Much as I hate to provide any further publicity 'oxygen' to the latest potential addition to Ecuador's population, I do think that I have a solution to the problem.
The UK (surely immediately followed by Sweden) should cut all diplomatic ties with Ecuador. Close our embassy there and oblige them to close theirs in the UK. At that point, all of their diplomats and anyone else inside their UK embassy will need to leave and Assange can be nabbed before he leaves the country. He does not, as far as has been reported, have any diplomatic status or protection outside of the embassy.
There is the risk that the Ecuadoreans will try to smuggle him out in a box or some other kind of diplomatic bag. Really, can you see this self-publicist being gagged and man-handled and not getting the chance to fulfill his martyr's destiny? No, neither can I.
We can expect sabre rattling and faux outrage from the usual suspects in Latin America but do we really care? If Mrs Kirchner makes another speech denouncing the colonialist UK, will we pay it any heed or will we just see it for the pandering that it is? Mr Chavez will no doubt show 'solidarity' with his Ecuadorean cousins and if he (and Mrs Kirchner, come to that) decided they wanted to close their respective embassies in the UK, would we care?
It would probably seem mischievous, to say nothing of downright over-optimistic, to suggest that our EU partners might follow suit and also close their embassies, wouldn't it? The silence from European capitals and the EU Foreign Affairs High Priestess (Catherine Ashton, in case you have forgotten!) has been truly deafening! I wonder if the lure of anti-Americanism is just to hard to resist?
So cut-off relations, show Ecuador that having the very dubious pleasure of Assange's company actually has a price and make them pay it.
On the upside, the UK Treasury will have been boosted by £250K from that forfeited bail money and it just might make the fools that paid it, think twice before they jump on the next band-wagon that comes along.
The UK (surely immediately followed by Sweden) should cut all diplomatic ties with Ecuador. Close our embassy there and oblige them to close theirs in the UK. At that point, all of their diplomats and anyone else inside their UK embassy will need to leave and Assange can be nabbed before he leaves the country. He does not, as far as has been reported, have any diplomatic status or protection outside of the embassy.
There is the risk that the Ecuadoreans will try to smuggle him out in a box or some other kind of diplomatic bag. Really, can you see this self-publicist being gagged and man-handled and not getting the chance to fulfill his martyr's destiny? No, neither can I.
We can expect sabre rattling and faux outrage from the usual suspects in Latin America but do we really care? If Mrs Kirchner makes another speech denouncing the colonialist UK, will we pay it any heed or will we just see it for the pandering that it is? Mr Chavez will no doubt show 'solidarity' with his Ecuadorean cousins and if he (and Mrs Kirchner, come to that) decided they wanted to close their respective embassies in the UK, would we care?
It would probably seem mischievous, to say nothing of downright over-optimistic, to suggest that our EU partners might follow suit and also close their embassies, wouldn't it? The silence from European capitals and the EU Foreign Affairs High Priestess (Catherine Ashton, in case you have forgotten!) has been truly deafening! I wonder if the lure of anti-Americanism is just to hard to resist?
So cut-off relations, show Ecuador that having the very dubious pleasure of Assange's company actually has a price and make them pay it.
On the upside, the UK Treasury will have been boosted by £250K from that forfeited bail money and it just might make the fools that paid it, think twice before they jump on the next band-wagon that comes along.
Assange should face the charges he accused of in Sweden. However, economists like Joseph Stiglitz highlight the gross abuse of the political and economic institutions that govern globalisation by the US and to some extent the UK. This enables developed nations to prosper at the expense of developing nations. US farm subsidies and the developed nations stance on global warming are some examples.
ReplyDeleteSo it's hardly surprising that a country like Ecuador has taken this opportunity to use a pawn like Assange to frustrate the US and the UK. So perhaps we should consider the wider picture before being too critical of a struggling nation like Ecuador.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteJohn,
DeleteI have only read a little of Stiglitz and some of what he has written is worthwhile, though, and it's a big though, he tends to come at everything from a left of centre perspective. When you start from there, it is difficult to get to a place of reason.
The ciminality expressed by programmes like US farm subsidies and the EU Common Agricultural Policy do need to be addressed.
However, none of that, not one little bit, has anything to do with Assange. He is simply a man that is wanted for questioning on charges of serious sexual assault, in Sweden. He is a man who has used the courts of the UK to seek to avoid questioning and then the processes of the UK, (being granted bail) to escape the outcome of those legal processes.
Simply put, he is an opportunistic and self-serving coward. And that statement applies regardless of the situation in Sweden.
What has been very interesting, in the last week, is to watch and listen to the 'left' tying itself into all sorts of knots over Assange.
We have the mysoginist, 4 times married Galloway with talk of Assange merely being guilty of a breach of 'sexual etiquette'. If The Sun or The Daily Telegraph reported such words, they would be accused of gutter journalism or of making them up, or both. But 'darling George', (from the Respect party, I kid you not) will get away with it because he is anti-US.
Then we have others from the 'left' who stand with those of us on the 'right' who say that 'no means no' and all rape is wrong. These folks are suffering most because they applaud the anxiety that Assange initially caused the US and so just love his anti-US credentials but can't really support his shying away from facing up to the accusations. To say nothing of Ecuador's world famous support of campaigning journalism and the pursuit of truth!!
I understand that the fund to pay someone to set-off the fire alarm at the Ecuador Embassy, now exceeds £6,500. If I was one of those bail providers, I might think about contributing a hefty chunk to the pot,to tip it over the edge. Just a thought!
Is Assange's issue (and my reference to the US) not that once he's extradited to Sweden he'll then face extradition to the US where they'll bang him up for a very long time for being a whistleblower?
DeleteI thought the US to punish him for a) undermining US security by publishing embarassing incidents, b) stop others from providing WikiLeaks with material to publish and c) deter others from being whistleblowers.
If I was Ecuador, I now have a pawn to play in a game against the might of the US. Might be a tenuous link but is Ecuador not in an $18bn legal battle with Chevron related to environment damage? Could there be a behind the scenes deal enabling Ecuador to release Assange in return for something?
It may sound naive (I will come back to that in a moment) but right now the sole issue is Assange evading the legal processes and doing so after having used them. So doing it because they didn't go his way.
DeleteThere is no US arrest warrant out for Assange, as far as I can establish, so I think his 'fear' is ungrounded. It isn't as though the US hasn't had ample time to construct a case for hm to answer!
Consider also that the UK has a far more easy and more-used extradition treaty with the USA. Many in the UK think it is too one-sided but most would say that it is not just a piece of law that sits, unused, on the statute book!
Naive? I am not sure how making an extradition martyr out of Assange and then a 'victim of the US justice system' would serve America's interest. The damage done to America's relations with the world was time-limited. Yes things were 'sticky' for a while but at the end of the day, what is going to happen (or what did)? Are the other parties to these communications going to cease doing business or meeting with US officials? Of course not! Maybe there will be a little less candour in correspondence but I am not sure how that does anything other than promote secrecy rather than shine the light on it (which is a supposed Wikileak mission).
Put simply, Assange should face-up to his accusers. He should stop being played as a pawn by the Ecuadoreans and other 'loco latinos' in their battles with the US.