Sunday, December 18, 2022
Friday, December 16, 2022
Thursday, December 15, 2022
Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin apologized to Russia on behalf of the Holy See, announced Maria Zakharova of the Russian Foreign Office.
Edit: it’s almost as if the groups the Vatican offended weren’t actually murdering thugs!!
(Rome) The Vatican apologized to Russia for the recent comments made by Pope Francis in an interview with a US magazine. Moscow said it would accept the apology.
Francis' statements about the Ukraine conflict to the US Jesuit magazine America had caused a stir and upset. On the Western side, there was talk of a “change of course” by the Pope, which meant moving away from a neutral position in favor of the Western one. On the eastern side, on the other hand, people were very upset. The Pope was accused of insult and racism. Russia's Foreign Minister Lavrov even called Francis' words "un-Christian".
No course change can be read from the interview. Francis tried to accommodate his interlocutors and the American audience by not condemning Vladimir Putin and the Russian government, but by sharply pillorying the third Russian row. In doing so, he generalized that he attacked the Chechens and Buryats, two small peoples of the Russian Federation, as "particularly cruel." The Chechens are Muslims, the Buryats are Buddhists.
The Vatican Secretariat of State was anything but happy about the papal verdict. The months-long efforts to offer the warring parties the opportunity to act as an impartial mediator for peace talks suddenly seemed to have been wasted.
When Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin tried to take confidence-building measures on Monday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova countered on the same day:
“Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin believes that the Vatican could be a suitable place to organize a meeting of the parties for a dialogue on Ukraine. I'm afraid my Chechen and Buryat brothers wouldn't appreciate it. As far as I remember, not a word of apology came from the Vatican.”
In any case, the Vatican knew what to do – and reacted after a visit to Santa Marta.
Today Zakharova announced that Moscow has received an apology from the Vatican for the Pope's comments about Chechens and Buryats:
"We have received a message from the Vatican through diplomatic channels containing an official statement on behalf of the Secretary of State of the Holy See, Pietro Parolin, regarding the above statements by the pontiff. In particular, the note states: The Vatican Secretariat of State apologizes to the Russian side.”
At the same time, Zakharova pointed out that
"The Holy See deeply respects all the peoples of Russia, their dignity, faith and culture, as well as other countries and peoples of the world".
The Foreign Ministry spokeswoman added:
The apology shows "that the Vatican not only calls for dialogue, but also knows how to conduct the dialogue and listen to the interlocutors. This approach deserves sincere respect.
We believe the incident has been resolved and we look forward to continued constructive engagement with the Vatican.”I’m
The Foreign Ministry spokeswoman added:
The apology shows "that the Vatican not only calls for dialogue, but also knows how to conduct the dialogue and listen to the interlocutors. This approach deserves sincere respect.
We believe the incident has been resolved and we look forward to continued constructive engagement with the Vatican.”
Shortly before Moscow made the apology public, Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni confirmed that there were "diplomatic contacts on the matter," without going into detail.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: VaticanNews/Facebook/Ambasciata delle Fed. Russa (Screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.Com
Wednesday, December 14, 2022
Pope Francis with Bishop Heiner Wilmer of Hildesheim on 17 October 2022. Will Wilmer become the new Prefect of the Church?
Edit: ever since Preppy Taylor got attacked by the sissy boys at Rorate, he’s gone up a lot in our estimation.
I thought the Pachamana stunt was funny. Rorate wasn’t amused, and if they didn’t like it, it’s obviously good. Their pearl clutching and shameless tofu gobbling effeminacy knows no shame.
Tuesday, December 13, 2022
Edit: anyone who knows anything about human nature knows that you’re going to find these kinds of people working in institutions at all levels. Nowhere are there more of these predators, than in entertainment, where human trafficking quickly enters the equation, paid for by powerful people who often aren’t brought to justice, and many of them are aberrosexual.
Meanwhile, certain people continue to insist that this is merely a Catholic problem.
Fact is, when I look out at who is really responsible, I look at who runs pornography, who is changing societal mores, who is chiseling at the moral bedrock on which societies resist natural calamities and invasion from outsiders, it’s always the same people who are most guilty of what they accuse Catholics of doing.
KODIAK, Alaska (KTUU) - A former monk who was part of the Russian Orthodox Church has been sentenced to five years in prison for the sexual abuse of a minor, the Department of Law reports.
Monday, December 12, 2022
Edit: this has been going on ever since Muslims came out of the desert. It shouldn’t be a shock that they do this. What’s disturbing, is that a certain group of very powerful people insists that they be located in large pockets in European cities where they can rape, loot, pillage and burn with near impunity.
