Hacker News Reader

Comment by DiogenesKynikos | Hacker News Reader

Exactly. This is why the previous Ecuadorian government granted him political asylum - his legitimate fear of persecution by the American government for publishing their embarrassing secrets.

The current government of Ecuador has not only handed him over, however, but has even handed over his personal belongings in the embassy to the US government. So much for protecting him from political persecution!

View on HN

It's unfortunate Ecuador went back on its promise of asylum, but I will give them some credit that they granted it in the first place, against what was surely strong USA pressure, and protected Assange for 7 years.

For context: Ecuador changed governments in between. While the current president was officially the continuation of the previous one (the one who granted Assange asylum), in effect he turned soon after being elected, to the point the prior president considers him a traitor to all he initially stood for.

So you must give credit to the prior government, not the current one.

I wonder if any external foreign forces played a role in that Ecuadorian election...

The executive branch of the US government did as well. Drastically. The opinion of the US Justice department through each of those two wildly different presidents however, did not change.

The difference is that before the election, Lenin Moreno was seen as the successor of Rafael Correa (unlike the Trump and Obama situation). Correa's grant of asylum to Assange was seen as a political/ideological stand, and his successor was expected to continue it. When Moreno got elected he reverted enough of Correa's policies that the latter considers him a traitor [1]. That was unexpected.

----

[1] https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/11/rafael-corr...

> "“The greatest traitor in Ecuadorian and Latin American history, Lenin Moreno, allowed the British police to enter our embassy in London to arrest Assange,” Mr. Correa tweeted. “Moreno is a corrupt man, but what he has done is a crime that humanity will never forget.”

This goes deeper than Correa vs Moreno.

(A) Ecuador received a $4.2B loan from the US-dominated IMF, which was approved around the same time Assange was dragged out of the embassy, and

(B) President Moreno was caught up in the INA Papers scandal where many personal photos, messages, and documents were published, and Moreno accused Assange of involvement shortly before evicting Assange.

IIRC most of South America was furious as they were all active targets of the exposed spying.

I don't think most of South America know who Assange is, it's pretty fringe nerdy news over here, I would guess Ecuatorians a bit more though, but doubt most are into the detail but rather have a vague idea.

I meant the governments of South America which were being spied on and I believe it was all of them.

Ecuador didn't exactly "[go] back on its promise of asylum". Assange violated the terms of his asylum. Whether that's justification for handing him over to the U.S. is a separate argument, but Ecuador was justified in terminating the asylum.

Perhaps, but it really had nothing to do with it by best accounts.

Change of Government, new person is power was always anti-assange. Government changed, Assange out.

  Assange violated the terms of his asylum.

This is only true if you take what the government of Ecuador has claimed at face value.

The reality is that Latin American governments often make deceptive and untrue claims to support activities that benefit them.

In this case, Ecuador made several unsubstantiated claims ostensibly designed to humiliate Assange, which fall short of any reasonable attempt to prove that Assange violated the terms of his asylum.

From what I gathered, this sounds more like it happened because he is somewhat grating as an individual, as opposed to a political statement.

He would have probably been better off pulling a Snowden and disappearing into Hong Kong for a while...

I mean, and that $4.2B IMF loan secured by Moreno.

Meeting with Manafort about Assange was one of the first things Moreno did when he was in power.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/04/manafort-tried-to-make-deal-...

There's a new leader in Ecuador, more US friendly, and they leaned on him with the IMF --- they got a huge loan just as they gave him up. It does seem that he is a bit of an asshole, but I don't think it's conspiratorial to think there's more to it than that.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-imf/ecuador-inks-...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ecuador-jilted-assange-as-it-so...

This, and apparently he released a bunch of documents proving financial corruption among him and his friends/family.

He didn't. Whoever's in charge of the WikiLeaks twitter had retweeted a news story about the leak (which was leaked by a third party).

I am not sure that would have worked. The stuff he and Wikileaks published ended up taking a lot of the narrative control away from very powerful interests.

That is a straight up attack on legitimacy. And legitimacy is one of a few basic political powers. That makes it a big deal. (Others are having an army, ownership of the means of production, etc...)

That's what the government that handed Assange over, and which is now cooperating with his persecutors, claimed - without any evidence, of course. That government also happens to be pursuing friendly relations with the United States, and also just happened to receive a large IMF loan, not that those things could possibly be related to the decision to revoke Assange's asylum.

Political asylum is not normally revoked because someone is a bad house guest, and one former embassy employee has gone on the record stating that the new Ecuadorian government did its best to make Assange's life in the embassy living hell, and that he was actually a courteous guest. It is in the interest of the Ecuadorian government to defame Assange and to make excuses for their sudden cooperation with American authorities.

That's what the government that handed Assange over, and which is now cooperating with his persecutors, claimed - without any evidence, of course.

There's video.

Not of any of the lurid claims made by the Ecuadorian government. The fact that the Ecuadorian government has shown itself willing to release videos of Assange that they consider embarrassing (like him exercising), without that video actually substantiating any of their salacious claims, suggests that those claims are false.

Video of what?

[redacted], presumably.

That's the reason they gave, but the reality is probably that it's no longer politically expedient to keep him.

>From what I gathered, this sounds more like it happened because he is somewhat grating as an individual, as opposed to a political statement.

All that means is the propaganda worked on you.

You are being totally naive in taking the government’s claims about Assange at face value.

The world would be a much better place if people would learn to distinguish between “a person with political power said so” and actual evidence.

It’s a different leader of Ecuador. Assuming a consistent position is like assuming consistency between the Obama and Trump administrations. Unrealistic expectation from a past that no longer exists.

I agree, but it's a bit more complex than that. Obama and Trump are officially political enemies and stand for different visions for the US.

In contrast, Lenin Moreno (current president of Ecuador) was the political succesor of Rafael Correa (previous president) and was in line with Correa's policies... until after being elected. He then turned around many of Correa's policies and is seen as a traitor by the latter.

This is more as if Hillary had won (ok, I know, not a perfect analogy!) and afterwards tore down everything Obama stood for.

I wonder who’s paying him...

It sounds like he either arrogantly or through mental illness drastically wore out his welcome. I'm leaning on his mental illness being the reason. If his safety were so important to him he wouldn't have bit the hand that fed him.

The new Ecuadorian government - the same one that handed him over and which has a clear interest in justifying this action by defaming him - has not provided any evidence to substantiate their lurid claims, despite their apparent willingness to leak various surveillance videos of him to the press. It's sad to see people taking baseless accusations by an involved party at face value.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com