Yuri Kramar. Exclusively to Vestnik Kavkaza
Yesterday, the enthroning of the new Pope Francis took place in the Vatican. Many indirect factors prove that his election wasn’t a coincidence. First, Benedict VI resigned, the first time in 600 year a sitting pope had done sos; then he was replaced by Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio in the second day of the conclave’s working. Almost all international mass media are paying numerous compliments to the new Pope.
It makes us think about a very smart and well-prepared direction of the Pope’s electing and the powerful information campaign which followed the elections.
The new head of the Vatican is expected to overcome the crisis in the Catholic Church and using it in favor of those who contributed to Francisco’s enthronement. At the same time, these goals contradict each other, and certain decisions will depend on the Pope himself. What will he feel like: an Argentinean, a Latin American, or a Catholic?
The policy of the RCC will depend on this, including the policy of the Caucasus and the Middle East. For example, recently the pro-Armenian mass media have reported as if Cardinal Bergoglio called “the Armenian genocide a hard crime against humanity and the Armenian nation, committed by the Ottoman Empire” in 2006 in Buenos Aires. However, they came up with only one reference to a little-known American periodical. It raises doubts on truthfulness of the information. The Argentinean Senate adopted the resolution in 1998, which judges any genocide as “a crime against humanity”, as examples there were genocides of Armenians, Jews, Kurds…
Such a behavior of the Argentinean elite is not surprising. Firstly, the Jews Diaspora of Buenos Aires surpasses even the New York Diaspora. The foreign minister of Israel Avigdor Lieberman paid a special attention to the Argentinean authorities a couple of years ago during his visit to the South America. And what can be more pleasing for Tel-Aviv than a small filth to Turkey, its strategic rival – at least the propaganda of “the Armenian genocide”?
Secondly, Argentina is the most “pro-Western” country among other states of the Latin America. Its role is similar to the role of Poland in East Europe. Buenos Aires is watching its Latin American neighbors and fulfilling all globalist requirements of the IMF, the World Bank, and other liberal structures. As for the policy of “liberty promotion” along with protection of homosexuality an important moment is touching on the myth on “the Armenian genocide.”
By the way, both of these items concern the motherland of the current Pope. Along with the resolution on “the Armenian genocide” the Argentinean authorities have recently recognized ability of homosexual unions – it caused a heavy rebuff of the head of local Catholics, Cardinal Bergoglio. His relations with President Cristina Kirchner appeared to be at “the freezing point.”
Almost all international mass media noticed that congratulations from Lady-President were very moderate. And even the recent visit to the new Pope was marked by Kirchner’s request to “contribute to returning of the Malvinas Islands to Argentina”, the residents of which voted by common consent for maintaining the archipelago under the British jurisdiction.
However, Popes have never interfered into disputes of secular leaders of the world and have always followed the principle “let the strongest win.” The UK is the strongest in the dispute over the Falkland Islands. And Kirchner’s impossible request resembles a direct desire to get the Pope into a mess in eyes of his compatriots.
At the same time, these factors do not contradict attractiveness of “the Argentinean variant” for modern Western liberalism, including the USA. Other variants were much more uncomfortable for Washington. While Americans had been fighting against the world Communism and the USSR, they failed to see a boom of socialism in the Latin America. In the 20th century only Cuba experienced its victory, but today it is easier to name the countries where socialists are not in power. Venezuela, Brasilia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru, and Nicaragua are being administrated by the left-wing regimes. First of all, they are oriented at nationalization of natural resources producing from hands of transnational monopolies which used to leave only a tiny part of revenues to the population.
The policy of these countries differs from the Argentinean or Columbian. In some extent they all are anti-American, and their foreign political steps prove this. For example, after the conflict over South Ossetia Venezuela and Nicaragua were one of first countries which recognized its independence.
To be continued
