Look up narcissist in the dictionary and the term is defined as excessive love or admiration of oneself. In the world of mental health, meanwhile, narcissistic personality disorder applies to a disorder in which a person has an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. Both of these terms may have originated in Greek mythology but as the last few days have shown, they could easily have been invented to describe Julian Assange.

As the WikiLeaks founder stood on the balcony of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London on Friday, squinting at the sun he rarely sees, waving a United Nations report, he certainly had the air of a man who sees himself in heroic, mythical terms. With the world’s media in attendance and his loyal supporters whooping below, he showed off the UN report that agrees with his own assertion that he is being arbitrarily detained by the UK and Swedish authorities, that he should now be “set free”. He talked of “sweet victory” and attacked the two governments for denying his children the right to see their father.

I have no doubt Mr Assange views his situation, which has seen him holed up in the embassy for three and a half years, as similar to that of the prisoners at Guantanamo. But as he spoke imperiously on the balcony about unlawful detention, of the supremacy of the UN, of human rights and his fears of extradition to the US, the one elephant in the room he did not address was the legal reason he is being sought by the UK and Swedish authorities in the first place: the outstanding accusation of rape against him.

There are many in Mr Assange’s camp who would say the accusation is being used to discredit and reel-in a man who is dangerous to governments across the world because of his selfless devotion to civil liberties. He did, after all, leak material showing some extremely disturbing stuff, including footage of US soldiers shooting dead civilians in Iraq.

But in whose world does leaking material about illegal government activities leave you unwilling and unable to defend yourself against a separate but equally serious legal accusation? In Assangeland, of course, where everyone else is to blame for everything and the world and its wife - especially its wife - is out to get you.

Over the years there has been a horribly mysogynistic bent to much of the rhetoric of Mr Assange’s supporters. The Australian has admitted having sex with the woman who made the allegation, but claims it was consensual. And in Assangeland denial is obviously enough. Why should the great man have to explain himself to anyone else? The allegation must be politically motivated, right? Why should he have to even speak to the authorities about this pesky rape stuff when he’s got much more important stuff to worry about?

We, of course, should be asking another question altogether: what right has the UN to deny a woman who claims to be the victim of a serious sex crime the chance of justice? Does the UN really view Mr Assange’s right to walk the streets as more important than a woman’s right to see her accusation of rape legally investigated? Shockingly, if Friday’s report is to be believed, the answer is yes on both counts, though the UK Government does not agree.

Mr Assange could walk quietly out of the embassy any day of the week. In doing so, he would, of course, have to face the serious sexual accusations against him. But doing so would give him the opportunity not only to clear his name, but also see the children he claims to be denied access to. After all, Sweden is known to have a fair and transparent legal system. So what is he afraid of? He has claimed all along that Sweden will extradite him to the US, but there is not a shred of evidence to support this.

Make no mistake, Mr Assange is holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy because he chooses to be. Because it gives him the oxygen of publicity and makes him feel important. Because it prevents him having to face up to an allegation that could potentially undo anything positive his WikiLeaks work has achieved. His pompous bearing on Friday in front of the cameras made that abundantly clear.

Mr Assange has always used sections of the media to promote the self-made myth that he is the ultimate martyr for civil liberties. For the moment, bizarrely, it appears the UN is prepared to concur. This story is far from over. Nobody knows how it will end. But one thing is for sure. The ultimate tragedy of Julian Assange can only ever be about the fatal flaw that has always brought him down: narcissism.