# Aren't embassies inviolate under international law? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 16, 2012, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635 "2012-08-16T01:20:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/61 "2012-08-16T19:10:17Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > [Moderator Warning] > > **MPB in Salt Lake** , you’ve been around long enough to know that political commentary of this kind is inappropriate for GQ. This is an official warning. Do not do this again. > > Colibri > General Questions Moderator Was that political commentary? ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/62 "2012-08-16T19:27:05Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > At this point they are harboring a man accused of a criminal act. Oh, wait, he is only wanted for questioning in Sweden. Well, if he had actually been accused of a criminal act by a prosecuting body, I wouldn’t have a problem with this. There is an outstanding warrant for his arrest in Sweden, which I believe has survived a challenge in Swedish court. Realistically in the EU I don’t think it’s normal at all for one country to just ignore valid arrest warrants from another EU country. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/63 "2012-08-16T19:32:03Z")
In theory Ecuador could apparently get him out of the country by getting him into an embassy car (without setting foot on British soil outside the embassy) and then transporting him to a plane. Once there, if he sets foot on the ground to travel from the car to the plane he can be arrested. A few options could get around that, a plane configured to allow a car to drive into it would be one option. They can also smuggle him in a very large diplomatic bag with several men carrying it. Anything in the bag is protected and can’t be opened. What still doesn’t make sense to me is: 1. Very little chance in my opinion this results in any significant punishment for Assange under Swedish law. 2. This act will basically mean he can’t travel anywhere other than Ecuador for a long time. However long it takes for matters like this to “expire” under Swedish law. (His jumping bail in the UK might be a totally separate violation so that is a concern as well.) 3. During that time he will have to live in Ecuador, which will probably persist for many years versus at worst 12 months or something in a comfy Swedish prison (more likely some rehab “camp” or something.) Why not just go to Sweden? The claims that Sweden is just waiting to ship him off to the United States is a total red herring and fatuous, Assange hasn’t been charged with any crimes in the United States. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/64 "2012-08-16T20:25:33Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > They can also smuggle him in a very large diplomatic bag with several men carrying it. Anything in the bag is protected and can’t be opened. [That might not work.](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19281492) > [@](#): > > In 1984 there was an attempt to smuggle a Nigerian man from the UK in a so-called “diplomatic bag” protected from inspection. The bag was in fact a large crate - and customs officers successfully intercepted it at the airport. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/65 "2012-08-16T21:01:59Z")
Another factor: If this embassy is just an apartment, then is it even possible to get Assange into a car without setting foot on British soil? We might have to resort to action-movie scenarios, like having Assange jump out the window and land on a truck full of matresses (with diplomatic plates, of course), and then drive him to the airport, where he jumps directly into the open door of the plane. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![TATG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/50afbb/32.png) [@TATG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TATG)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/66 "2012-08-16T21:14:35Z")
> [@Diceman](#): > > Another factor: If this embassy is just an apartment, then is it even possible to get Assange into a car without setting foot on British soil? We might have to resort to action-movie scenarios, Or a [ridiculously small car](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_P50). ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/67 "2012-08-17T00:13:47Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Why not just go to Sweden? The claims that Sweden is just waiting to ship him off to the United States is a total red herring and fatuous, Assange hasn’t been charged with any crimes in the United States. This page has all the details: [http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WUKJA](http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WUKJA) the tl dr version: The Stratfor hacked emails leaked last year claimed there is a sealed grand jury indictment against Assange. Sweden is more likely to release Assange to the US under the temporary release scheme for various reason. Assange certainly seems to believe all this, which explains his seemingly bizarre action. The treatment of Bradley Manning certainly gives Assange a very good reason to make sure he never gets into the US jurisdiction. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/68 "2012-08-17T01:24:03Z")
