Which fallacy occurs when a government is exempt from a peace agreement by claiming there are no rebels in their territory?

The fallacy that occurs when a government claims it is exempt from a peace agreement by asserting that there are no rebels in their territory is referred to as Victory by Definition. This fallacy happens when a person or group defines a situation in such a way that any reference to opposition or conflict is eliminated, thereby claiming an unfair advantage.

In this scenario, the government asserts that the absence of recognized rebels justifies its non-participation in a peace agreement. By redefining the conditions of the agreement based on their own terms—namely, the claim that there are no rebels—they are effectively declaring victory over a conflict that may not genuinely be resolved. This approach can obscure complex realities and dismiss the experiences or claims of those who might dissent, which are essential to a full understanding of the situation.

Victory by Definition highlights how language and definitions can be manipulated to present a false sense of resolution or authority, often to avoid engaging with the actual issues at hand.