[RMX] All three Afghan nationals arrested for the rape and murder of a 13-year-old Austrian school girl in Vienna in June of last year have been convicted by an Austrian court.
Saturday, December 10, 2022
Father Marko Ivan Rupnik, priest, Jesuit, theologian, is best known for his art in sacred space, which can be described as the preferred art of the Holy See.
(Rome) Is Fr. Marko Ivan Rupnik a sex offender? Will the next abuse allegation hit the Church like a thunderbolt? The Slovenian Jesuit is not personally known to most Catholics, but many are familiar with his mosaics, which he in an unmistakable style adorn the sacral spaces of some of the most famous pilgrimage sites such as Fatima, San Giovanni Rotondo and Lourdes and the churches of Kraków dedicated to St. John Paul II and Washington [ugh]. He also designed the Redemptoris Mater Chapel in the Apostolic Palace. Fr. Rupnik is currently completing the mosaics he designed on the facade of the Brazilian national shrine Aparecida. But what about the allegations? Caution is advised.
The art of the Slovenian Jesuit can be described, at least indirectly, as the style of sacred art favored by the Vatican, given the promotion in three pontificates. There were divided opinions about this undue preference, but these are not the subject of this article. In any case, the esteem of the Holy See is so great that in 2016 Pope Francis celebrated a Holy Mass in the Apostolic Palace for the Centro Aletti led by Rupnik. P. Rupnik is a priest, Jesuit, theologian and artist. For many years he has been the central figure of his order's study center “Ezio Aletti”. Has Pope Francis now prevented an excommunication latae sententiae of his brother by his protective, even covering-up, hand?
Who blames the allegations? The website Silere Non Possum (“I can't keep quiet”) and a site called – nomen est omen – Left, which is linked to a left-wing theory magazine. The churchman was guilty of "sexual and psychological violence". On closer inspection, however, it could be a matter of two corners. The news has meanwhile also been picked up by media outlets that are close to tradition and critical of the Pope. Maybe we shouldn't jump on every bandwagon, at least not in haste.
P. Rupnik was born in 1954 in Zadlog, Slovenia. In 1974 he entered the Jesuit order and in 1985 he was ordained a priest. He obtained a doctorate from the Pontifical Gregorian University and studied at the Pontifical Academy of Fine Arts. He has lived at Centro Aletti since 1991, which he managed until 2020. He teaches at the Gregorian and the Pontifical Liturgical Institute and runs two "studios" at the study center, one for spiritual art and one for theology. He was or is consultor of several dicasteries of the Roman Curia.
The Sacrament Chapel designed by Rupnik in the new church in San Giovanni Rotondo
First, a word about Silere Non Possum. The blog has existed since March 2021 and is run by Marco Felipe Perfetti, who at the time went public as a law student at the University of Bologna and who, as the editor of the “Vatican Code of Criminal Procedure”, is now also being questioned by the media about the case of Cardinal Angelo Becciu. The Korazym website mistakenly referred to him as a lawyer, but that would have been a bit too premature. A major concern of the blog is the fight against "homophobia" in the Church, including threats of legal action in state courts against priests who oppose the gay agenda.
This already anticipates that the accusations against P. Rupnik are not of a homosexual nature. A good 80 percent of cases of sexual abuse by clerics are homosexual acts.
Allegations against the Jesuit go back to 1995, when a member of the women's order Comunità Loyola, which was founded in Ljubljana in the 1980s and is close to the Jesuit order, complained that she had been plagiarized and that she had suffered "mental, physical and spiritual abuse" in 1992/93. Father Rupnik was the spiritual assistant and confessor of the community of sisters and a friend of the founder and superior general Ivanka Hosta. The problems which arose ended with the removal of Rupnik after a dispute between Hosta and the Jesuit.
This break was so traumatic for some sisters that they left the order and followed Rupnik to the Centro Aletti in Rome, which he headed. The male members of the center are almost exclusively Jesuits and form a household. But there are also numerous female employees who are in no way inferior to their male colleagues in terms of academic training and who teach at various universities. The women who followed Rupnik to Rome should also be counted in this context.
The matter became public because letters to Pope Francis that three different sisters of the Comunità Loyola had written to him became known. At least one of them has been published. The writer says she has given up the "search for religious life." Because of the refusal to listen to her, she had herself released from the Order. In the letter she expresses her indignation that Father Rupnik, despite “the serious allegations leveled against him, for which I have been called as a witness more than once, continues to lecture throughout Italy and publish his catechesis on YouTube.”
