Vatican reaction [or rather, lack of it] to US strikes in Iraq By John L. Allen Jr. | [Boston] Globe Staff | August 09, 2014 When the United States went to war in Iraq in 1991 and 2003, the Vatican was a vociferous critic of those conflicts. On the other hand, Pope Francis and other Vatican officials have been clamoring for months for the international community to come to the aid of the country’s embattled minorities, including Christians. As a result, Vatican-watchers have been anxious to gauge the response to the limited US airstrikes that began Friday. It’s a case in which Rome seems pulled in different directions, perhaps accounting for what has been so far a muted reaction. First of all, to be clear: While pacifism is a legitimate option within Catholic social teaching, it’s not mandatory, and recent popes haven’t been pacifists. The late Pope John Paul II helped coin the term “humanitarian intervention” in the 1990s in places such as Haiti and Bosnia, where he supported peacekeeping exercises intended to defend civilian populations and to disarm aggressors. In the case of the new American campaign in Iraq, the strikes are aimed in part at facilitating delivery of humanitarian aid, which Francis has identified as an urgent priority. Moreover, the action came after the United Nations Security Council condemned aggression by the Islamic State and called for support for Iraq, giving the US campaign some degree of international warrant — one of the Vatican’s tests for a morally legitimate use of force. On the other hand, most Vatican diplomats believe the 2003 US-led invasion laid the basis for the instability and sectarian tension which the radicals are now exploiting. As a result, there’s a built-in skepticism any time American forces deploy in the country. In addition, the Vatican believes the ideal formula for a humanitarian intervention is one that occurs under the formal sponsorship of the United Nations, with a clear footing in international law, so that it’s not just one state or a “coalition of the willing” pursuing its own agenda. Most basically, the Vatican believes, as recent popes have said repeatedly, that “war is always a defeat for humanity,” so nobody’s going to come out and applaud bombing campaigns. Arguably, this is a case in which silence signifies grudging consent. Usually when a country starts dropping bombs, Vatican officials are among the first to protest. In this instance, mum has been the word. “No one here is celebrating,” one Vatican diplomat told the Globe on Saturday, “but when people are at risk, they have to be defended . . . that’s clear.” In other words, the Vatican hasn’t issued a green light, but it hasn’t put up red either. It’s more like amber — proceed with caution. As a footnote, another reason for the Vatican’s discretion is concern that it not be perceived as calling for an armed crusade to defend Christian interests, which could be exploited for propaganda value for by radical Islamists. For the same reason, officials were at pains over the weekend to stress that Filoni’s mission isn’t aimed just at Christians, but at all vulnerable minorities, and that the Vatican supports local political solutions to protect everyone’s rights.
Posted on: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 01:35:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015