Skip to main content

Assange: South America v colonialism?

Julian Assange remains holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and the Brits wonder what to do to get him out of there.  The Swedes want Assange on their patch.  The US wants Assange too - as The Sydney Morning Herald revealed yesterday.   Meanwhile, a different "play" is afoot.  Some South American countries throwing down the gauntlet to what they see as residual colonialism by the Brits and its cohorts.

"Ecuador was this weekend seeking support from its Latin American partners to confront what officials described as threats by Britain over Quito’s decision to grant asylum to Julian Assange, the Wikileaks founder.

The government of President Rafael Correa has played the role of the mouse that roared at the British bulldog in the standoff over Mr. Assange, who has been holed up in Ecuador’s London embassy since seeking refuge there on June 19.

Ricardo Patiño, Ecuador’s foreign minister, this week accused British authorities of planning to storm the embassy to enforce an extradition warrant against Mr. Assange and declared: “We are not a British colony.”

President Correa will not have to push very hard to win a ringing declaration of solidarity from his closest regional allies, including Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Bolivia, who are always on the alert for any manifestation of neo-colonialist bullying.

The radical Alianza Bolivariana, which includes those countries, issued a statement firmly rejecting British threats, even before its officials met in Ecuador on Saturday to discuss the situation.

The larger Union of South American Nations (Unasur), which includes most states in the continent, was meeting on Sunday, also in the Ecuadorian city of Guayaquil.

Despite the tone of righteous indignation likely to dominate both meetings, the Assange case has thrown up some odd contradictions, and accusations that, when it comes to the sanctity of political asylum, the Latin Americans do not always practice what they preach.

In Bolivia, one of Ecuador’s closest allies, opposition politicians have highlighted the case of Roger Pinto, a right-wing senator who has been sheltering in the Brazilian Embassy in La Paz for almost three months.

Mr. Pinto has been granted asylum by Brazil but the Bolivian government will not give him safe conduct out of the country on the grounds that he is the subject of corruption allegations.

Bolivian opposition figures said the government was guilty of doublespeak, and Fabián Yaksic, an opposition parliamentarian, said that in the Pinto case “they’re using the same arguments that we’re hearing from Britain’s Conservative government.”

Mr. Assange’s lawyers include Baltasar Garzón, a Spanish jurist and human rights campaigner.

Mr Garzón was on the other side of an extradition battle in 1998 when he issued an international warrant for the arrest of General Augusto Pinochet, the former Chilean president, on allegations that included the murder and torture of Spanish citizens.

The former dictator was in Britain at the time and a London magistrate granted a request for his extradition to Spain. The British government subsequently allowed him to return home to Chile on health grounds.

One of Gen. Pinochet’s firmest supporters at the time of his battle against extradition was Margaret Thatcher, the former Conservative prime minister. She had received help from the Chilean leader during the Falklands War of 1982 to recover Britain’s far-flung colony after an Argentine invasion.

That conflict still rankles with the Latin Americans and, Mr. Assange notwithstanding, remains at the root of their occasional outbursts against British neo-colonialism.

A Bolivian official, Idón Moisés Chivi Vargas, made a straight connection between the two cases in an article denouncing British colonialism. “Yesterday it was Argentina, today it is Ecuador, tomorrow it could be Bolivia, Venezuela, Cuba or Nicaragua.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reading the Chilcot Inquiry Report more closely

Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary.   The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the

Robert Fisk's predictions for the Middle East in 2013

There is no gain-saying that Robert Fisk, fiercely independent and feisty to boot, is the veteran journalist and author covering the Middle East. Who doesn't he know or hasn't he met over the years in reporting from Beirut - where he lives?  In his latest op-ed piece for The Independent he lays out his predictions for the Middle East for 2013. Read the piece in full, here - well worthwhile - but an extract... "Never make predictions in the Middle East. My crystal ball broke long ago. But predicting the region has an honourable pedigree. “An Arab movement, newly-risen, is looming in the distance,” a French traveller to the Gulf and Baghdad wrote in 1883, “and a race hitherto downtrodden will presently claim its due place in the destinies of Islam.” A year earlier, a British diplomat in Jeddah confided that “it is within my knowledge... that the idea of freedom does at present agitate some minds even in Mecca...” So let’s say this for 2013: the “Arab Awakening” (the t

An unpalatable truth!

Quinoa has for the last years been the "new" food on the block for foodies. Known for its health properties, foodies the world over have taken to it. Many restaurants have added it to their menu. But, as this piece " Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa? " from The Guardian so clearly details, the cost to Bolivians and Peruvians - from where quinoa hails - has been substantial. "Not long ago, quinoa was just an obscure Peruvian grain you could only buy in wholefood shops. We struggled to pronounce it (it's keen-wa, not qui-no-a), yet it was feted by food lovers as a novel addition to the familiar ranks of couscous and rice. Dieticians clucked over quinoa approvingly because it ticked the low-fat box and fitted in with government healthy eating advice to "base your meals on starchy foods". Adventurous eaters liked its slightly bitter taste and the little white curls that formed around the grains. Vegans embraced quinoa as