Ecuador says Britain withdraws threat to raid embassy in Assange standoff

[struggle4progress]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - Britain has withdrawn a threat to enter Ecuador's embassy in London to arrest WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange who has taken refuge there, President Rafael Correa said on Saturday, taking the heat out of the diplomatic standoff.

"We consider this unfortunate incident over, after a grave diplomatic error by the British in which they said they would enter our embassy," Correa said in a weekly media address.

In a statement, Ecuador's government said it had received "a communication from the British Foreign Office which said that there was no threat to enter the embassy" ...





Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/08/25/uk-wikileaks-assange-ecuador-idUKBRE87O0EV20120825

[a geek named Bob]

1. sounds good

If this conflict is over, should we talk about gardening?

[tama]

9. There is nothing as important

than gardening and even that is not that important.

[a geek named Bob]

10. My wife and I

Are harvesting the early Kale, Peppers, and Cherry tomatoes.

I'm making a lime-basil and garlic salsa, from our garden.

That, and vinegar pickles.

I figure about three more small polts, and we can cut about half our food budget.

[tama]

13. Delicious!

Rowan berries look good and plentiful this year in these parts, good for jam - my mother had a monster recipe. Also good for drying - just hang from ropes in ceiling - and giving porridge a kick of taste and vitamins. Also should worse come worst, shops empty and/or no money to buy nothing and no garden to harvest, you can get through winter with dried rowan berries alone.

[a geek named Bob]

15. I passed on your suggestion to my wife

We're looking into how much low work food we can grow on our property. We've taken to calling our place the city micro villa. How much room would the plant take up?

I'm figuring we can grow most of our own food, and can a lot of it.

I'm hoping to take our place off the power and gas grid, using homebuilt stuff, within 5 years. I figure the extra power I make can run a little golf cart, to help my neighbors.

[tama]

17. Rowan (sorbus aucuparia),

other English names whitebeam, service tree and mountain-ash, is a tree or shrub, so room it needs is anything between bonsai and whole forest . Here in Finland we have a tradition of planting or rather letting one grow in every home yard. It's more like the weed of the tree world, grows everywhere in all sizes and shapes. I love gardening, but plant's like Rowan are the reason for the latter part of the saying "but even that is not that important."

Another funny thing about the berries, they are not sweet but rather bitter, but contain enough sugar to turn partly into ethanol before birds getting ready to migrate to somewhere warmer stuff themselves with them... and get very very drunk. And birds are not only animals, some eat them just for the buzz. Bears having a drunken party - don't go near! - and then sleeping it of for whole winter. XP

Your family sounds like you have a very good thing going on there, so happy to hear!

[a geek named Bob]

20. Tama, thank you for the kind wishes!

We decided to have fun with this property. We're thinking of using non-invasive Bamboo as a screening wall. Part of the property will have (heavily potted) black bamboo, for building and cool purple paper for writing on. (Henceforth to be bound into a large tome of thinking methods, how to tricks, and reference info, to be called The Purple book of Bob.)

Rowan is also supposed to a good luck tree, isn't it?

[hlthe2b]

2. That was such a bad move by the Brits for so many reasons...

maybe there will be some resolution at some point...

[MADem]

32. They never made a threat. They simply reminded the Ecuadorans that they have a law on their books.

People can call that an implied threat if they'd like, but the bottom line is this--that law is STILL on their books. The only way they'd use it is if Assange thought he could run his "Wiki" business out of Knightsbridge while stashed in that crappy little room with the bed and the treadmill--in that case, the Brits would be up the stairs and through the door in a heartbeat. That was the subtext behind the conversation, but Correa chose to misinterpret it for political purposes.

Correa is trying to wring the last possible bits of publicity out of this bad bargain into which he's entered.

"Are you going to storm my embassy?"

"Fuck no, old chap! Keep an eye on Julian's computer usage, now, and you'll be fine!"

"Good--I'll call that a 'victory' and claim to have pulled the tail of the English Lion one more time! I'm gutsier than Hugo, now! Everyone--look at me, know my name, recognize my face!"

All that said, Assange is effectively imprisoned, and the Ecuadorans are paying for it. That's the crux of the matter, the bottom line.

[randome]

34. Nice summary!

[AntiFascist]

3. Maybe the OAS resolution meant something after all n/t

[msanthrope]

4. Good. Now all they gotta do is wait him out. nt

[Canuckistanian]

6. And this pleases you for some reason?

What if he decides to stay there for years? Would that please you equally?

[msanthrope]

7. He will not be there for years. He will be there only as long

as Correa finds it politically expedient.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. You mean Britain decided it was not the right time

for an act of war?

