Yuri Kramar. Exclusively to Vestnik Kavkaza
See part 1 http://vestnikkavkaza.net/analysis/politics/38267.html
Apparently, the support of “the anti-American belt” of the Latin America will concern directly or indirectly potential victims of Washington’s “peacemaking operations” – Syria and Iran. “An enemy of my enemy is my friend.” It may reflect in a position in the UN and the Security Council where not only permanent members participate regularly, as well as a coherent economic policy, breaking the trade embargo, and so on.
Of course such a policy of the left-wing Latin American regimes is not favorable for “the world hegemon.” And the new Pope who was elected, at least, with the consent of Washington will be involved by the USA in resistance to anti-Americanism on the continent. Military dictatorships (in Chili, Paraguay, Argentina) which were used for suppression of the left-wing movements failed to govern effectively.
The USA has a history of using “the Catholic factor”. The fundament of social movements of the continent is the so-called “theology of liberation” which says that the main goal of the Church is libration of people from social and economic oppression. Jesuits (and the new Pope belongs to them) have done a lot to fight for social justice.
An interesting fact is that the most famous on the continent graduator of the Jesuit University is Fidel Castro. Of course one can say that Catholics (including Jesuits) teach anyone because the level of education is high in their universities.
Of course, officially “theology of liberation” has never been supported by the Vatican, especially under John Paul II who was elected, first of all, for the sake of announcing “a crusade against Communism.” Cardinal Bergoglio stood against “Catholic socialists” either. However, he criticized their approaches only which are far from Christianity, democracy, and are too bloody, but he didn’t mind the idea of social justice.
Now Francisco has a dilemma. The West expects his help on turning Latin America into Argentina – pro-Western, liberal, and globalist. The Vatican is also concerned watching the growth of socialist attitudes, as they can gain an anti-religious character.
At the same time, “the pro-Western alternative” may appear even worse for the Roman Catholic Church. The reason is not only the fact that “a religion” of modern globalism is “warlike tolerance”, i.e. popularization of homosexuality, abortions, euthanasia, and so on which is incompatible to Christian, as well as Muslim values. Moreover, real social justice cannot be achieved, if national treasures of Latin American states again fall under the control of transnational corporations.
“The liberal alternative” proved that hopes for it are senseless. In Argentina after a series of economic reforms proposed by foreign well-wishers, the country lost not only natural resources under the earth, but also the earth itself which appeared in hands of foreign banks as a prepayment for undisbursed loans.
Thus, the policy of the new Pope will mostly depend on preferences of this or that his hypostasis. If he wants to be an Argentinean neo-liberal, we will probably see “John Paul II-2”, a passionate fighter against the left-wing and anti-American movements. Turning of some countries to liberal and pro-American policy will inevitably influence their attitude to problems of the Middle East and the Caucasus.
If Francisco is to fight against poverty in Latin America and the rest of the world, he will have to cooperate with the left-wing forces, except for the Cubans and Koreans. It requires a different attitude to Iran, Syria, and “the Armenian genocide.”
The first exam for the new head of the Vatican will be the presidential elections in Venezuela on April 14. The local church intends to support the opposition, for example, it demanded that sick Hugo Chavez would swear an oath in the capital of the country rather than in a Cuban hospital. The main candidate of the Venezuelan opposition is Enrique Capriles, a graduator of the Jesuit University, even though he is a Jew.
What will the Pope decide in this situation? Will he distance from both of the candidates? Or will he support one of them? His decision will determine further steps of Francisco as the head of the Vatican.
