TJ. I thought you would conveniently forget that the discussion was about people escaping from China being shot in the back. Similarly, East German guards would shoot escaping people in the back. Look, convicted: nytimes.com Perhaps the equivalent in China will be prosecuted as criminals too. < Peter Fechter bled to death in the death strip, on 17 August, 1962. This led to a public outcry. American troops watched him, but could not help him. The East-German border policemen, who had wounded him, did not help him either.
In 1966, two children, aged ten and thirteen years, were killed in the border strip. This is unusual because the East German border police had orders to not shoot on pregnant women, children or mentally ill people. > There is no statute of limitations. China approves: 
You seem unable to distinguish between shooting people in the front to stop invasion and shooting in the back to stop escape. Since the question is about China's policy, it is not surprising that the difference bewilders you. Those who escaped to West Berlin could easily be returned if unwelcome. They were welcome. India could easily refuse entry to escapees from China. Swimming for freedom from China. news.google.com
Contrary to your false belief, there is no international law against escape and seeking of asylum should the receiving country willingly accept the refugee. On the contrary, there are international agreements regarding accepting refugees. Receiving countries do not always willingly accept such escapees. For example, a Made in China murderer escaped back there having committed his crime in NZ, only to be captured by China's bosses at the request of NZ police, and put on trial. China is apparently going to keep him, but not with his freedom intact. Good riddance.
Mqurice |
