I had been only peripherally tracking the whole Assange story. But, when the fallback position to "storming the embassy" (i.e., preventing Assange from leaving the building) broke, it just rang a big historical bell for me.
Sau said that under International Law, the 1964 Vienna convention means domestic law does not prevail in cases as granting political asylum and “this has been respected even in the worst dictatorial moments of Latin America and Africa”.
Sau downplayed the possibility that the UK breaks into the Ecuadorean embassy in London and speculated that UK will delay indefinitely Assange’s safe passage through British territory.
MercoPress - South Atlantic News Agency
Ah, yes, indefinite confinement in an embassy, where have I heard that before?
When the Soviet Union invaded Hungary on 4 November 1956, to restore the overthrown communist government, Cardinal Mindszenty sought Imre Nagy's advice, and was granted political asylum at the United States embassy in Budapest. Mindszenty lived there for the next 15 years, unable to leave the grounds.
- Wikipedia
Bottom line, the UK, with US backing, is behaving like the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War. Of course, the complete amnesia about the strong resemblance between the tactics of neocon politicos and the Communists has been permanent since
The End of History. I would rather call it
"The End of Memory", because no one is ever reminded when our gigantic military/intelligence conglomerate takes a page from the Soviet Politburo's playbook. Meanwhile, Obama is constantly called a communist.
Come below the Orange Curtain for more.
“this has been respected even in the worst dictatorial moments of Latin America and Africa”.
In making his speculation, Mr. Sau seems to rely upon the fact that not even the School of the Americas-trained sociopaths who ran Latin America for thirty years would stoop as low as the British just threatened to do. With this UK/US behavior, in the words of one author:
The West has just become a giant banana republic.
Regardless, the whole affair is perhaps the foulest example that western governments will ignore their own laws, or selectively apply them, whenever they see fit.
Legal precedent means nothing. Rule of law means nothing. Free speech means nothing. Their own treaties mean nothing. It’s unbelievable. Anyone in the west who honestly thinks he’s still living in a free society is either a fool or completely out of touch.
If that seems too radical an idea, consider that ECUADOR is now the only nation which stands to defend freedom and human rights against an assault from the United States, the United Kingdom, and their spineless allies.
The West has just become a giant banana republic
IMHO, given the pushback from Latin America and
the Russians, an embassy invasion is unlikely; but a Mindszenty-style lockdown of Assange would be perfectly in keeping with the role reversal that has turned the American military/intelligence complex into the enforcement arm of the Neo-colonialist age in which we live.
So, lets just review the history to see how upside down the world is today.
On 26 December 1948, Cardinal Mindszenty was arrested and accused of treason, conspiracy, and offences against the newly formed communist government's laws. Shortly before his arrest, he wrote a note to the effect that he had not been involved in any conspiracy, and any confession he might make would be the result of duress. While he was imprisoned by the Communist government, he confessed to working with Americans against the state of Hungary.
Among other forced confessions, Mindszenty admitted that he had orchestrated the theft of Hungary's crown jewels (including the Crown of Saint Stephen) with the explicit purpose of crowning Otto I of Austria-Hungary. He admitted that he had schemed to remove the Communist government; that he had planned a Third World War, and that, once this war was won by the Americans, he himself would assume political power in Hungary.
On 3 February 1949, his trial began. On 8 February Mindszenty was sentenced to life imprisonment for treason against the Communist government.
- Wikipedia
Quite clearly, Mindszenty was a screaming anti-Communist, which is a very dangerous thing to be in a Communist police state. (Just as being a Pentagon whistle-blower is a very dangerous thing to be in the American MIC state.) Not having any place to flee to in 1948, Mindzenty was subjected to a show trial with the typically ludicrous accusations and then imprisoned.
Seven years later, due to the abortive Hungarian Revolution of 1956, Mindszenty was freed from prison. But the revolution was crushed by the Soviets and Mindszenty fled to the US embassy:
On 30 October 1956, during the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, Mindszenty was released from prison and he returned to Budapest the next day. On November 2, he praised the insurgents...Cardinal Mindszenty sought Imre Nagy's advice, and was granted political asylum at the United States embassy in Budapest. Mindszenty lived there for the next 15 years, unable to leave the grounds...
Mindszenty is widely admired in modern-day Hungary, and no one denies his courage in opposing the Nazi and Nyilas gangs, or his resolve in confinement...
However, this is not to say that Mindszenty was some the kind of person a liberal would like.
Mindszenty is seen as the archetypal figure of "clerical reaction" by his communist critics. He continued to use the feudal title of prince-primate (hercegprímás) even after the use of nobility, peerage and royal titulature were entirely outlawed by the 1946 parliament (under Soviet influence). His aristocratic attitudes and continued claims for compensation against nationalization of vast range of pre–World War II church-owned farmlands alienated large groups of the Hungarian society, which was composed of a majority of agricultural workers at the time.
He did not believe in a separation of church and state and fought fiercely against secularization of church-run primary and secondary schools.
- Wikipedia
Perhaps the willingness of the US to aid this asylum-seeker had something to do with these feudalistic attitudes - part of the constant stream of US alliances with reactionaries and authoritarian parties throughout the Cold War.
But, for me, the bottom line is that it used to be the US giving asylum to principled refugees from authoritarian systems. Now, it is the US ripping its own and international law to shreds in order to get one inconvenient man who has revealed the dirty laundry of America's military.
Same story, different players.