4 ms·

There is precedent: "Thatcher—who was kept apprised of the situation by Whitelaw—determined that British law would be applied to the embassy, despite the Vienn

by nikcub 14y ago

There is precedent: "Thatcher—who was kept apprised of the situation by Whitelaw—determined that British law would be applied to the embassy, despite the Vienna Convention, under which the embassy is considered Iranian soil." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Embassy_siege http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Embassy_siege

marshray 14y ago
That building had been completely taken over by non-Iranians. Even still, the British didn't enter it until the hostage-takers began executing the Iranians. "Three further shots were fired during the course of the imam's conversation with Oan. Oan announced that a hostage had been killed, and the rest would die in 30 minutes unless his demands were met. A few minutes later, Lavasani's body was dumped out of the front door." Considering they were at the time holding 52 American hostages in the US embassy in Tehran, the Iranians couldn't credibly complain about the British rescue operation representing a violation of their rights under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. I guess I don't think that precedent is going to generalize to many other situations.
eriksank 14y ago
In all practical terms, the Ecuadorian authorities expect their embassy to be inviolable. It is this expectation and their insistence on this expectation that complicates this matter to no end. It is simply not in British interests to be seen dismissing this expectation as unimportant. My personal view is that a deal should be possible that is acceptable to both Assange and Ecuador, to end this stalemate. Her Majesty's diplomatic representation in Ecuador should be able to make a compelling proposal that saves the day and the face of everyone involved.
- marshray 14y ago
  > It is simply not in British interests to be seen dismissing this expectation as unimportant. Maybe that's understating it a bit. The United Kingdom itself has embassies all over the world, filled with important British people and often in places where they might not be uniformly liked. The British have far more to lose by a breakdown of diplomatic protections than the Ecuadorians do. http://www.google.com/search?q=british+embassy+attack http://www.google.com/search?q=british+embassy+attack

by nikcub 14y ago

marshray 14y ago

That building had been completely taken over by non-Iranians. Even still, the British didn't enter it until the hostage-takers began executing the Iranians. "Three further shots were fired during the course of the imam's conversation with Oan. Oan announced that a hostage had been killed, and the rest would die in 30 minutes unless his demands were met. A few minutes later, Lavasani's body was dumped out of the front door." Considering they were at the time holding 52 American hostages in the US embassy in Tehran, the Iranians couldn't credibly complain about the British rescue operation representing a violation of their rights under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. I guess I don't think that precedent is going to generalize to many other situations.

eriksank 14y ago

In all practical terms, the Ecuadorian authorities expect their embassy to be inviolable. It is this expectation and their insistence on this expectation that complicates this matter to no end. It is simply not in British interests to be seen dismissing this expectation as unimportant. My personal view is that a deal should be possible that is acceptable to both Assange and Ecuador, to end this stalemate. Her Majesty's diplomatic representation in Ecuador should be able to make a compelling proposal that saves the day and the face of everyone involved.

marshray 14y ago
> It is simply not in British interests to be seen dismissing this expectation as unimportant. Maybe that's understating it a bit. The United Kingdom itself has embassies all over the world, filled with important British people and often in places where they might not be uniformly liked. The British have far more to lose by a breakdown of diplomatic protections than the Ecuadorians do. http://www.google.com/search?q=british+embassy+attack http://www.google.com/search?q=british+embassy+attack