Ecuador's Defence of Civil Liberties

While this entry is a departure from my tracing topic, I could not pass up the opportunity to reflect on this week’s reading through this article. Mr. Snowden recently confirmed that he was the source of recent NSA leaks regarding US surveillance of civilian activity. He is “on the run” from US authorities who wish to prosecute Snowden for espionage. In his bid for escape, Snowden, like Julian Assange before him, has contacted the Ecuadoran government for asylum.

What is so interesting about this bid for asylum, is the Ecuadoran response to US criticism. In the linked article below, the foreign minister from Ecuador, Ricardo Patino rationalizes their involvement saying that “Ecuador puts its principles above its economic interests.” According to Ralph Clintron, this is not how democracy functions. Democracy protects pre-existing power structures; using appeals based in democratic topoi that often mask more self-interested pursuits. According to Clintron, democracy is essentially materialistic, and democratic virtues are often sacrificed for the sake of material resources.

In reading this news report, I must ask the question, what does Ecuador have to gain by their involvement in this conflict? Are they really concerned with the common good? Are their motives really spurred by the belief that “What is being done to Mr. Snowden and to Mr. Julian Assange – for making or facilitating disclosures in the public interest – is an assault against the people?” It is interesting that on his way to Ecuador, Mr. Snowden has passed through China, Russia and reportedly will pass through Cuba, each of which has refused US requests for extradition, and yet these countries have a long and public history of restrictive state policies.

So, if civil liberty is not their reason for defending Mr. Snowden, one must ask, what power interests does their involvement reflect? As this story unfolds, the relationships between the US and the countries involved are called into question. US officials are the first to cite the affect that this incident will have on future diplomatic ventures. And this is perhaps where the truth lies. These nations may not be concerned with civil liberties, instead, they may be using this incident to react to their relationship with the US in regard to other issues that do not allow for such an abrasive stance. This incident may simply be a side plot where nations who feel restricted by US power react by exercising their power  in the only available avenue.

Lally, K., Faiola A., and  DeYoung, K. "Snowden apparently did not board Havana flight, but may leave Moscow Tuesday." Washington Post 24 June 2013, n. pag. Web. 24 Jun. 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russia-says-it-has-no-authority-to-expel-snowden/2013/06/24/325281f2-dcaf-11e2-bd83-e99e43c336ed_story.html.

Clintron, R. (2010). Democracy and Its Limitations. In Eds. John Ackerman and David Coogan. The public work of rhetoric: citizen-scholars and civic engagement. U of South Carolina Press. 98-116