[struggle4progress]

11. When the UK reiterated for the hundredth time that it had never threatened to invade the embassy,

Ecuador backed down under the face-saving guise that the UK had retracted the threat (that was never actually made)

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. And the OAS had a declaration for fun?

Okay...

Suffice it to say it would have been an act of war.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

14. note that they changed the declaration since the brits said they had made no threats

or are we thinking of two different declarations?

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Two different

what is going on is a classic in international affairs, some hot heads said things they should not... other less hot heads called them on it, what we say that?

So now we go into the we wait... and this game of cat and mouse will last for years.

[struggle4progress]

18. OAS resolution calls for bilateral talks in Assange standoff

OAS resolution calls for bilateral talks in Assange standoff
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Wesley Gibbings

Caribbean countries sandwiched by a challenging hemispheric divide ... appeared to find convenient middle ground when ... Organisation of American States (OAS) reached agreement Friday ...

... there was an expectation that Caribbean members Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica and St Vincent and the Grenadines, together with ALBA-aspirant St Lucia, would have toed a heavy, recalcitrant line ...

A communiqué issued by the UK in time for Friday’s OAS ministerial consultations, however, claimed that “at no time was any threat made against the Embassy of Ecuador.” “The Foreign and Commonwealth Office emphasises that the respect for, and compliance with, international law is at the heart of the conduct of the foreign policy of the United Kingdom,” the communiqué says ...

Against the backdrop of such arguments, the OAS Permanent Council agreed Friday ... to promote more conciliatory bilateral discussions between Ecuador and the UK. It was a line proposed by Trinidad and Tobago early in the proceedings. It had, however, joined with the US and Canada in initially rejecting a resolution to debate the issue suggesting the standoff was a matter for bilateral negotiation ...

http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/2012-08-26/oas-resolution-calls-bilateral-talks-assange-standoff

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. And why do you think it does?

UK stop your threats of an act of war, sit down and TALK.

That is a translation of diplomatese for ya.

It is a polite way of going STOP THIS IDIOCY!

I know, I know this is not hard to understand.

For the record, this will last a few years... I suspect.

[struggle4progress]

21. The ultimate object of the diplomatic immunities is to facilitate diplomacy itself,

which in turn is desired as lubricating relations between various nations. With diplomatic immunities also comes an obligation for the immunized diplomats not to abuse the privilege by simply disregarding the laws of their host

That one country might send a diplomat, representing it, to a diplomatic outpost, in another country, is a desirable state-of-affairs, but it is not an absolute right. The host country is not obliged to recognize the diplomat indefinitely: if the diplomat becomes noxious to the host, the host has freedom to withdraw recognition and expel the diplomat. Similarly, the host country is not actually obliged to recognized to recognize a diplomatic mission indefinitely: if a mission becomes noxious to the host, the host country would be quite within its rights, for example, to ask its guest to close and quit its mission by some date certain, and the guest would have no right to ignore the request. Naturally, such outcomes are not preferred, as they limit the diplomatic intercourse of the countries involved, but no violation of international law would be involved in that, nor would that be an act of war

Many of us will be sympathetic to Latin American resentments about their sometimes abusive historical treatments by the Colossus of the North; and in particular, we may understand why Quito enjoys its own current stance. But London extends diplomatic immunities to Quito, with sole aim of easing contact with Quito, not with the aim providing Quito a stage for gesturing angrily at Washington -- and once Quito begins to interfere with local court rulings and London's legal extradition obligations to Stockholm, unless London finds there a very good reason indeed, London is entirely entitled to wonder if Quito has become a boorish guest, and London may consider, silently or aloud, the full range of its options. And, as already noted, London does indeed have options, beyond merely tolerating the behavior of Quito, though, in the end, of course, everyone will prefer that London not exercise the most extreme options, such as cutting ties to Quito

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Oh for god sakes we have done this in the past

and kept people in our own embassies for decades no less.

This is commonly done by states, more common than we'd like to think.

I know, Assange is ugly terrible and a war criminal, but you know what? This happens, often... more often than you think.

And every participant in this farce knows this well.

Have a good day... don quixote there is that windmill over there.

[struggle4progress]

23. Every case is to be judged on its own merits. The usual international standard for

offering someone refuge in an embassy, is that they face immediate personal danger outside the embassy. The usual reason for not extraditing a person to another country is that they would face personal danger there. There is no evidence Assange faces danger in the UK or in Sweden. So offering Assange refuge in the embassy pointlessly insults both the UK and Sweden

[sabrina 1]

25. He didn't claim to be facing danger in Britain. He got asylum based on the danger he faces

from the Right Wing morons in the US calling for his assassination. Considering that some of them are, shamefully, elected officials here and no one in authority reprimanded them or apologized for their insanity, as the Canadians did with their lunatic, combined with the GJ struggling to find a crime to charge a journalist with, Ecuador, a sovereign country, believed that the threat of possible extradition to the US was enough to grant him asylum.

