Week 14: Reporter or Hacker? The Fate of Julian Assange
Summary: Julian Assange was arrested by the British police from the Ecuadorian Embassy due to an extradition from the US. While Mr. Assange was on good terms with the Ecuadorian leader Rafael Correa when he first fled from the US, the new leader of Ecuador revoked Mr. Assange's asylum due to his "discourteous and aggressive behaviour," "the hostile and threatening declarations of his allied organization against Ecuador" and "the transgression of international treaties."
The US government first tried to arrest Mr. Assange due to his activites with WikiLeaks, releasing classified information such as military documents concerning operations in Afghanistan. Now that he's been arrested by the UK authorities, he will be held in custody for up to 12 months in prison and has his extradition hearing on May 2, but will still remain in custody until then. The former Ecuadorian president stated that he is shocked by the revocation of Mr. Assange's asylum, stating that it goes against their constitution.
Mr. Assange has also released a statement in reaction to his arrest, stating that "it will be a sad day for democracy if the UK and Ecuadorean governments are willing to act as accomplices to the Trump administration's determination to prosecute a publisher for publishing truthful information." The Ecuadorian Foreign Ministry denied the rumors in a statement, calling them "fake news" and adding that the allegation of a deal with the UK "misrepresents reality."
Reaction: I think the extradition of Mr. Assange has deep implications for the rest of the world and whether to treat people such as him as reporters or as hackers. In the past, the US has criticized other countries for executing reporters and journalists for spreading information about the flaws of their government. Depending on how Mr. Assange and his lawyers frame this, the US could be faced with similar scrutiny from countries it has criticized in the past. WikiLeaks, represented by Mr. Assange, has spread classified secrets that are true, as any reporter would. However, the extra wrinkle of obtaining this information through illegal means. But does that change the fact that the organization is just doing that - reporting facts? While this issue may seem to only affect the US, it sets the stage for how the free world handles its own criticism and how it treats those who criticize it. The US now has the opportunity to show the world how they should deal with its citizens who disagree with them - not with covert assassinations and executions, but rather with a fair trial that exposes the truth, and the whole truth of the matter for better or worse.
Connection to MWS:
This connects to the Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials, where the US similarly set the stage for a fair treatment of the Germans and Japanese who committed war crimes throughout WW2. Instead of executing the criminals for their heinous crimes, the Allies chose to set up the trials to show the world that they are fair and treat their enemies respectfully. This allowed the Allies to create the narrative that as the "good guys," they chose to treat the Germans and Japanese justly, demonstrating their power to do good. In the case of Mr. Assange, the US has an opportunity to do the same. Holding a fair, public trial will demonstrate to the world the righteousness of the US by treating Mr. Assange fairly. While it may not produce the outcome that either the Democrats or the Republicans want concerning Russia's interference with the election, it will set an example and allow the US to maintain the image of being a fair country, even to its citizens that don't necessarily agree. It will also help shake the image of hypocrisy that other countries that the US has criticized in the past for jailing those who speak out against the government may develop from this whole exchange.
Questions to Consider:
How should the US handle Mr. Assange?
What are other possible implications of his case outside of the US?
Was it right for the US government to arrest Mr. Assange?
