I personally found the speech quite astounding. There were various suggestions as to what he might say about the resolution of his situation, that he might submit voluntarily to the Swedish authorities etc. He is of course under an obligation, as part of his being granted political asylum by the Republic of Ecuador, to refrain from making political statements. Instead he used the opportunity, from the premises of the Embassy, to drive home a very political message and to describe his personal position in some of the dramatic terms that I have commented on in my last blog entry.
Specifically, the language he used would not be out of place in a political thriller. He spoke in Hollywood terms of police "descending" on the building, "swarming" up an internal fire escape, "after dark". He spoke in the language of the underdog: a courageous small nation standing up bravely to "threats" and taking a "stand for justice", a country defending its Constitution, of shining a light on the secret crimes of the powerful, of unity in oppression and determination.
All of this is of course like catnip to his devotees. It is exactly the language they love and a reinforcement of a vision they seem to require. The paranoid world they dwell in is full of fear, secrecy, and conspiracies. He spoke to his supporters as being "witnesses" who had protected him, giving them a sense of importance and purpose. It is all about vigilance: looking out for the hidden faces of the "enemy" and "oppression". He reduced it to the personal: "his children who have been denied their father. Forgive me, we will be reunited soon."
What he did not do once was mention why he was held up in the Embassy, which is because of his decision and own voluntary act in skipping bail, and being a fugitive from due judicial process. Not once did he mention the two women in Sweden, alleged victims of serious sexual assault. He blatantly conflated the work of Wikileaks (which many consider extremely valuable) with his personal situation of being a rape suspect avoiding justice.
To me he came across as being caught up in the same head space of many of his devoted supporters. He expressly stated that the UK did not "throw away the Vienna Convention" because his supporters "were watching". This must be either highly insincere, or the view of a fantasist. The implication is the UK would have stormed the Embassy had no one noticed? I can't get my head round how that would work exactly. I should have thought the media would have been involved in any such event, regardless of the presence of a group of people waiting outside.
He brought the United States into the picture by speaking of a witch hunt. There was no acceptance that it is Sweden that requires him for a criminal prosecution, not a country that has not even sought his extradition. It is exactly the same mixing of real and hypothetical that his supporters engage in. He spoke of Pussy Riot and the disgraceful case of the treatment of Private Manning. What exactly do either of those have to do with his position as a rape suspect?
Assange named a host of Latin American nations whose foreign ministers would hold an "emergency meeting" (again note the drama of his language). The irony that many on the list have quite dubious records on human rights and government oppression surely cannot be lost on the intelligent observer. Here is a man whose organisation has stood up against government secrecy and censorship seeking refuge with regimes whose records are for the most part incomparably worse than the "oppressor" nations which are his enemies.
Julian Assange did not come across to me as a frightened man. He came across today, in my subjective view, as an arrogant, egotistical, manipulative coward. The last few days have really changed my view on him, and not for the better. His speech took us no further. It gave no detail of anything that would happen next, of any remorse, or of any recognition of the two women who have alleged serious sexual assault. I joked before he came on that his appearance would remind me of a scene from Evita. For the drama he plied on, and for his astounding egomania, I fear I was far from wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment