Airlines really do not want an entire aircraft refused landing because of one person. All the pre-departure paperwork procedures exist to prevent this from happening. Airlines won't go along with "just board them anyways" schemes unless forced to do so under threat. If they do cooperate (or are forced to) it gives the destination country cause to void that airline's licenses without risk of reciprocal sanctions against its own airlines. Dragging commercial airlines into a political dispute like this won't work.
I realize nations do this, but do nations like Australia or the U.S., which fancy themselves more in harmony with the rule of law, want to be put in that position?
Which reminds me, many nations, such as the U.S., have domestic laws which would prevent denying re-entry to citizens. The airplane example isn't the best because there are many technical ways to stop inbound air traffic[1]; ports of entry at land borders, not so much.
[1] Stopping outbound air traffic is even easier as a technical matter.
You simply deny the validity of their travel documents.
China does this all the time:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-deportations-ex...
Airlines really do not want an entire aircraft refused landing because of one person. All the pre-departure paperwork procedures exist to prevent this from happening. Airlines won't go along with "just board them anyways" schemes unless forced to do so under threat. If they do cooperate (or are forced to) it gives the destination country cause to void that airline's licenses without risk of reciprocal sanctions against its own airlines. Dragging commercial airlines into a political dispute like this won't work.
reply