The Geopolitics of Pope Benedict

Chiesa has an excellent article up called the The Surprising Geopolitics of Joseph Ratzinger, Pope. It actually goes into Pope John Paul II 's geopolitical point of view too. It would be great if the media , and indeed many Catholics that twist Vatican statements around, would read this to correct crucial misunderstanding they are promoting as to various things.

A few excerpts:

I think this over the always controversial topic of war and the Iraq War is worth posting in full:

Then came a pope from Poland, and everything changed. The spiritual revolution that he inspired was the additional factor that accelerated the collapse of the Soviet system. During his pontificate, the Church deployed the entire gamut of its resources. Geopolitical realism alternated with Wilsonian idealism. The papacy put the people in front of the state. It replaced the inviolability of borders with "the duty and the right of interference, to disarm those who wish to kill." It called for the intervention of international troops, in defense of the peoples of Bosnia and Kosovo.

In both cases, these were Muslim populations, relics of the Ottoman Empire that three centuries before had besieged Vienna; now the pope was aligning himself with them. John Paul II was anything but a pacifist. He called for military intervention in East Timor, in Haiti, in the Great Lakes region of Africa: in this last case, his appeal went unheard, and the result was the unfettered genocide of entire populations. The expansion of freedom and of democracy was one of his guiding principles. But at other times and in other places, John Paul II opted for the rejection of armed action, for the sake of realism. He opposed the 1990-1991 war against Iraq, in spite of the fact that it was approved by the UN and intended to restore the legitimate sovereignty of an invaded country, Kuwait. Among the "interests" that motivated the pope's opposition to the war, the first was the defense of the Christian minority in Iraq. Another was the rejection of the new world order with unlimited American hegemony. Still another was the proposal of establishing a relationship, not of opposition, but of "dialogue" between the Church and Muslim countries, similar to the relationship with the Soviet bloc during the years of Östpolitik, even at the cost of keeping silent over the large-scale violations of human rights perpetrated in those countries.

After September 11, 2001, Pope Karol Wojtyla gave de facto approval to war operations in Afghanistan. But he resolutely opposed the second war against Iraq. He contrasted this with all his strength, but without ever condemning it as immoral. The logic of the pope's opposition to the war was, again, realist. So much so that in 2003, especially after the terrorist massacre in Nassiriya on November 13, the official line of the Holy See became – and remains – one of open support for the continued presence of Western troops in the country, a presence viewed as a "peacekeeping mission," partly for the protection of Christian minorities.

That last part I bolded might be news to many but it is very true. The attack in Nassiryia Iraq was the second worst terrorist attack behind 9 /11. In a amazing front page op ed that occurred in the Official publication /newspaper of the Italian Bishops a message was sent that the Church was starting to look at Iraq differently.

This was all missed by those that quite frankly decided to to try confuse people and mislead people that the Vatican supported an immediate withdrawal of US troops and Coalition forces from Iraq. Sadly that is still being done today.

Moving on to Pope Benedict:

If John Paul II was the pope of dazzling intuitions, Benedict XVI is the pope of methodical reasoning and action. The former was above all image, the latter is mainly "logos." John Paul II made an impact with these words from his first homily as pope: "Be not afraid, open the doors to Christ." The words already contained a glimpse of the peaceful revolution that he would inspire in Eastern Europe, and not only there. But the first action of Benedict XVI that made a worldwide impact was the long and substantial lecture that he gave at the University of Regensburg on September 12, 2006.

He literally shook the world, for both the right reasons on the wrong ones. That lecture explained the new pope's view of the Church and of the West and his plans for them, including relations with Islam. According to the canons of geopolitical realism, Benedict XVI should never have delivered that lecture in its entirety. He should have had it reviewed and purged beforehand by the diplomatic experts, something that he intentionally declined to do. And a number of people in the Vatican curia criticized him for this.......

and

Everyone was surprised by the extraordinarily friendly welcome that Benedict XVI gave to American President George W. Bush, on the occasion of his last visit to the Vatican. It certainly marked a break with respect to the traditional anti-Americanism of the Catholic hierarchy: an attitude that sees the United States as synonymous with unbridled capitalism, consumerism, social Darwinism. But the real motivation for Pope Ratzinger's fondness for the United States is that it is a country born and founded "on the self-evident truth that the Creator has endowed each human being with certain inalienable rights," foremost among which is liberty.

To United States ambassador Mary Ann Glendon, who came to present her credentials to him, Benedict XVI said that he admires "the American people's historical appreciation of the role of religion in shaping public discourse," a role that elsewhere – read, Europe – "is contested in the name of a straitened understanding of political life." With the consequences that derive from this on the issues closest to the Church's heart, like "legal protection for God's gift of life from conception to natural death," marriage, the family. The severity with which Benedict XVI chastises the governments of Europe on these issues, and, on the other hand, his clear admiration for the United States, is another element that distinguishes him. The material and spiritual destinies of the West are certainly at the center of this pope's geopolitical interests. But that's not all. It's enough to think of the attention that he devotes to China. The letter that the pope wrote to Chinese Catholics is also strongly Ratzingerian. There, too, there is little diplomatic prudence and reticence.

Anyway good read