I don’t think that it is wrong for whistleblowers to put out information that they obtain as long as it is for the purpose of public knowledge, but when the information has to do with national security or bias, laws of treason and transparency can come into play. Unfortunately, the more interesting information has to do exactly with that. According to a top national security officer, Rodney McDaniel, only 10% of everything that is classified by the government needs to be classified. If this secret information is used for political bias or in ways that puts the security of countries in danger, then it is treason and Assange has a reason to be arrested. There have been connections with him and Russia that may indicate a combined effort in the collusion of Russia scandal. There is obvious evidence that Assange did obtain secret documents through illegal means, which means that the US has the right to detain him and put him through a hearing. But this is opposed by many who see this as an attack on journalism and the freedoms of those that report information. If wikileaks acts as solely a completely unbiased source that publishes secret information that doesn’t harm countries or create hatred, then it’s fine, but most information is kept hidden because governments knows it may stir up controversies. I don’t wikileaks is going to die because Julian Assange was arrested, as there are many other people who are part of the organization that know how to do what he did. I think the fact that wikileaks doesn’t have a face anymore just makes it more mysterious and threatening.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-11047811
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/uk/julian-assange-arrested-gbr-intl/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/world/europe/julian-assange-wikileaks-ecuador-embassy.html
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/11/712128612/julian-assange-arrested-in-london
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-assange/u-s-charges-assange-after-london-arrest-ends-seven-years-in-ecuador-embassy-idUSKCN1RN10R
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/apr/11/julian-assange-arrested-at-ecuadorian-embassy-wikileaks
I agree that it is scary to see WikiLeaks without a face. However, the way the US government prosecutes Mr. Assange will show the world how America treats his whole organization, WikiLeaks, as a whole. Mr. Assange has undoubtedly committed a serious felony, but what concerns the government more than the hacking is the information that is release. If they choose to punish Mr. Assange on the basis of cyber crimes, it will produce a drastically different outcome than if they choose to punish him for the secrets he revealed. However, it will not be made evident to the public as to which of the two they will prosecute Mr. Assange on - both political parties stand to benefit from the illusion of righteousness and enacting revenge on Mr. Assange for revealing their secrets. Again, dealing with Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks as a whole is a very delicate issue, as it sets an example for the rest of the world as to how we treat those who act out against us.
DeleteAlthough bringing to light the government’s faults is not illegal, since it would be protected under the freedom of the press and speech, Assange did illegally gain his information, which gives the government a right to arrest him. I believe that the US is not wrong for punishing Assange after illegally trying to hack into sensitive governmental information that could potentially put many people’s lives at risk. Having a fair trial though, is something that Assange should have the chance to have.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, according to the New York Times,
Legal experts predict that there is no concrete evidence that Assange is working with another party such as Russia. Furthermore, publishing stolen emails are not criminal and finding a way to charge Assange would be difficult.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/us/politics/julian-assange-wikileaks-russia.html
According to the New York Times, Mueller didn't find enough evidence to support a claim that Assange knowingly cooperated with the Russian Government to release the email correspondence and hurt Clinton's campaign. Therefore, the only reason the UN is allowed to keep him detained for the time being is "failure to submit to court, while his guilt in the matter is still unknown. The US should really stop trying to claim that Assange is absolutely guilty on the matter and bring him in, because it's clear that's not true as of yet and that the President, the most powerful person who stands to gain from the possible collusion, clearly is trying to distance himself from the crime. In the article that was cited here, back in 2016, where the collusion was supposedly going on, President Trump said that he "loves Wikileaks", though just recently he claims he "knows nothing really about him". It's pretty clear that all Trump wants to treat Assange with right now is the cold shoulder now that he's hurting his image even more. In short, Assange shouldn't be let off the hook for essentially releasing critical information to the public, but we shouldn't say that he's guilty of espionage, not only because there's no provable evidence yet but also because Trump has clearly thrown him under the bus now that he's no longer useful. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/us/politics/julian-assange-wikileaks-russia.html
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-11949341
The publishing of the confidential information is technically not illegal since the website has freedom of press. It is debatable if extreme information such as highly confidential governmental information should be allowed, but they definitely should have the right to release private information that has a direct impact on the people, because the public deserves to know. According to https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/us/politics/julian-assange-wikileaks-russia.html, "legal experts point out that what is known about his activities in 2016 — including publishing stolen emails — is not criminal, and therefore it would be difficult to bring charges against him related to the Russian interference campaign." Julian Assange has not been proven to do anything illegal, and it is still unproven whether Assange has any direct correlation with the Russian government. However, I agree with Penny that Assange still be arrested because he definitely used illegal ways of retrieving the information. Although the exact crime he has committed is still unclear, Assange should still be held until further information is revealed, or when the government finally discovers a valid reason to arrest him. After Assange's questionable actions and previous convictions of sexual assault, he definitely should not be trusted. He is both a reporter and a hacker.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is wrong for informants to provide the information they receive for public knowledge purposes, but when information is related to national security or prejudice, treason and transparent laws may play a role. Honestly more interesting information must be fully relevant. If this secret information is used for political prejudice or puts national security at risk, then this is treason and Assange has reason to be arrested. Contacting him and Russia may indicate a joint effort by the Russian scandal. There is clear evidence that Assange did obtain secret documents through illegal means, which means that the United States the right to detain him and allow him to pass a hearing but, many people think this is an attack on journalism and the freedom of those who report information. If wikileaks is just a completely unbiased source, publishing secret information that doesn't hurt the country or create hatred, then it's good, but most of the information is hidden because the government knows it can be controversial.
ReplyDeleteThis seems very complicated. If he is truly releasing truthful information that should be heard by the citizens of a particular place, I suppose the people should know what their government is doing and/or planning. However, confidential military papers aren't something that people all over the world should see, particularly if there are plans on it. On the main article, Assange was accused of "putting feces on the embassy walls and other behaviors far from the minimum respect that a guest can have" by the Ecuadorian authorities. If that is true, that is just majorly disrespectful and he should face some kind of punishment for defacing the embassy. There is still a thin line of whether he should be punished as a hacker or not punished as a reporter. To some degree, there must be a right to privacy but also the right to know what is happening in the world. The problem is that everyone is has different comfort levels of releasing information. However, in this particular case, I find that the things on the site are things that should be kept secret and not leaked to the public.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cnn.com/2013/06/03/world/wikileaks-fast-facts/index.html
I believe that the Assange case, should be handled by the US just as every other case would be. This is a crucial element to the US having a fair justice system. But, I believe that the questions: what are other possible implications of his case outside of the US and was it right for the US government to arrest Mr. Assange, put too much emphasis on Assange being the founder of WikiLeaks, and not enough emphasis on the facts of the extradition and Assange as a person. To begin, this is simply not an issue of freedom of speech. While, Assange may have started WikiLeaks, none of his crimes have anything to do with that. He was first accused of rape in Sweden, and now there is a second accuser. While, the case is no longer open, this was the case that made him seek asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy. But, by entering the embassy and staying, Assagne skipped bail, which is a crime, and that is why he spent time in jail in England. Clearly, this chain of events has nothing to do with freedom of speech, so therefor holds no international implications. Next, to the US extradition. Assange faces a charge of conspiracy to hack into a Pentagon computer network and is also accused of helping an Army private to illegally download classified information. While, part of this may look like a freedom of speech issue, lets analyze this further. First, trying to hack into the Pentagon is obviously a no-no which should be punished, and the second has nothing to do with him releasing the information which is protected by freedom of speech, rather he is getting punished for helping another person commit a crime. With all of this taken into account, it is clear Assange is not the whistle blower some may make him out to be, but rather a coward who is unable to stand behind his actions and instead hides from them.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/world/europe/julian-assange-sentence-uk.html
https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/4/12/18306901/julian-assange-arrest-wikileaks-rape-sweden-embassy
The Assange case must be handled just like any other criminal case. I would say that Assange shouldn't be prosecuted, but he acted as a tool for the Russians. Some may say that he was simply executing his right to free speech, but he hacked and meddled in the US electoral system. It is absurd for him to think that he won't be caught. In the US he is being prosecuted for legitimate reasons. If he was simply a news source there would be no controversy, but because he hacked and got his information through illegal hackers in Russia, he shouldn't be considered a journalist. It is absurd for people to think that this should go unpunished, seeing as multiple people working for the US had their cover blown and were forced to retreat from their targeted location. Bottom line is that people's lives were put in danger because of assange. Unlike Snowden Assange committed crimes that put people in danger, he committed crimes that hurt others more than it helped. Snowden committed a crime against the US, but in his case, he legitimately thought out the entire process and made sure that it helped the public. Unlike Snowden, Assange should be put on trial for what he did.
ReplyDelete