The Biggest Leak In Intelligence History

[Chengar Qordath]

As a followup, Ecuador has granted asylum to Assange. That won't do much to cut down on the tension.

[Taure]

Should just expel the diplomats, then go in and arrest the guy.

[Vir]

Originally Posted by Taure

Should just expel the diplomats, then go in and arrest the guy.

Eh, they can't really. They're protected under the vienna convention. What they could do is give them a new embassy and revoke the current one then go in and arrest him.

[Taure]

They're protected under the vienna convention.

Which is why you expel them first.

[Vir]

Originally Posted by Taure

Which is why you expel them first.

Simply expelling the diplomats doesn't grant the UK the legal right to enter the embassy. You also need to revoke the embassy status.

[Hello]

Any chance of them saying "fuck it" and walking in anyway?

[WalkingDisaster]

Originally Posted by Hello

Any chance of them saying "fuck it" and walking in anyway?

With the US Gov Breathing down their necks like an extra-angry-and-impatient Drill Sergeant?

Chances are pretty high, I'd say. Ecuador can't really do shit to any country who does so. They'll whine to the U.N. The UN will shake it's finger and tell the offending country they don't get any cookies at dinner, then it'll all be over, at least as far as actual ramifications and punishments in the political field go.

Or so I predict.

[Taure]

I don't think the US would particularly like the precedent set. I mean, consider the recent situation in China - they guy who fled to the US embassy.

That was somewhat different, as he fled not from criminal charges but out of fear of a particular corrupt official. But still, the stuff he revealed was embarrassing for China. I bet the US is rather glad of the convention on not storming the embassies of other countries.

Also, I don't think the US really cares about this case much at all. Certainly not enough to destroy a diplomatic convention which has helped them in the past. They care about Wikileaks, but not Assange. Wikileaks has now grown beyond Assange. Sure, they don't like him, but the whole "Sweden will extradite me to the US" bullshit Assange is sprouting is just the ravings of a conspiracy loon with delusions of grandeur. Or, more cynically, someone who really wants to avoid due process and going to trial like the rest of us would have to. He thinks himself above the law.

[Antivash]

Originally Posted by Doctor Whooves

Hooray! More political tension between the UK and countries in South America!

Im disappointed that this statement wasn't immediately followed by Hooray Beer!

[samkar]

Originally Posted by Taure

Also, I don't think the US really cares about this case much at all. Certainly not enough to destroy a diplomatic convention which has helped them in the past. They care about Wikileaks, but not Assange. Wikileaks has now grown beyond Assange. Sure, they don't like him, but the whole "Sweden will extradite me to the US" bullshit Assange is sprouting is just the ravings of a conspiracy loon with delusions of grandeur. Or, more cynically, someone who really wants to avoid due process and going to trial like the rest of us would have to. He thinks himself above the law.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02...for_wikileaks/

tells a different story

[Equinox]

Originally Posted by samkar

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02...for_wikileaks/

tells a different story

I'm sure they'd love to get their hands on Assange... but as Taure said, that doesn't mean they're going support completely disregarding something like the Vienna Convention.

What [I think] the US is doing at the moment is the smart thing. Say nothing, wait for him to get sent to Sweden and the outcome of his trial. If he's guilty... well, there isn't going to be much public outcry if a convicted rapist gets extradited to the US. If not, then they can go from there. Trying to make a lot of noise about him now wouldn't serve them very well.

[samkar]

Originally Posted by Equinox

I'm sure they'd love to get their hands on Assange... but as Taure said, that doesn't mean they're going support completely disregarding something like the Vienna Convention.

What [I think] the US is doing at the moment is the smart thing. Say nothing, wait for him to get sent to Sweden and the outcome of his trial. If he's guilty... well, there isn't going to be much public outcry if a convicted rapist gets extradited to the US. If not, then they can go from there. Trying to make a lot of noise about him now wouldn't serve them very well.

He hasn't even been charged in sweden and even if he would be found guilty by their laws it would result into a fine. The European Arrest Warrant can only be issued for offenses carrying a minimum penalty of 12 months. They clearly don't give a crap about such petty details anymore.

All that money on attorneys and what else thrown away because sweden doesn't want to question him in some embassy or while he lived in some guest house.

[Taure]

Interesting comment on Reddit.

There is no precedent or treaty which suggests the UK needs to allow safe passage, or that a car cannot be stopped, searched, and Assange removed by London police. The only such treaty is in the Americas, and the UK is not a party to it.

Most importantly, by aiding Assange in defying his bail conditions Ecuador has breached article 41.1 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and is also violating 41.3 by imposing on another international obligation (the one between the UK and SWE), so it is unclear that the UK retains any lawful obligation to respect the inviolability of the Ecuadorian mission since under the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, the UK is clearly able to deem Ecuador in breach and such a clause is inseverable from the rest of the treaty.

Its fascinating, because I think there is real legal groundwork for the UK to breach the mission.

[Zennith]

Dude, Taure, you keep talking like he's been charged with a crime.

Protip - he hasn't been.

[Taure]

The Swedish legal system requires that people be interviewed before they're charged, so that doesn't mean much. The reason why he hasn't been charged is because he's been evading it.

[Tehan]

If memory serves, Assange said he'd be in Stockholm the next day if Sweden promised they wouldn't extradite him to America.

Sweden refused.

[Taure]

Right. Nation states are not normally in the business in pandering to the special requests of individuals under investigation for crimes. Why should Assange be able to negotiate with a nation about whether he will allow them to investigate him?

Essentially, Sweden's refusal to commit to something like that doesn't reveal hidden intentions. It's a matter of not showing weakness or allowing individuals dictate terms. Could open the floodgates. It's a "don't negotiate with terrorists" kind of policy.

For me, the biggest problem with the "they plan to extradite him" issue is that it just doesn't make sense. If the US wanted to extradite Assange, they wouldn't do it from Sweden, with whom they have had some rocky relations. If the US wanted Assange, they'd get him straight from the UK, where it would be significantly easier.

[samkar]

Taure, remote questioning is common procedure even during trials. If they really wanted to close this PR debacle for sweden they would have.

Assange is Australian and part of the Commonwealth. I would strongly assume that if there aren't bilateral agreements how to deal with extraditing of common citizens it must be part of the Commonwealth treaty.

[Vincent]

So the embassy and diplomatic car may be Ecuadorian territory but what about the ground he has to walk on between them? Or between the car and the plane? I don't see how he's going to get out of the country if Britain really wants to grab him.

[Taure]

He can't. He's stuck in the embassy for the rest of his life - or until an agreement is reached. Or until there's a political change in Ecuador and the new powers that be change the policy.

They couldn't even smuggle him out in a diplomatic bag. While they can't be opened, they can be inspected and stopped from progressing further. He'd just get sent right back to the embassy.

The people who wrote the Vienna Convention knew what they were doing. They added plenty of exceptions for if a nation tries to use conventions designed to protect diplomacy for non-diplomatic means.

But I think we can rule out the British going in and grabbing him at this stage. Regardless of the legality, it would be immensely unpopular.