Striking The Colors - in International Law

In International Law

1. "Colors. A national flag (or a battle ensign). The colors . . . are hauled down as a token of submission."
2. International law absolutely requires a ship of war to fly its ensign at the commencement of any hostile acts, i.e., before firing on the enemy. During battle there is no purpose in striking the colors other than to indicate surrender.
3. It was and is an offense to continue to fight after striking one's colors, and an offense to continue to fire on an enemy after she has struck her colors, unless he indicates by some other action, such as continuing to fire or seeking to escape, that he has not truly surrendered. It is for this reason that Raphael Semmes spoke with bitter sarcasm about USS Kearsarge's continuing to fire after CSS Alabama had struck her colors in their 1864 duel. (Contemporary sources aboard the Kearsarge reported that at least one of the Alabama's guns continued firing after the Confederate commerce raider had struck her colors). For this reason, striking the colors is conclusive evidence of a surrender having taken place in the case of a warship, but not in the case of a merchant ship. What would be perfidy in the case of a warship is not in the case of a merchant ship: A merchant ship may strike its colors as a ruse de guerre in an attempt to escape capture, since it does not engage the enemy in combat.
4. In distinction to striking one's colors, hoisting a white flag, in itself, is not an indication of surrender. Rather, hoisting a white flag indicates a request for a truce in order to communicate with the enemy. Under the Geneva Convention, persons carrying or waving a white flag are not to be fired upon, nor are they allowed to open fire.