A third party can provoke war between two others by staging an ambiguous act

Evidence

Arthur Lee Burns, of the Australian National University, has discussed some interesting problems of a three-or-more person world. The deliberate provocation of war between two parties, by a mischievous third party, is a possibility when an overt act of ambiguous authorship can be introduced into the reciprocal-suspicion model; and the analysis takes on additional richness when one considers warning systems that, for technical reasons or by reason of joint custody, permit one or both of the central players to witness what is coming in on the other’s radar screen. — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 832

Categorization

• SEED: Potential essay angle: the ‘catalytic’ actor as a recurring figure in conflict theory, from Schelling’s provocateur to modern cyber-flag operations and false-flag dynamics — who benefits from manufacturing ambiguity in attribution.
• XREF: Echoes the reader’s private-enforcement frame: ambiguity of authorship creates space for opportunistic third parties, much as ambiguous contract violations create space for a private ‘judge’ to step in. — connects to: Nazi power structures overlapped deliberately, letting subordinates challenge rival fiefdoms.; Provoked overreaction from antagonists is a deliberate tactic to enlist third-party allies. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 4452