PopeWatch: Diplomacy

Sandro Magister gives us the details on the Pope’s policy in reference to Russia and Ukraine:

Among the leaders Volodymyr Zelensky has met with so far in Washington and in the capitals of Europe, Pope Francis is certainly the one with the positions farthest from his, and at times conflicting.

In an unusual statement issued shortly after the end of the conversation between the two in Rome, on the afternoon of Saturday May 13, Francis took care to say that there was only one point on which both had agreed: the “humanitarian efforts” for the victims of the war, in particular – as Zelensky later specified in a statement of his own – for the release of prisoners and the repatriation of Ukrainian children deported to Russia.

In effect, the pope had already given news of his cooperation in the release of prisoners last September in Kazakhstan, during his meeting with the Jesuits of that region. He revealed that “a military leader who deals with the exchange of prisoners” had come to meet with him at the Vatican “together with the religious adviser” to Zelensky, and that he, Francis, immediately called “the Russian ambassador to see if something could be done.” Which did happen, with the exchange on September 22 of over 200 fighters, and of more afterward. And now with the pope’s commitment to do everything possible for children as well.

Highlighting instead, after the conversation of May 13, the point of greatest contrast between the two was the Ukrainian president: “With all due respect to the pope, we don’t need mediators,” he said. “Since the war is on the territory of Ukraine, the peace plan can only be Ukrainian,” referring to his ten-point plan released last February.

The Vatican “mediation” between Moscow and Kyiv that Zelensky has refused is that which has been attributed repeatedly to the bidding of the pope, the last time after the words Francis himself spoke on his return from his trip to Budapest, on April 30, when he announced that for peace in Ukraine “a mission is underway, but it is not yet public,” and “when it is public I will talk about it.”

Promptly after this sibylline announcement Professor Stefano Zamagni, until March 31 president of the pontifical academy of social sciences and last October the promoter of a six-point peace plan – right away highly criticized for its imbalance in Russia’s favor – relaunched that plan of his, remarking that he sees it as more timely than ever and that he entrusted it at the time to the care of the secretariat of state. But without any confirmation from this.

The word from both Moscow and Kyiv was that they knew nothing of the initiative the pope had announced, while secretary of state Pietro Parolin instead confirmed that something was afoot. But instead of “mediation” this would be a matter of “mission,” from the Latin word “missio,” which means sending. That is, Francis is thought to have the intention of sending two cardinals to Moscow and Kyiv, each with a letter of appeal from the pope for a ceasefire, just as in 2003 John Paul II sent cardinals Pio Laghi and Roger Etchegaray to Washington and Baghdad, with the pope’s written request to stop the imminent conflict in Iraq. Without finding a hearing, as will be recalled.

Among the various gifts on the occasion of the May 13 meeting, Francis offered Zelensky a book with a collection of his remarks on peace in Ukraine. Among these is one in which the pope speaks clear words in support of the armed struggle of the Ukrainians against the Russians. It is the “Letter of the Holy Father to the Ukrainian people” released on November 24 2022, in which at a certain point the pope writes: “I think of you, young people, who in courageous defense of your homeland have had to take up arms rather than pursue your cherished dreams for the future.”

And further on: “I stand in admiration of your steadfast resistance. Even amid the experience of this enormous tragedy, the Ukrainian people have never given in to discouragement or self-pity. The world has come to recognize a people bold and strong, a people that suffers and prays, weeps and struggles, resists and continues to hope, a noble people of martyrs. I remain close to you.”

This letter was the fruit, also in terms of the writing style, of the meeting that took place in Rome on November 7 between Francis and the major archbishop of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church, Sviatoslav Shevchuk, strongly in solidarity with the patriotic war also being fought by his faithful. And when it was published it marked a clear turning point in the position taken by the pope, who before this had never said that he approved without reservation the armed defense of Ukraine against Russian aggression.

But then this first statement by the pope in support of the Ukrainian war of resistance was also the last. Chilling even more the relations between Kyiv and the Vatican, and not even obtaining, thanks to this, an improvement in relations with Moscow.

In fact, since the start of the war Francis has not yet managed to establish direct contact with Vladimir Putin. Last November 6, during the return flight from his trip to Bahrain, the pope said that from the very first days he had asked, through the Russian ambassador to the Holy See, to be able to go to Moscow to meet with Putin. But from Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov he received the reply that “for the moment this was not necessary.” The request and the relative reply were made by letter, and since then Putin has remained unapproachable. A last letter from Francis to Putin may have been handed over on May 11, once again to the Russian ambassador Aleksandr Avdeyev, received by the pope on a farewell visit. It is not known with what outcome.

And yet there has been no lack, on Francis’s part, of positions that are very understanding of the Kremlin’s “reasons,” in particular that “barking of NATO at Russia’s doors” which the pope has repeatedly pointed out as the triggering cause of the aggression against Ukraine, “without understanding that the Russians are imperial and fear insecurity at the borders.”

This and other statements by Francis have lent weight to the thesis that the current pope is marking a geopolitical realignment of the Church of Rome, no longer with the West in solidarity with Kyiv, but with the rest of the world, with Latin America, with Africa, with Asia, with states that are all very reluctant to oppose Russia.

This thesis has been supported, in the magazine “The Atlantic,” by the renowned American vaticanista John L. Allen Jr., who pointed out that on the war in Ukraine the pope is in fact closer to the positions of India and China than to the European and Atlantic ones.

Go here to read the rest.  The Pope’s diplomacy is easy to understand.  He is on the side of tyrants so long as they are anti-US.  Strong anti-Americanism has usually been a component of Peronism,  and that has been the one unchanging feature of Vatican diplomacy under Francis.