The Rupnik case is therefore a case in another case, that of the Slovenian women's order, and dates back more than 25 years. Whether and what role the women who followed him to Rome might also play does not seem to be the question at the moment. The prosecutor quoted by Left, who remains anonymous, speaks of "knowing at least three sisters" of the Comunità Loyola, upon whom Rupnik inflicted "mental and physical violence" in the early 1990s, but she herself obviously not.
It's also unclear if Left and Silere are quoting Non Possum from the same letter, although they appear to be basing this on the same source. The woman, who claims to have been interviewed by the Vatican on several occasions, concludes “that I was not believed. After so much suffering, I have a legitimate need to know if the Church considers Father Rupnik to be a reliable teacher.” This is an allusion to the fact that the Jesuit publishes catechesis on the Internet. The letters would have reached the Pope "certainly", but there has been no answer to this day.
Cardinal Vicar De Donatis in the chapel of the Great Roman Seminary designed by Rupnik
What happened? In 2019, the women's order founded in Ljubljana underwent a visitation. In December 2020, with the approval of Pope Francis, the Congregation for Religious appointed an Apostolic Commissar. Msgr. Daniele Libanori, Auxiliary Bishop of Rome and himself a Jesuit, was appointed as Commissar. The latter is questionable, although he has been known for his severity in similar cases in the past.
The Commissar was dispatched quietly. The starting point was not P. Rupnik, but the accusation of abuse of power and the oppression of fellow sisters by the founder of the order and general superior Ivanka Hosta. However, a significant number of the sisters defend themselves against this Roman intervention, which is seen as an "act of persecution", and reject the accusations.
But did P. Rupnik also become a case in this case? Has it been too "idealized" up until now? Wasn't the prosecutor believed because the person she accused is held in high esteem or because her testimonies are not credible? She herself indicated that she had thoughts of suicide. At that time, a quarter of a century ago, P. Rupnik was also her confessor. However, the allegations remain vague. Sexual violence is also hinted at, but everything seems blurred.
“In the beginning, the community was characterized by abuse of conscience, but also emotional and allegedly sexual abuse by Fr. Marko Rupnik. As a friend of the foundress and several sisters from the very beginning, he had a constant closeness and presence in the personal lives of all the sisters and the community as a whole. When the final separation from Father Rupnik was completed due to the great suffering of some sisters, it was a great burden for the sisters. Rupnik's responsibilities have never been fully clarified; on the contrary, they were practically hushed up and not denounced by those directly involved, but also by Sister Ivanka, who knew about it.”
The accusation becomes doubtful when the author completely leaves the factual level of the already less than concrete allegations, which seem to come more from hearsay, and generalizes her allegations by calling on the Pope to "take all means to protect them and to give voice, dignity and freedom of conscience to other many victims of these new religious movements and new communities.”
Is someone leading their very private, exaggerated campaign? The anonymous source cited by Left claims that harsh sanctions were imposed not only on the women's order but also on Father Rupnik in January 2022. He has to lead a life of seclusion, "no sermons, no public celebrations and a ban on confession," writes Silere Non Possum.
The fact is that Father Rupnik already gave up the management of the Centro Aletti in 2020, but still runs an artistic and a theological "atelier" there. His resignation could be put in the distant future with the Commissioner's appointment a few months later, but not January 2022. What happened earlier in the year?
On January 3, 2022, Father Rupnik was received in audience by Pope Francis. The Vatican press office did not name a function. Today, the management of the Centro Aletti is held by the theologian Maria Campatelli, who manages the publishing house of the study center and the theological studio "Cardinal Špidlík". P. Rupnik was therefore only ad personam with the Pope, which is rarely the case.
Awarded an honorary doctorate by the Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná
Nothing became known about the content of the audience, since neither the Holy See nor Father Rupnik commented on it. However, it does not look like the Jesuit will be punished. In the event of a conviction, distance is sought and contact is avoided. The anonymous prosecutor, on the other hand, sees the audience as a moment when Francis personally informed his confrere about the "tough sanctions" imposed on him. A rather erroneous interpretation given Vatican customs.
There is little sign of a travel ban and other strict conditions: Last May Fr. Rupnik led a retreat for priests in the Italian province. On November 30, he received an honorary doctorate from the Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná in Paraguay. The Jesuit is free to move about, appears in public and is active on the Centro Aletti website as before.
