretation Americans at the time believed that the Goettge Patrol in 1942 had been wiped out almost to a man by a fake surrender. Doubtless many of the same reasons of mutilation of the dead came into it, revenge, brutalisation, dehumanisation and so on. It’s been argued that the nature of jungle warfare was a disincentive, in that it happened at close range and attempting to take prisoners rather than shoot would get you killed.

There are exceptions to the rule though, see the extraordinary story of the ‘Pied Piper of Saipan’, and that the Japanese PoWs numbered in the thousands at Okinawa.

[Donnerwetter]

The German High Command issued an order in 1945 that the sniper’s badge had to be removed before capture, since predominantly Soviet troops immediately shot every captured enemy sniper wearing it.[1]
[1] Sniper's Badge - Wikipedia (there is an additional cite in the German Wikipedia article)

[Dissonance]

@Voyager

In WW II the Germans treated the Russians much worse than the Americans because the Soviet Union treated German prisoners worse - and I think did not subscribe to the Geneva Convention. So, tit for tat counts.

I missed this on the first read through, at least the Geneva Convention nonsense. This was the bullshit attempt at a justification made by Adolf Hitler for the clearly illegal Commissar Order issued by him before invading the Soviet Union that all political commissars were to be shot out of hand, the pertinent parts of the order reading:

In the battle against Bolshevism, the adherence of the enemy to the principles of humanity or international law is not to be counted upon. In particular it can be expected that those of us who are taken prisoner will be treated with hatred, cruelty and inhumanity by political commissars of every kind.

The troops must be aware that:

1. In this battle mercy or considerations of international law is false. They are a danger to our own safety and to the rapid pacification of the conquered territories.

2. The originators of barbaric, Asiatic methods of warfare are the political commissars. So immediate and unhesitatingly severe measures must be undertaken against them. They are therefore, when captured in battle, as a matter of routine to be dispatched by firearms.

As to this tripe about the USSR not being a signatory of the Geneva Convention of 1929, it is perfectly clear that Hitler himself knew the order was illegal as when issuing it he also pardoned in advance any German soldiers who broke international law, in his own words:

“The war against Russia cannot be fought in knightly fashion. The struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be waged with unprecedented, unmerciful, and unrelenting hardness. All officers will have to get rid of any old fashioned ideas they may have. I realize that the necessity for conducting such warfare is beyond the comprehension of you generals, but I must insist that my orders be followed without complaint. The commissars hold views directly opposite to those of National Socialism. Hence these commissars must be eliminated. Any German soldier who breaks international law will be pardoned. Russia did not take part in the Hague Convention and, therefore, has no rights under it.”

Russian Tsar Nicholas II had in fact convened the 1899 Hague Convention, one assumes he meant the Soviet Union as a distinct entity from the Russian Empire hadn’t. This still leaves the order illegal though:

Hitler was well aware that this order was illegal, but personally absolved in advance any soldiers who violated international law in enforcing this order. He erroneously claimed that the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 did not apply since the Soviets hadn’t signed them.[5] In fact, Russia had signed both conventions. However, the Soviet Union, as a distinct entity from the Russian Empire, did not, in fact, sign the Geneva Convention of 1929.

While the Soviet Union did not sign the 1929 convention, Germany did and was bound by article 82, stating “In case, in time of war, one of the belligerents is not a party to the Convention, its provisions shall nevertheless remain in force as between the belligerents who are parties thereto.”