Assange tests British diplomatic principle

20 August 2012

Julian Assange now sits securely in a small room inside the Embassy of Ecuador in London. He is safe, as Cardinal József Mindszenty was safe for many years inside the US Embassy in Communist-ruled Hungary. This is a benefit of the internationally-agreed Vienna Convention on sovereign immunity of diplomatic premises. The irony is exquisite.

He draws on the rich and frequently resorted to Latin American tradition of using secure diplomatic immunity to protect the lives of one another's dissidents or deposed political leaders.

Such embassy safe havens and agreed safe conducts are not just theoretical concepts in Latin America. They have saved many lives and avoided the savagery and mutual embarrassment of reprisal trials in the oft-repeated cycle of coups and counter-coups.

They provide a face-saving and humane way for all concerned to deal with the consequences of violent and unpredictable political transitions. If any part of the world has reason to cherish the ideal of diplomatic immunity and inviolability by the host government of sovereign embassy premises, it is Latin America.

Assange chose well with Ecuador. Paradoxically, it is small and unimportant enough to be able to stand up to the US in ways that would be more difficult for larger Latin American nations such as Argentina or Brazil. There is a less complex and opaque web of economic interconnections. Commercial sanctions exercised through US corporations would be more easily exposed and denounced.

If clumsy pressures were applied on Ecuador, a wave of Latin American solidarity against Yanqui bullying could be relied on. Ecuador is not in regionally doubtful odour like leftist Venezuela, Cuba or Bolivia. It is a decent little middle-of-the-road country.

The choice now before Britain is stark: to give Assange safe conduct to Ecuador or to let him become another highly visible prisoner of conscience — another Cardinal Mindszenty — in London.

The British government has no option of storming the Embassy or cutting off its electricity or water. As Geoffrey Robertson argued on ABC Radio on Friday, once it violated the principle of immunity of diplomatic premises, Britain would be at the mercy of such actions against its many thousands of diplomatically protected people and their families in many parts of the world.

Britain has so much more to lose here. It would be grossly irresponsible to violate the Ecuadorian Embassy's diplomatic immunity.

Yet Britain and Sweden will not negotiate any compromise with Assange now. The would lose too much face.

The wisest course for Britain would

AUSTRALIA

Assange tests British diplomatic principle

Subscriber login