The anonymous source says the priest "forced her, with pressure and blackmail, to do things that I reported to the right place in good time." But "everyone has spread the cloak of silence over it". And further: "After my first report, nobody helped me, neither the community nor the then Archbishop of Ljubljana nor Father Rupnik's superior, with whom I spoke and tried to explain what had happened."
The woman would like to know the result of the investigations against Fr. Rupnik by Msgr. Libanori and the competent dicastery. The question is whether and in what form Msgr. Libanori was commissioned to do this at all. In any case, his appointment as acting head of the women's order Comunità Loyola has nothing to do with an investigative assignment. The same source, while seeking clarity, claims that Monsignor Libanori has concluded that "the victims heard are credible and their narrative stands". That is an act of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The presentation is confusing and doesn't seem to hold up.
Silere Non Possum and Left raise the question of whether Pope Francis is covering up "the abuse of Rupnik" and recall the Inzoli case, which once brought such an accusation to the head of the Church in Italy. Now it is known that the so-called “Bergoglio system” has beneficiaries. Especially in connection with homosexuality, which shouldn't bother Left or Silere Non Possum. However, this does not allow any generalization. The mere reference to an allegedly prevented excommunication latae sententiae raises serious doubts. An excommunication in connection with a crime cannot be “prevented” at all. Anyone who commits the act automatically incurs excommunication. Therefore, excommunication as a penalty after due process is the rule.
According to what has become known so far, the charges against P. Rupnik are too thin, much too thin. What if he's guilty? Then more concrete evidence is needed. But what if he's innocent? Then an attempt is made to throw dirt at him, because, as is well known, something always gets stuck. What remains for the time being are doubts that smack of character assassination. And it is in the nature of doubts that they gnaw. Pope Francis did what he always does when he wants to defend someone who is under attack: he showed himself demonstratively together with Fr. Rupnik.
On January 3, 2022, Pope Francis received the Slovenian theologian and artist in audience
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Centro Aletti/Giuseppe Nardi/Facebook/VaticanMedia(Screenshots)
Friday, December 9, 2022
Pope Francis received Grand Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk in audience in early November, with some consequences.
Highlights by Andreas Becker
“Pope Francis continues to offer himself tirelessly as a peace mediator," writes Vatican scholar Sandro Magister. But has Francis lost his credibility as a neutral mediator in the Ukraine conflict? If so, who will be able to launch the necessary peace initiatives in this war in order to bring Moscow and Kiev, or rather, as some say, Moscow and Washington, to the negotiating table?
To the annoyance of western state chancellery and opinion makers, Francis stayed away from hasty condemnations in order to be a possible contact for all parties to the conflict. Behind the scenes, Vatican diplomacy is working hard to explore opportunities for dialogue. Unofficially, Francis has offered to conduct peace negotiations in the Vatican as neutral ground. The Pope is the highest-ranking Western authority that rejected unilateral blame on Russia and blamed NATO, i.e. Washington, for the outbreak of the war. In May he said in an interview that NATO had barked too loudly in front of Russia's doors and provoked Moscow. He had also denounced that war was a product of the arms trade in order to sell arms and test new ones. He insisted that he was not talking about a Russo-Ukrainian war but about a new world war. This is also an indication that the interests involved go far beyond what appears at first glance. Francis went so far as to question the possibility of a "just war" at all. (See Roberto de Mattei: Is war always unjust?)
However, things may have changed in the past ten days, according to some commentators. Has Francis also withdrawn from the “race” for peace like the ranks of European politicians before him? Does the unconditional formation of a front help on the way to peace, or does it actually prevent it?
Surprisingly harsh words towards Santa Marta have recently been heard from Moscow. The reason for this were statements made by Francis to the American Jesuit magazine America. (See hacker attack against the Vatican – who is behind it?) The spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, was outraged:
"This is not even an anti-Russian stance, but an outrageous distortion of the truth."
The Russian Ambassador to the Holy See, Alexander Avdeyev, with whom the Vatican had previously been in close and friendly contact, reacted "outraged" and spoke of "insinuations".
Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov initially held back, but then spoke up to brand Francis' statements as "un-Christian":
"The Vatican has said that this will not happen again and that it is probably a misunderstanding, but that does nothing to strengthen the authority of the Papal States."
The representatives of the Vatican Secretariat of State had tried to extinguish the fire and tried to calm it down at the highest level.
