A 3am-standoff between British police and officials at the Ecuador embassy in Knightsbridge, London notwithstanding, Ecuadorian Foreign Minister Patiño underscored his government’s firm view on the case of Julian Assange when he announced on Thursday, “The government of Ecuador, true to its tradition of protecting those who seek refuge in its territory or on the premises of diplomatic missions, has decided to grant diplomatic asylum to citizen Assange.”
The Minister’s remarks came in the face of an unprecedented – some would say brazen – raid by the police to allegedly arrest Mr. Assange from the embassy, where he sought refuge on June 19, and extradite him to Sweden was said to be planned. Mr. Assange is not only formally sought by authorities in Sweden in a pending case against him, but along with his organisation he is held responsible for publishing thousands of confidential cables of the U.S. State Department.
One unanswered question on most observers’ minds at this time was why Ecuador has decided to grant political asylum to Mr. Assange especially when doing so would risk jeopardising its ties with nations that it considers important allies and trading partners, including the U.S., the U.K.,Sweden and Australia.
A host of possible justifications for the Ecuadorian action have been suggested, including notions that the country’s President, Rafael Correa, may be seeking to show himself a champion of free speech, or to embarrass the US, or to thrust himself onto the global stage as a fearless leader.
However as Mark Weisbrot of the Centre for Economic and Policy Research has argued, Mr.Correa “didn’t want this mess and it has been a lose-lose situation for him from the beginning,” given the escalation in tensions that he has suffered the US, UK and Sweden since Mr. Assange sought asylum at the embassy on June 19.
Mr. Weisbrot and others have pointed out that the U.S. is Ecuador's largest trading partner and has several times threatened to cut off trade preferences that support thousands of Ecuadorian jobs.
However what Ecuador’s own explanatory note on the decision to grant Mr. Assange asylum suggests is that Mr. Correa’s government made the decision based on a careful consideration of the facts in the case, including shortcomings in the procedures followed by the
prosecution regarding sexual assault charges that he faces in Sweden, and the balance of ethical considerations.
Of particular salience to Ecuador’s support for Mr. Assange is the fact that Mr. Assange’s legal team have on several occasions offered to provide Swedish authorities with access to Mr.Assange on the premises of Ecuador’s London embassy, in order for them to interrogate him and take formal statements for the case.
“This measure is perfect and legally possible. Sweden did not accept,” Ecuador’s Foreign Ministry noted, adding that the U.S. had similarly refused to clarify its position on the Assange case, “saying it is a bilateral matter between Ecuador and the United Kingdom.
Thus the facts that ultimately tilted Ecuador toward granting asylum to Mr. Assange included the consideration that “there is strong evidence of retaliation by the country or countries that produced the information disclosed by Mr. Assange, retaliation that may endanger their safety,integrity, and even his life.”
Keywords: WikiLeaks, Assange asylum
There is little doubt that Mr. Assange safety, integrity, and even his
life is under peril, not from some banana republic, but from Western
nations whose double standard and hypocrisy are amazing. After all
Assange happens to be only a messenger of a totally changed, fully
interconnected world. Egypt strong man Hoshne Mubarak did not have the
foresight and wisdom to appreciate this paradigm shift and has paid a
dear price. Surprisingly Western World which has been vanguard the
internet enabled sweeping changes, is unable to fore see and adjusts
with its devastating consequences. It must be realized that if not Mr.
Assange someone else would have exposed the dirty cloak and dagger
world of diplomacy. Sickening days of “Diplomacy is the art of telling
people to go to hell in such a way that they ask for directions” are
truly over and there is no more any fig leave to hide. Sooner the
realization better it will be for every one.
Don't get too comfortable, Julian. All that stands between you and the cops is a puff of Ecuadorean hot air. It's only a matter of days.
Bravo to Ecuador. Shame on the British government on trying to stamp their authority as it was being done during the ancient BRITISH RULE... Ecuador is not a British colony and to emphasize or threaten another embassy is just an utter disgrace. I think US is the main loser in this battle who is behind Sweden to re-open the Sexual assault case on Assange. I am shocked at the arrogance of the UK to think they can just violate international laws and freely enter the Embassies of other countries at will. Would they be so keen to do this if someone was taking refuge in the embassy of the USA in London... Certainly not.
Assange's seeking asylum in Ecuador is just an attempt to escape
justice in Sweden for sex charges. He knows that the US cannot charge
him because he is not a US citizen and has not signed any official
secrets contract. If he was able to apply pressure to the US Army Major
who supplied the papers or CD then he might be charged, but in general,
foreign nationals who have access to US classified information and
disclose it without authorisation have to answer first to their own
governments. Also it is obvious from the published information that
much of it was over-classified and misdirected to the Army Major. The
'need to know' principle has to be applied to any security system.
Mr Narayan,
A return question to you for your so called 'unanswered' question below:
"One unanswered question on most observers’ minds at this time was why Ecuador has decided to grant political asylum to Mr. Assange especially when doing so would risk jeopardising its ties with nations that it considers important allies and trading partners"
Do those observers mind that only those powerful nations can take the alibi of 'humanitarian and humane approach' when deciding political asylum for nationals of other countries?
What a refreshing and encouraging development! A government that actually takes note of ethical and legal and moral considerations instead of acting in its own narrow greedy self-interest!
If the governments of the "Great Western democracies" (Canada, USA, Britain, Sweden etc.) were only half as enlightened then perhaps these "great" countries would not be slowly sliding into the abyss.
My hat is off to Ecuadaor and i will be looking more closely at it as a country to live out my retirement in peace and security.
It was NEVER a lose lose situation for Ecuador as suggested. Ecuador have colluded and stage managed this with Asange before all this became public. To think anything else is fanicful. If they didnt want to offer him refuge there would have been no story, period.
How about the Ecuadorian President simply being someone who champions human rights period? Or is that simply too hard to fathom for a West which puts political and material concerns before concerns for human rights abuses?
Please Email the Editor