Correa, like Chavez and most of the new Democratic Leaders of South America are smart people. The old Colonialist racism of course cannot conceive of anyone from outside of Euerope or the US being smart, which in a way benefits them.

The huge support for Ecuador from the OAS shows how the world views the Western Colonialists. And how damaged the reputation of this country is by the war crimes, rapes and torture eg, that have gone unpunished here.

The world saw the treatment of Bradley Manning also, which as predicted by P.J. Crowley would harm the US. All in all we are feared more by the rest of the world than any terrorist threat.

I was hoping that in 2008 with a clean sweep of the old Bush regime, and Republicans in Congress, the US could begin to repair its image as a bad image weakens a country. Instead, the world learned that war criminals would not be punished, leading the world to believe that it was not just Republicans, that it is US policy now to torture, kill, assassinate without trial, whoever they feel like.

It would be wise for the US now to take a huge lesson from this incident. It was the world telling us we are viewed as untrustworthy, a violator of human rights who, rather than punish war criminals, protects them. What we do with that lesson is up to us.

[Peace Patriot]

37. Thank you, sabrina 1! Great post! nt

[hack89]

38. Ecuador did not get huge support from OAS

all they said was "Embassies are inviolate and please solve this problem diplomatically."

They did not get the resolution they actually wanted as several countries felt the OAS was not the place to resolve bilateral disputes. And the OAS actually changed the wording of the resolution as they accepted Britain's statement that they have made no threat to storm the embassy.

Explain this to me: Why didn't the OAS come out in support of Assange? Why didn't they say that Ecuador was in the right to grant asylum and that Britain should let Assange go? For that matter, why didn't the resolution even mention Assange?

[sabrina 1]

39. I thought this was obvious. Why didn't they come for Assange? Do you know what this was

about? Not everything is about Assange. This was about a threat of a gross violation of International law against a sovereign nation. Not that the Western nations have ever been hampered by law, International or Otherwise. But for the first time, one of them got called on their lawlessness and was forced to back down.

Latin American countries have been building a strong unified force over the past several years as they emerge from under the influence of the old Colonial states. This was a perfect example of why they have done so, and an even more perfect example of how it is going to be much more difficult from now on for the West to return to its bullying of smaller countries in Latin America at least.

In fact the slap down of Britain acting as though Ecuador was still a colonial puppet state was a historical moment. Assange was not the issue here at all.

And yes, Ecuador received the full support of the Americas, except for the few allies they have left in that region of the world who stood out, demonstrating how isolated they have become.

[hack89]

40. I see no support for Assange or Wikileaks in the OAS statement

most likely because there is no country in the world that is comfortable with openness and transparency.

I completely understand their concern about the sanctity of embassies - but yet again, they were willing to accept the UK's statement that they did not threaten to storm the embassy.

I think Correa is playing with fire. He loves Assange because he embarrassed America and other European countries. But they seem to ignore that fact that every government is threatened by Wikileaks. The OAS is full of countries with turbulent and non-democratic histories. Coups and counter-coups are the norm. How many embarrassing secrets do you think are hidden - Assange is the kind of person that terrifies such governments.


Do you think other South American governments will tolerate Correa allowing Assange to run Wikileaks under Ecuadorian protection?

Do you think Assange will compromise his principles and not report on certain governments to keep Correa happy?

[sabrina 1]

42. I guess you have not read the Latin American cables released by Wikileaks.

Wikileaks has been pretty much universally praised in Latin America after they read the revelations. Unlike the US media, the Latin American press showed little hesitation publishing those revelations there.

This is why Latin Americans are so much more informed on Wikileaks and what they have done to benefit society, than the average American.

The only people in Latin America who hate Wikileaks, are the remnants of the old brutal regimes, and our former allies who are still trying to destabilize these countries.

You see, that region of the world has experienced what Governments keeping secrets does to a country. They can and did, eg, disappear innocent people. Some of those countries are now in the process of finally prosecuting those war criminals, shamefully our former allies.

So you could not be more wrong. When I read the Latin American cables they confirmed what some of the most popular leaders in that region of the world, Chavez eg, had been saying all along. I knew they would be published there and they were.

Correa has an approval rating of 70% in his own country, expected to go up since his decision on Assange. He is widely popular as is Chavez, in Latin America.

