It might be important to remember this message.

The FARC negotiations, I assume, must be this FARC. They operate mostly in Colombia (which shares a border with Ecuador). Apparently FARC has operated a bit in Ecuador as well.

The FARC negotiations were back in September, but Assange wasn't cut-off back then.

I would imagine this pissed off Kerry a bit, considering that the peace ratification failed! (by an incredibly small margin)

So, what does Ecuador have to do with this? Besides sharing a border with Ecuador/FARC, it looks like Ecuador does not consider FARC a terrorist group (unlike countries like USA, Columbia, EU, NZ). Does this mean they would have even wanted the peace agreement ratified? Or that they would want it more?

Here's some info on what the (failed) Colombian peace agreement would have looked like. It appears that the FARC would completely, and legally, absorb back into Colombia and act like nothing happened. Some big players here.

Although, it is still most likely that the Ecuador file was simply more insurance for safety. Kerry would definitely have methods to get Ecuador to bend the knee if needed. If anything, holding onto Assange was likely Ecuador's security against the strong-arm of "the five-eyes". If they let him off the leash a bit, he begins to self-weaponize, but Ecuador can still yank the leash (internet) to feign obedience to EU/US.

The third part of that tweet should be obvious, as this was the third player on Oct 21st. I need to leave now so I can't finish this post.

Three visible players on Oct 21st:

Ecuador (internet/safety) Kerry (Angry US Sec state arrives in UK days prior) UK (Armed police)

Assange obviously got a whiff of this since the pre-commitment tweet seems to have occurred on the same time that Kerry was in UK talking to Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson (FCO) about Syria.

Now we're back to the potential Russia:Wikileaks link that was being discussed previously.