> [@coremelt](#): > > This page has all the details: > [http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WUKJA](http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WUKJA) > > the tl dr version: > The Stratfor hacked emails leaked last year claimed there is a sealed grand jury indictment against Assange. > Sweden is more likely to release Assange to the US under the temporary release scheme for various reason. > > Assange certainly seems to believe all this, which explains his seemingly bizarre action. The treatment of Bradley Manning certainly gives Assange a very good reason to make sure he never gets into the US jurisdiction. That’s the basic definition of a conspiracy theorist cite, though. I find the entire idea to be preposterous. The history of the United States suggests Assange probably would not be tried, as I said, unambiguously **stolen** classified documents were released by persons working in the U.S. government to the New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case. The government tried to stop publication of the papers, and failed, and then tried to bring criminal charges against the government employees and it was declared a mistrial. They never tried to pursue criminal charges against the journalists. And this was in the Nixon White House, not one that would have been particularly hesitant to try and get the journalists arrested if they thought they could succeed. ---
**Author:** ![grude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47774/32.png) [@grude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grude)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/69 "2012-08-17T01:29:20Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > That’s the basic definition of a conspiracy theorist cite, though. I find the entire idea to be preposterous. The history of the United States suggests Assange probably would not be tried, as I said, unambiguously **stolen** classified documents were released by persons working in the U.S. government to the New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case. The government tried to stop publication of the papers, and failed, and then tried to bring criminal charges against the government employees and it was declared a mistrial. They never tried to pursue criminal charges against the journalists. And this was in the Nixon White House, not one that would have been particularly hesitant to try and get the journalists arrested if they thought they could succeed. One detail that might change things is that Assange is not a US citizen, I have seen this listed as both a plus and a minus in the case(from Assange’s viewpoint). I believe the fear is that not being a citizen he will be lost to Guantanamo or one of the CIA run black site prisons in the middle east or Europe. > **[HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News](https://www.huffpost.com/)** > > Read the latest headlines, news stories, and opinion from Politics, Entertainment, Life, Perspectives, and more. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/70 "2012-08-17T01:35:51Z")
The Atlantic, which is quite simply more reliable than sources like “justice4assange” had a really good article a bout both Stratfor and WikiLeaks some time ago: [link](http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/02/stratfor-is-a-joke-and-so-is-wikileaks-for-taking-them-seriously/253681/). Basically confirms what I’ve seen in reading the real news for the past few years. Namely that Stratfor is nothing but a scam company that sells banal corporate research at inflated prices, most of it easily found through internet searches or very low-level “intelligence gathering” abroad. By low-level I mean probably less in-depth than your average overseas journalists goes into when filing a report back home. Stratfor is a “CIA lite” in its mind and the mind of the gullible only, and it appears Stratfor intentionally promotes such an image. WikiLeaks by and large hasn’t done anything important aside from release the helicopter attack video, almost everything else ever released by WikiLeaks actually was already known, irrelevant, or uninteresting. Julian Assange appears to be a deranged egotist, having taken credit for things like Egypt’s revolution against Mubarak and most likely to him he fully believes he is so important that the United States is desperate to apprehend him. The truth is probably that he is not much of a concern at all. Bradley Manning is because he was an enlisted soldier who clearly violated the law, that means he has to be punished, the law he violated was one with extremely stiff penalties so he will most likely spend the rest of his life in prison. I’ll note that given Stratfor’s often repeating years-discredit rumors as “fact” and having overseas “intelligence gatherers” who can’t even speak the local language in the country they are in and need directions from freelance journalists to get around I find it extremely doubtful they have any access to a sealed grand jury indictment or any ability to even know about one. ---
**Author:** ![dzeiger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/46a35a/32.png) [@dzeiger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzeiger)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/71 "2012-08-17T03:44:58Z")
It occurs to me that even if the US did plan on doing anything with this, Assange’s grandstanding has made it much less likely to happen–we’re at a point where the UK is having to deny that they’re about to storm an embassy to grab someone who’s accused of something that seems roughly equivalent to beer goggles, by its nature that looks like so much overkill that they almost have to have sinister motives underneath, so everyone is looking closely for them. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/72 "2012-08-17T06:31:10Z")