The cleverness and a faux pas
But what did Francis say that caused such outrage in Russia? In an interview with America, Pope Francis pointed to Western pressure to condemn Russia's President Vladimir Putin and the Russian government, and explained why it is not wise to constantly condemn those you want to bring to the negotiating table.
In doing so, however, the pope made a diplomatic faux pas, if it was not intentional: in order to exercise the prudence he had called for, but still meet Western expectations, Francis pronounced condemnations, albeit in the third row and not generalizing in concrete terms. He said he had "a lot of information about the cruelty" of Russian troops in Ukraine. Not enough, the pope added:
"The cruellest in general are perhaps those who come from Russia, but not from the Russian tradition, like the Chechens, the Buryats and so on".
In his attempt to name no one and crack a nut by numbers—Chechens make up 1 percent of Russia's population, and Buryats just 0.3 percent—his criticism was given a racist tongue-in-cheek slap. The Russian leadership had to react to this in order not to endanger the internal cohesion of the many peoples, ethnic groups, races and religions. The Chechens in the North Caucasus are Muslims, the Buryats in Siberia are Buddhist Mongols.
In the southeast (pink) the Russian occupied and annexed areas; in the west (outlined in red) the majority Catholic area, (dashed red) the areas with strong/significant Catholic minorities.
Communication errors are anything but impossible. Francis often speaks spontaneously and gives numerous interviews. Above all, however, he tries to respond to his respective interlocutors, and they were Americans. That makes the tightrope walk difficult.
When the official website of the Holy See was hacked shortly after the publication of the America interview, the finger was immediately pointed at “the Russians” in the West. But restraint is the mother of wisdom. Francis said numerous other things in the interview that caused little joy in the West.
Shevchuk's visit to Rome
Since then, the question has been whether there was a misunderstanding or whether Francis changed course after almost ten months of war. There is a lot to be said against it. Francis is known for his insistence on a position once taken. The main features of his geopolitical ideas are also known. It is even less credible that he wants a war until the "victory of Ukraine", that is, the defeat of Russia.
It is therefore necessary to look at what happened in the days leading up to the interview. The America interview took place on November 22nd and was published on November 28th. On November 7, Francis had an audience with Grand Archbishop Svyatoslav Shevchuk of Kiev-Halych of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.
Recently it has often been said that Francis and Shevchuk, who still know each other from Buenos Aires, have a close, friendly relationship. But that is only partially true. When the historic meeting between the Pope and the Russian Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow took place in Cuba in 2016, loud tones of serious resentment could be heard from the Greek Catholic Church of Ukraine, which is united with Rome. Francis felt compelled to make special gestures to sort out the discrepancies to some extent.
Rather, it is a certain Ukrainian distrust that has shaped the mood ever since. During the audience, Shevchuk made intensive efforts to win Pope Francis over to the Ukrainian cause, which does not mean the humanitarian aspects, but rather the one-sided political support that Francis had not previously granted in the way that the Kiev-Brussels-Washington axis wishes. It is said that Shevchuk pulled out numerous stops and managed to get Francis to write a letter directly to the Ukrainian people. This letter, very moving, was published on November 24 and is not only based on a suggestion by the Ukrainian Grand Archbishop, but also recalls his own statements in language and style so clearly that the authorship can essentially be attributed to Shevchuk.
Francis complied to a large extent with the wishes that were brought to him by the Uniate Church leader on behalf of the Ukrainians. Shevchuk also goes back to the fact that Francis, in this letter from the Holy Father to the Ukrainian people, but already at the general audience on November 23, at the Angelus on November 27 and on November 28 in the America interview, in the 1932 /33 million Ukrainians starved to death in what was dubbed a “horrific genocide.” The pope spoke of "extermination by starvation" achieved by Stalin, the communist dictator, through an "artificial" famine.
This corresponds to Francis's diplomacy: he speaks of a historic event in order to stand by the Ukrainian people, without directly taking sides in today's event. Francis went so far as to speak of a "historical precedent".
In the wake of Shevchuk's visit and the papal letter, media efforts increased to claim Francis for the anti-Russian boat. However, the change of course is being written more about by interested parties. A source in the Vatican Secretariat of State described Francis' choice of words in relation to the American magazine as "imprudent". According to the Secretariat of State, Francis gave Shevchuk a little too much guidance. However, there is no question of a course change.
It was not Shevchuk who endangered the line of the Vatican, but the spontaneity of Pope Francis.
