Do you love fiction about spies and secret missions? I do. So, I can't help but imagine a US covert mission to do to Edward Snowden what Israel did to Adolph Eichmann.
The dramatic scenario I imagine is exactly what the Israeli government pulled off in 1960 when it snatched World War II German War Criminal Adolph Eichmann from Argentina for trial in Israel. Here is one report:
On a Wednesday evening in May, a small team of Mossad agents waited anxiously around an apparently broken-down Buick limousine near Eichmann’s house at 14 Garibaldi Street for him to arrive back from work on his usual bus. He was late, but when he walked past, the agents seized him, muffled his shrieks, pushed him into the back seat of the car and drove him to a house they had rented a few days before, where he was questioned and admitted his true identity. He was kept there until on May 20th, heavily sedated and disguised with his grey hair dyed and a false moustache, he was taken aboard an El Al plane to Dakar in Senegal and from there to Israel.Whether our government is capable of pulling off something like that depends on how Edward Snowden is able to live as a fugitive, wherever he finds asylum. Whether our government should do so, or will do so, is something else altogether.
If this train of thought in this rant interests you, follow me into the tall grass for more.
The US should not do this, of course, but our government does a lot of things that damned few folks around this blog would approve. I would personally prefer the government leave Edward Snowden alone and a lot of people around the World would agree with me. But I know it is unwise to expect the government to decline prosecution. Any government under any President. The laws that the US seeks to enforce against Mr. Snowden also bind hoards of others in and outside of the government who have access to classified materials. Sadly, if for no other reason, the government is compelled by duty to make an example of Mr. Snowden by seeking his arrest and extradition. After all, it's not like we're talking about Wall Street, here, where making examples has a whole different meaning, involving immunity and bonuses and appointment to cabinet seats. But let's not go there.
Inevitably, that leaves speculation of how far our government is willing to go to lay its hands on Mr. Snowden? One would always hope that the government would apply only legitimate means consistent with US and international law, but, regrettably, experience teaches us that isn't necessarily the case, even with our present President.
Our government gave short shrift to matters of International Law and Pakistani sovereignty that night. What if Edward Snowden sought refuge in some country with US relations even more frayed than the US-Pakistani relationship, say Ecuador, where the Foreign Minister reports that Mr. Snowden has requested asylum?
Ecuador has badly strained relations with the US. According to GlobalSecurity.Org, the President of Ecuador greeted the inauguration of President Obama thusly:
Visiting Havana in January 2009, Correa demanded that the "Empire" end its "blockade" of Cuba, calling U.S. policy absurd. He accused the "Empire" of ethnocide (apparently meaning destruction of a people's culture). He called for an Organization of Latin American States that would include Cuba and exclude the US.I saw Spamalot on Friday night and President Correa's gesture reminded me of the line "I fart in your general direction!". Also, The Fish Slap Dance.
Ecuador already protects Wikileaks founder Julian Assonge from arrest and extradition to Sweden on criminal charges, but that is virtually a house arrest. Protecting leaker, Edward Snowden, would be similar to protecting leaker, Assonge, except for the sex part. But, if Snowden takes up life in Ecuador, he'll need either house arrest or enough money for bodyguards if he wishes to avoid the risk that the US will send tough guys to grab him and throw him into a car, drive him to a safe house, sedate him and fly him to the US. And bin Laden had guards, didn't he?
But, the US risks a hell of a lot from strained diplomatic relations with Ecuador. We risk Valentine's Day! That's right, it's a War on Valentine's Day. What I really mean is roses. There doesn't seem to be a very robust trading relationship between the U.S. and Ecuador. But over the last 20 years, Ecuador has been the major US trading partner for rose seed, more than 50% of our national supply, worth over $20,000,000.00 to the US economy.
OK, I hear you. That's nothing to the US economy. The American President can't visit the outback with out it costing that much. But it may be worth a lot more to the poor folks in Ecuador. Click that link about rose seed back there. Rose cultivation in Ecuador provides a living for mostly female heads of household in badly impoverished areas. The benefits in their daily lives are tangible and positive. Many are diverted from much more dangerous forms of agriculture. The "21st Century Socialist" Ecuadoran government (shatever the fuck that means) promotes these programs and this trade.
We need to alert FOX News. Obama is persecuting Edward Snowden just to anger the Ecuadoran government, thus imperiling American rose production to attack Valentine's Day, the heartless bastard.