Perhaps there is something significant in the fact that
Assange is in the Ecuadorian Embassy
There is no secret in that. It's an embassy and sovereign territory of the Ecuadorians. No government in their right mind would trespass. Perhaps there is something significant in the fact that
Assange is in the Ecuadorian Embassy
There is no secret in that. It's an embassy and sovereign territory of the Ecuadorians. No government in their right mind would trespass.What about forcing down a presidential plane (of a nearby country)? Would a government in their right mind do that?
Once a hegemonic country's closest-held secrets are involved, all bets seem to be off.
I'm actually a bit surprised that Britain didn't stage some kind of covert snatch from the Ecuadorian embassy after all these years (at the behest of the US).
While we're speculating: Could this mean that the US doesn't want Assange anymore?
I think the value of catching Assange probably dropped a lot post-Snowden though. He's probably more famous, and more importantly he proves that Assange isn't a one-off.
Note that Part 1(1)(4) states[0]:
"The Secretary of State shall only give or withdraw consent or withdraw acceptance if he is satisfied that to do so is permissible under international law."
So it's not like they can do this willy-nilly. Under that act, there has to be a reason permissible under international law to revoke the consulate land, and it's a complete revocation of the land rights, requiring a new application by the foreign state to re-establish the consulate.