Why is Assange Hiding?

What is it about Julian Assange? His very name seems to incite venom of one type or another from both the right and the left. One says he's a traitor to (insert nation here) while the other says he's the penultimate defender of free speech. Meanwhile Sweden wants him on sexual assault charges. What to think?

As to the sexual assault charges, the idea that a conservative would be forgiven such things without being hauled through court leaves one to wonder whether women are being thrown under the train for the sake of allowing someone to expose state secrets to the world. That's not a pleasant thought; crimes against a person surely merit the full vetting process. And we wonder if hypocrisy is at work here as well. A cursory glance at what is happening with Missouri's Todd Akins over his views on rape demonstrates very clearly how the left can appear two faced on the supposed women's issues. Why are there no calls for Assange to face the allegations against him? He's accused of actual assault; Akins at worst was merely stupid.

Are the allegations false? That is more than we know. Yet we suspect that it is more than his supporters know as well yet for some reason don't care. Yet the charges are coming from Sweden, a nation not exactly known as bastion of social conservatism. At the end of the day, we only know that Sweden thinks enough to want to at least talk more to him about it. These charges are a separate item from whatever he did through Wikileaks. If they are mere smoke meant to draw him out for capture, well, let's just say that's it's awfully convenient that he finds the political asylum defense worth pursuit unless he finds a need to hide from something.

Which brings about point number two. He and his defenders can say whatever they want about open agreements openly arrived at, but until they recognize that that only works when everyone agrees to play fair they will never appreciate that there is a need for secrecy at certain times and certain places among nations, and perhaps even among friendly nations. If what he did amounts to espionage, then, quite frankly, the United States and several other nations may well have a right to haul him into court. It's as simple as that.

No one has the moral authority to leak state secrets solely for the purpose of leaking them. Like it or not, some things are confidential for very good reasons, reasons which go beyond any given individual's assumed right to know them. When the first nation willing to grant him sanctuary is one so far down the line of world order as Ecuador, it speaks volumes. Not the least of which are the tales of someone who has something to hide from.