IF there are US charges against him and IF the US tries to extradite then I'm sure he'll have an opportunity to fight it.
What is your opinion about what countries should or should not have to do based on? Your feelings about countries in general, or a specific empathy for Sweden?
> IF there are US charges against him and IF the US tries to extradite then I'm sure he'll have an opportunity to fight it.
You're absolutely sure? Why haven't you called Assange yet? I'm sure he'd be happy to know what you know.
The current rules for extradition do have their reasons. You may not want Germany to be able to enforce its strict rules about nazi speech all over the world, or Turkey to be able to imprison people who've offended Erdogan.
Haggling over extradition is not unusual. For example, the US has promised not to use capital punishment in order to extradite people from countries that forbid capital punishment.
If there would be a request, as you say yourself, Sweden doesn't necessarily have to honor it, for example if Assange faces capital punishment. Assange could probably fight extradition in court also.
In any case this is nothing here to suggest that this is anything more than a smokescreen thrown up by Assange to distract from the fact that he's a rapist fleeing prosecution.
He refuses to go anywhere that makes him extraditable to the US. The Swedish, in turn, say roughly "our general rules are such that we can't guarantee that, and an exception isn't practically possible". Which makes sense, it's arguably better to have plain and simple rules than ones that cover every last edge case.
Personally, I think the Swedish should bend their laws. Globalisation is proceeding, and I think there'll be more country-straddling cases in the next century than there were in the past century. If that assumption is correct, writing rules to cover stances like Assange's is more reasonable than it has been.