Julian Assange
TwitterFri, 14 Jul 2017 16:17 UTC
Expelling "diplomats" is perfectly lawful.
But seizing diplomatic property is a clear and dangerous breach of the Vienna Convention. I know all about this as I had to study whether the UK could legally seize Ecuador's embassy. No--even if every diplomat is expelled. The Vienna Convention governs all diplomatically certified buildings.
Inviolability is explicit.
Obama's seizure of two Russian embassy properties is seen by the global diplomatic community as beyond the pale. Why? Not because of any great love of Russia. But because
it places all embassies everywhere at risk by setting a new norm.
That is why even countries that opposed the US supported its rights in relation to the 1979 occupation of its embassy in Tehran.
Obama's action in seizing the two Russian embassy properties is much worse than the seizure of the US embassy in Iran. Why? Because Iran had just had a revolution and was in chaos. Protestors and not the Iranian government occupied the embassy (at least formally).
By contrast the US seizure of Russia's property was proclaimed to be an act of state, a flagrant and destabilizing breach of Vienna. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is not just some obscure international law. It is the foundation of all diplomatic law. It is the most widely obeyed and respected international law there is. It governs every diplomat, embassy and consulate.
So Obama's flagrant breach of it strikes at the heart the entire diplomatic system. Normally it is only seen when armed mobs take over and a militia occupies an embassy. As both the US and Russia are signatories to the
Optional Protocol on Disputes, any time Russia wants to
it can take the case to the International Court of Justice and win within months. ...
If the US doesn't obey the ICJ ruling on it will alienate the global diplomatic community and the ICJ. It will then be open season, standing at the ICJ will have diminished increasing the chance of victory for the plaintiff.
THE ABOVE is likely why we are seeing talk about the US giving the Russian properties back.
The Trump admin doesn't want to look weak or frightened or as if it can be pushed around by the ICJ or the global diplomatic community, so it pretends that its a quid pro-quo for Russia playing nice in Syria.
Comment: The Duran's Adam Garrie
points out that this is particularly relevant to Julian Assange's own case:
The reason that Assange has not been molested by British authorities is because he is legally on Ecuadorian soil so long as he remains in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London which he has done since 2012.
However, in the United States illegal seizing property of the Russian Embassy, a dangerous precedent is set for countries violating the rights of sovereign embassies throughout the world. ...
Russia and the US are not at war and were not at were when Obama ordered the seizures of Russian property. Likewise, there is no state of war between Britain and Ecuador, but if Obama could seize Russian territory over a clearly political agenda, could Britain do the same in respect of Ecuador?
Legally of course Britain cannot do so, but if a precedent for breaking such laws has been set by the United States, there is no telling whether or not a close NATO ally of the US could do something similar. Will those who commit war crimes together, violate the Vienna Convention together?
This is why, even if the dispute is resolved and the US hands back the stolen Russian property, it would set a legally important precedent for Russia to take the US to the International Court of Justice and at least demand compensation for being locked out of their own legal property.
For now, Russia is likely not going to follow Assange's advice as for the time being Russia seeks to prioritise a diplomatic solution to the crisis Obama caused. Russia delayed even raising the threat of diplomatic retaliation (which is legal) until Vladimir Putin met Donald Trump face to face, something which was clearly a good will gesture. Nevertheless, Russian patience is wearing thin.
Given that this is the reality, one can only imagine what Julian Assange must be feeling in respect of his own patience.
Comment: The Duran's Adam Garrie points out that this is particularly relevant to Julian Assange's own case: