Seems to me Assange isn't so much afraid of being extradited to US (there is a truckload of ways to fight that if it ever comes to that) but of actually being convicted in Sweden.<p>The Piratebay trials have shown how corrupted the Swedish justice system can be, with both police, prosecution and judges having proven private connections with the copyright industry (which in itself is not only organized and financed by the US, but also actively backed up by the US government).<p>Being extradited to the US would make him a martyr, but being convicted for rape in Sweden would damage his reputation beyond repair. I doubt if the US even wants to deal with the whole circus of getting Assange extradited if there's an easier way to take him out of play.
Why Ecuador, in particular? I just learned that they've adopted the US dollar as their currency, following devaluation of their old currency in 1999.<p>Edit: I checked, and Ecuador does have extradition treaties with both the UK and the US. I don't know about Sweden though.<p>Edit2: according to <a href="http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/06/19/assange_seeks_asylum_in_ecuador" rel="nofollow">http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/06/19/assange_seeks...</a> Ecuador has a treaty with the EU as well. But moving to Ecuador puts the decision in Ecuadorian hands instead of UK, so maybe he thinks they will stand up for him better.
Assange interviewed the Ecuatorian president for his program at RT: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE-1-9QXd3Y" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE-1-9QXd3Y</a><p>The Ecuatorian president is introduced as "populist", yet the interview is non-critical. I thought "populist" was globally pejorative?<p><i>Edit: the president himself uses the term in a negative context</i>
How dire is Assange's situation? Is it really possible that the US will try to imprison or even execute him?<p>Edit: I know were not talking directly about the US here, but the reason I made the jump is that I see Sweden as a lot more likely to allow the US to bully it into giving up Assange
Julian's situation seems very weird to me, given the stories about how secretive he was, how he kept in hiding, etc. At the same time, he was very clearly and publicly the face of wikileaks.<p>Why did he not simply remain anonymous? All that Wikileaks has done could be done without having a public figurehead, right?<p>Being public seems to have been the tactical error. (or was he trying to be anonymous, but got outed at some point and then given that he couldn't be anonymous anymore he decided to embrace it?)