No to arms sales and seven point peace plan
The peace movement in Italy, strongly influenced by left-wing Catholic circles, which Francis has in mind, categorically rejects arms deliveries to Ukraine. But the new Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni also wants to continue this, signaling that she will submit to Washington's foreign policy. At the end of November, she obtained a mandate from parliament to be able to continue the transfer of arms and armaments to Ukraine throughout 2023. Francis has so far not endorsed or even shown understanding for arms deliveries.
However, the Pope never went as far as Andrea Riccardi, the founder of the Community of Sant'Egidio. In the spring, Riccardi had called for Kiev to be declared an “open city” in order to prevent bloodshed and destruction, which would have meant Russian troops occupying the Ukrainian capital without a fight. At the big peace rally on November 5 in Rome, where Riccardi gave the closing speech, it was hardly surprising that there were no Ukrainian flags to be seen.
Francis is closer to the position of Avvenire, the daily newspaper of the Italian Bishops' Conference, which writes daily in favor of peace in Ukraine but is just as outspoken against arms shipments seen as an expression of a proxy war. Editor-in-chief Marco Tarquinio doesn't say it openly, but makes it clear enough that in this war the Ukrainian army, which has been upgraded by the NATO countries, is an auxiliary force of the Biden government to weaken Russia.
From this perspective, too, the Ukrainian people are seen as victims, albeit less of Russian aggression than of Washington's geopolitical egoism.
So far, however, the Vatican has not officially backed the seven-point peace plan drawn up by the two prominent Catholic intellectuals Stefano Zamagni and Mauro Magatti and presented in the October issue of the magazine Paradoxa. Zamagni is President of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, under Francis an important center of the Pope's political initiatives; Magatti is a professor of sociology at the Catholic University of Milan and secretary of the Social Weeks of Italian Catholics, a study conference first held in 1907 at the suggestion of the economist Giuseppe Toniolo, which has been held every two years since then to "raise awareness of the true Christian social message". reach. The impetus for this was a social encyclical addressed to Italy's bishops by Pope Pius X in 1905.
The seven-point peace plan, as presented in Zamagni's Avvenire at the end of September, provides for:
1. Neutrality of Ukraine, which renounces NATO membership but retains the full right to become a member of the EU. A UN resolution is to introduce mechanisms for monitoring, so that the peace agreement is guaranteed to be respected.
2. Ukraine is guaranteed full sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. A corresponding declaration of guarantee is to be made by the five permanent members of the World Security Council (USA, Russia, the People's Republic of China, Great Britain and France) as well as the EU and Turkey.
3. Russia will retain de facto control of Crimea for a number of years, during which the two sides will seek a lasting diplomatic solution, also de jure. The local population will get free movement of people and capital both to Russia and to Ukraine.
4. The Lugansk and Donetsk regions remain an integral part of Ukraine, but retain economic, political and cultural self-government.
5. Russia and Ukraine will be given secure access to Black Sea ports to conduct their normal trading activities.
6. Gradual lifting of Western sanctions against Russia in parallel with withdrawal of Russian troops and arms from Ukraine.
6. Creation of a multilateral fund for the reconstruction and development of the devastated areas of Ukraine, including Lugansk, Donetsk and Crimea, in which Russia participates on the basis of a fixed key. (Specifically, reference is made to the experiences with the Marshall Plan.)
The plan essentially follows the western post-war order for Europe, which categorically rules out annexing territories to another state (which is why Kosovo and Moldova and the behemoth Bosnia-Herzegovina exist). On the other hand, it is acceptable for Brussels and Washington for member states to break away and achieve sovereign statehood – but only if this corresponds to the political interests of Brussels and Washington (see the partition of Czechoslovakia, the dissolution of Yugoslavia and, most recently, the separation of Montenegro from Serbia). Territorial integrity is invoked where it does not correspond to the plans of Brussels and Washington (see the prevented secession of Catalonia, the Basque country, South Tyrol, Scotland, Corsica). Poland's intention to annex Poland's western Ukraine until 1939, which was claimed by the Russian side or the media inclined towards it, completely ignores reality. Although Lviv was once a predominantly Polish city, the population of western Ukraine has always been largely Ukrainian. Within the framework of Western doctrine, at best an independent Republic of Crimea would be conceivable, possibly even the independence of individual oblasts. However, only in theory. In practice, there is currently not the slightest willingness to downsize Ukraine in favor of new, more pro-Russian states.
The prospects of the seven-point peace plan, which takes this into account, are nevertheless completely uncertain. However, it shows the direction in which Vatican diplomacy is currently working.
Image: VaticanMedia/Wikicommons (Screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekraon99@hotmail.Com