You have to start learning that what Americans think of other countries' leaders is simply irrelevant now. Too much crime, now uncovered, on our part against these countries makes our silly smear campaigns against them because they refuse to be puppets, just seem like the frustrated temper tantrums of spoiled brats.

[hack89]

43. So why is the OAS refusing to comment on Assange?

why are they not demanding that Britain honor Ecuador's granting of diplomatic asylum?

"Don't invade embassies and please use diplomacy to settle this issue." Seems like a pretty luke warm endorsement.

[AntiFascist]

44. The OAS includes Canada and the US...

It's no surprise that they (Canada and US) took the lead in toning down the OAS resolution, and that a few LA nations fell in line with them.

[hack89]

45. So where is the huge international outcry in support of Assange and Ecuador?

the OAS is the only organization to say a thing. Deafening silence from the test of the world. Why is that? I thought Assange was an international hero.

[AntiFascist]

46. The OAS happens to represent the entire Western Hemisphere...

in case you didn't know. There are people all over Europe supporting Assange, but the governments probably have more immediate concerns to focus on about their economies.

[hack89]

47. And yet the OAS has not voiced support for Assange

where is the ringing endorsement of Assange and Wikileaks?

The silent majority line did not work for Nixon - of won't work here. Let me know when there is visible support for Assange not going to Sweden to face justice.

[AntiFascist]

48. uhhhhh, that's not the issue...

Assange's legal team indicates that Assange has no problem going to Sweden to face justice as long as there is assurance he will not get extradited to the US. Regardless of whether extradition to the US is likely or not, such assurance would then allow Ecuador to release him to Sweden.

[hack89]

49. He is not in any position to dictate terms.

The Brits and Swedes are in the right legally. I don't see this taking too long - I bet Assange will be in Swedish custody by Christmas.

[AntiFascist]

50. Ecuador IS in a position to diplomatically discuss terms with both Britain and Sweden...

as I've said, if Sweden is willing to give in a little to the proposed terms, then he could be in Swedish custody soon, otherwise it appears that he can remain in asylum as long as he wants.

[hack89]

51. I think the embassy is the perfect place for him at the moment.

at least until after the election.

[AntiFascist]

52. Obama would probably agree...

but the UK is in a position to act as the go-between, and they probably want him out as soon as possible to end the embarassment of having him surrounded by British soil (trying to word this as carefully as possible).

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. Shhh...it's about the US...shhh don't tell anybody

The asylum was given on the threat of an American extradition from Sweeden.

Peope have explained this to you before... Look up BRIC.

And you are dead wrong about asylum. Offering asylum is, by it's very nature, a political act.

[struggle4progress]

29. It's a conspiracy! The University of Copenhagen's Biotech Research and Innovation Centre

wants to destroy us all! And the Biomedical Research Imaging Center at Chapel Hill is part of the plot!


... The first time I met Assange, he was convinced a sniper was targeting him through the windows of a conference centre. A few hours later, he was happily typing in front of the same windows. I asked why he believed he was a target. "I can't tell you," he said ...
Who is Julian Assange? By the people who know him best
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/24/who-is-julian-assange?newsfeed=true

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Of course, you now turn all "serious" on us

We know you got a vendeta against Assange. But seriously, this is international politics at it's best, or worst. And of course cultural clashes and expectations. That is reality, not your very unserious nature. LatAm has a very strong asylum tradition, underlined with a strong series of bilateral and regional treaties. The same cannot be said about Europe.

Go make more jokes.

[hack89]

33. Diplomatic asylum as opposed to political asylum is not recognized in international law.

So Ecuador does not have much of a legal leg to stand on.

[sabrina 1]

24. Lol!

[Fire Walk With Me]

8. I wonder if Anonymous taking down a few UK governement websites for a few days

has anything to do with this. Of course, governments are larger than their websites, but...

[Posteritatis]

26. I very strongly doubt the government would care that much. (nt)

[Fire Walk With Me]

35. Good, because more sites are now down :)

And no media attention to Scotland Yard being down.

[SDjack]

27. Ecuador Embassy: Don't relax your guard. In the Falklands

War, Britain defined a do-not-enter zone for Argentinean war ships, and then sank the Argentinean light cruiser Belgrano outside of that zone. The Brits excused their action by saying loosely "when our opponent gives you a big, fat juicy target, we sink it."

[lsewpershad]

31. Ecuador

Please keep you rguard up. Never fully trust the colonial power.

[DeSwiss]

36. Bullies always back down when confronted.

- K&R

[randome]

41. I wonder if any law enforcement operations are impacted by this.

Anonymous did nothing productive with this unless we think harassing/bullying law enforcement entities accomplishes something.