Seeking asylum in Ecuador is not completely nuts

If like me you were wondering what the hell Assange was doing seeking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy of all random places, here is a fascinating article in Business Insider on why this is not a completely wacko move, as I had assumed. That is not to say that it is not a move of desperation, however, and it may not work.

Most surprising key points:

• In December 2010 Australian diplomatic cables revealed that WikiLeaks was the target of an "unprecedented" U.S. criminal probe and that the U.S. Justice Department — through a secret Grand Jury — was looking to charge Assange under the 1917 Espionage Act. (According internal emails from U.S. private security firm Stratfor, there is already a sealed indictment against Assange.)

• There is a precedent of Sweden unlawfully handing over asylum-seekers at the behest of the U.S.

• Furthermore legal journalist Glenn Greenwald points out that Sweden's laws permit oppressive pre-trial conditions (e.g. severe restrictions on communications with the outside world) and extreme levels of judicial secrecy would enable the U.S. and Sweden to deal with Assange beyond public scrutiny. (Even the U.S. State Department condemned Sweden's "restrictive conditions for prisoners held in pretrial custody.")

Amazing that Sweden should be the US's stooge while Ecuador is not.

The article goes on to say that:

...former CIA analyst Ray McGovern considers Assange's move an "artful dodge" and says that "not only is Julian Assange within his rights to seek asylum, he is also in his right mind." 

Also:

McGovern openly wonders how Assange slipped through the various police checkpoints and walked into the Ecuadorian embassy...

The article and/or its source go on to suggest that Assange seeking asylum in Ecuador allow the British government to neatly wash their hands of him while not displeasing the US.