Swedish authorities will not release their prisoner Assange on gallant pressures in the form appeals or opinion articles. Even if fact-grounded and well written, and even if that is accomplished by decent people within the Justice system itself, such as former prosecutor Rolf Hillegren’s debate article [1] in SvD.
Published in Professorsblogg.com 13 Jan 2014
"Swedish prestige" may be one contributing factor, but one
real reason is that these Swedish political authorities, to a high
extent alienated on behalf of superpower U.S., are not any longer
sensitive to juridical opinions or even political decisions of their own
people. The Swedish rulers shall do on Assange no more, not less, than
precisely what Washington shall instruct them to do.
A
clear demonstration of the above is the actual discussion on the
Swedish defence, taking place in these very moments in Sälen amid
dignitaries from government and the military establishments of Sweden
and abroad. While the institution Swedish Civil Contingency Agency
disclosed these days that their last nation-wide poll shows that over
the half of Swedes disapprove the current (NATO-reliance) Swedish
defense design, PM Reinfeldt categorically dismissed at the conference
any flaw in such defense concept. This, in spite that only two per cent
of Swedes answering the poll considered the Swedish defense being “very
good”. PM Reinfeldt even declared that the Swedish defense has been made
"stronger" by his government.
Julian
Assange is not standing as a captive in London for the legal-wise
allegations under discussion by the well-intentioned piece of Mr
Hillegren in SvD.
Assange’s
freedom of movements was annulled by those in power a cause of the
Diplomatic Cables, and because he is the forerunner of the organization
WikiLeaks.
In
this context, another reason of why Carl Bildt and Fredrik Reinfeldt
will not “change their minds”, lies in the fact that such decision
rather belongs to the international corporate establishment targeted and
hit by WikiLeaks and the whistleblowing movement it generated, or
fearing to be hit in the future. In other words, “liberating or not
liberating enemy Julian Assange” is highly a purely domestic Swedish
issue. What are the relationships between this economic-military
international establishment, as a new epicentre of strategic decisions,
and local shareholder governments such the one of Bildt & Reinfeldt,
is an issue discussed in the “PESCI theses” developed in these columns.
With the above said, I would insist in my assessments stated in “Five political scenarios that can break the Swedish obstruction of Ecuador’s asylum to Mr. Assange”.
For
if this confrontation phenomenon has partly an economic-financial main
ingredient, and partly a geopolitical main ingredient, the way of solve
it would be most likely if resorting to measures at the same level. A
popular movement in Latin-American agitating a boycott to Swedish
manufactures goods– the JAS fighter included- if Sweden would not
respect the sovereign right of Ecuador of giving asylum to Assange, will
surely do more to avert the conspicuous Swedish capitalists (whose
enterprises are in fact international financed) deciding the fate of
Julian Assange.
The
history of Sweden's foreign policy appears being not more complicated
than that. And, the Swedish legal system has historically been
subordinated to Sweden's foreign policy. On this particular case,
Prosecutor-General Anders Perklev declared, referring to Mr. Hillegren opinions in SvD: "I don't think that they are at all representative of prosecutors in general".
References
[1]
R Hillegren, "Dags för Sverige att avsluta fallet Assange", SvT, 12 Jan
2014.
http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/dags-for-sverige-att-avsluta-fallet-assange_8887418.svd
No comments:
Post a Comment