What would happen if the UK simply expelled all of the Equadorian diplomats? Could they then retake the apartment claiming it is no longer an embassy? Or could it be used to capture Assange if he went with the Equadorians? ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/73 "2012-08-17T06:41:39Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Assange hasn’t been charged with any crimes in the United States. [Neither have 150 at Gitmo that the US knows are innocent.](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13184845) ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/74 "2012-08-17T06:49:44Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > [Neither have 150 at Gitmo that the US knows are innocent.](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13184845) Most of those 150 are no longer there (maybe all, hard to say based just on that article), having been released. From your own cite: > [@](#): > > There are now just under 180 detainees at the US naval base in Cuba. Most are deemed to pose a high risk threat to the US if released without adequate supervision. [BBC News - Wikileaks: Many at Guantanamo 'not dangerous'](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13184845) (eta: it doesn’t make it OK that they were there, but it’s better than them still being there, which your post may have unintentionally implied) Kind of besides the point, though, since Assange (having not been detained in a war zone or captured in relation to a terrorist plot) wouldn’t go anywhere besides a regular old court, jail, whatever. ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/75 "2012-08-17T13:32:30Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > The history of the United States suggests Assange probably would not be tried, as I said, unambiguously **stolen** classified documents were released by persons working in the U.S. government to the New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case. The government tried to stop publication of the papers, and failed, and then tried to bring criminal charges against the government employees and it was declared a mistrial. They never tried to pursue criminal charges against the journalists. And this was in the Nixon White House, not one that would have been particularly hesitant to try and get the journalists arrested if they thought they could succeed. Yet, a reading of more recent U.S. history would suggest that the U.S. government would have no compunction about kidnapping Assange from a foreign country and flying him somewhere to be tortured, without bothering with any legal proceeding (either in the U.S. or the country of kidnapping) at all. Not to mention that the current administration is in fact attempting to bring many cases for revealing information. Assange may be paranoid, but that doesn’t mean nobody is out to get him. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/76 "2012-08-17T14:07:20Z")
> [@Quercus](#): > > Assange may be paranoid, but that doesn’t mean nobody is out to get him. Assange is paranoid, and it’s the Swedish judicial system that’s out to get him. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/77 "2012-08-17T14:49:58Z")
“Even paranoiacs have enemies.” - Henry Kissinger > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > What would happen if the UK simply expelled all of the Equadorian diplomats? Could they then retake the apartment claiming it is no longer an embassy? Or could it be used to capture Assange if he went with the Equadorians? Yes, and according to NPR, that’s one of the approaches now under consideration by the British. Declaring the Ecuadorian ambassador _persona non grata_, closing the embassy and expelling the staff (and Assange) might do the trick very nicely. He could be arrested the moment he sets foot outside, or the police could go in and nick him once the closure of the embassy took effect. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/78 "2012-08-17T15:00:01Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > Kind of besides the point, though, since Assange (having not been detained in a war zone or captured in relation to a terrorist plot) wouldn’t go anywhere besides a regular old court, jail, whatever. Tell that to Maher Arar, the Canadian who was detained by US officials in New York, who then sent him to Syria for a year’s worth of torture, without any charges, due process or court authorisation. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/79 "2012-08-17T16:06:59Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Tell that to Maher Arar, the Canadian who was detained by US officials in New York, who then sent him to Syria for a year’s worth of torture, without any charges, due process or court authorisation. Or the asylum seekers Mohammed al-Zari and Ahmed Agiza, [who were tortured after Sweden handed them over to the CIA.](http://www.hrw.org/news/2006/11/09/sweden-violated-torture-ban-cia-rendition) ---
**Author:** ![grude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47774/32.png) [@grude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grude)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2012, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635/80 "2012-08-17T16:11:46Z")
How is this whole thing going over politically in Ecuador? I’m not sure how I’d feel as a citizen of a small nation that my government was souring relations and wasting tons of money protecting Assange. I have nothing against Assange, it just seems like a waste of money and relations for Ecuador, where is the national interest? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/arent-embassies-inviolate-under-international-law/631635.md?page=5)