or other guilty criminal decides that an excellent way to avoid capture is to pop into the nearest embassy of a questionable Central American state and seek political asylum. The Geneva Convention and the principle of inviolability is designed to protect diplomats not rapists. It is only right that Mr Assange should return or be returned to Sweden for questioning, unless it can be proven that the charges are politically motivated -- and the existence of 2 alleged victims with good character and plausible stories suggests that the accusations are worthy of investigation. It is Mr Assange's exploitation of the asylum process that endangers our overseas staff, not the response of the government which, rightly, needs to balance the rights of two alleged victims of rape with the rights of a man who has poked a gorilla with a stick and is complaining that it now wants to kill him. The FCO is tweeting about the "charges" against Assange. What an absolute disgrace. . "#Assange faces serious charges in country with the highest standards of law & where his rights are guaranteed." . https://twitter.com/foreignoffice The only two realistic options I now see for Assange are: . 1. Remain in the Embassy building until the government changes (just a few years to go) -- but be mindful Ecuadorial governments change, too. OR, . 2. Get an Ecuador passport (or two copies, just in case), and get driven in an Embassy car -- ideally, together with the Ecuadorial ambassador -- by Eurotunnel