THE POPE DEFIES THE PENTAGON
Julian Manyon on American fury over John Paul Ws plans to make a pilgrimage to Iraq
Amman HE may be 79 years old, bent, frail and suffering from what looks to many eyes like Parkinson's disease, but he has not lost his ability to infuriate the imperial powers of his age. It is 20 years since Pope John Paul II challenged the Soviet Union with a tumultuous visit to his native Poland which ignited the Solidarity trades union movement and led, ultimately, to the col- lapse of Soviet communism. Now, in what may be the last great drama of his papacy, the Pope is engaged in an acrimonious dis- pute with the world's remaining superpow- er, the United States.
At issue is John Paul's wish — described by the Vatican as 'ardent' — to mark the millennium by walking in the footsteps of the biblical Abraham. For the Pope, this is the greatest spiritual journey of his life, but for the US it is a considerable irritant. According to the Bible, Abraham — the product of a formidable line of begettings all the way back to Noah, and the father figure of the three great monotheistic reli- gions — came from the ancient city of Ur of the Chaldees. Once the centre of the magnificent Sumerian civilisation, it is now a collection of dusty ruins situated incon- veniently in the heart of the southern no- fly zone in Iraq, the scene of regular punitive air strikes by the US airforce, fre- quently assisted by our own RAF. Though no date has yet been officially announced, it is believed that John Paul intends to visit Ur in the first week of December. He has made it clear that his desire is to pray at the birthplace of the ancient patriarch before visiting other bib- lical sites in Egypt and the Holy Land. The Pope has written that he would be 'sad- dened if anyone were to attach any other meaning to this plan of mine'. But this simple expression of spiritual yearning is not enough for the US State Department, which has chosen to issue its own sermon on modern political morality. Its spokesman, James Foley, reminded the Vatican that Iraq is 'a brutal dictatorship where torture and summary execution are commonplace', and warned that the Iraqi regime would make political capital out of such a visit. For its part the Vatican stated tartly that `the Holy Father will be walking in the footsteps of Abraham, not in the footsteps of Saddam Hussein'. Although many may be startled by the arrogance of a func- tionary from a 200-year-old state — whose prevailing creed has always been the pur- suit of the dollar — presuming to lecture the Pope on ethics, US concerns are easy to comprehend. The US is bogged down in a humiliating stand-off with Saddam Hus- sein, and the prospect of the Iraqi dictator welcoming the Pope with a crocodile-like smile of satisfaction, and reaping all the publicity benefits this would bring, is clear- ly too much for Madeleine Albright, the US Secretary of State, and her colleagues to endure. There may also be deep-seated suspicion of Papal motives. US officials have not forgotten the Vatican's repeated public criticism of the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq and the sanctions, which con- tinue today.
In words which apparently represented John Paul's thinking, the Jesuit journal Civiltk Cattolica wrote: 'The liberation of Kuwait was purchased at the price of destroying a country and killing hundreds of thousands of people. At this point, can we talk about a just war?' The US govern- ment was stung by such attacks in 1991, but it must feel considerably more vulnerable today.
The 'just war' against Iraqi aggression has given way to a drawn-out vendetta against the Baghdad bogeyman, for which his civilian population is continuing to pay the price. Nine years of the oil embargo have destroyed the Iraqi economy, inflicted enormous damage to the country's health and education systems and, according to the UN itself, caused widespread malnour- ishment among Iraqi children. The hunt for Saddam's weapons of mass destruction ended inconclusively when Unscom decid- ed to pull out its weapons inspectors hours before last December's spectacular but ineffective three-day bombing campaign.
Since then, US and British aircraft have continued a little-publicised air war in the no-fly zones, firing 1,100 missiles at 359 targets in the last eight months and causing both military and civilian casualties. Offi- cially, the bombing is justified as a response to attacks on allied aircraft, none of which has so far been successful, but in reality it seems to be motivated by an inchoate determination to keep up the pressure on Saddam and not to allow him to 'get away with it'. What the bombing is supposed to achieve is another matter. There seems to be a vague hope that pounding away at key elements of the Iraqi military will provoke frustration inside the armed forces and even lead to a revolt against Saddam. Reports from inside Iraq speak of —0- Please, Dad, not another cautionary tale.' widespread discontent and tension, but it is doubtful if any of this has dented the effectiveness of the dictator's security sys- tem, which is based on family and tribal loyalties and is compounded by fear of the terrible retribution that awaits disloyalty. From the inner group of a few dozen 'Al- Murafiqeen' (The Companions) who watch over Saddam day and night, to the outer circle of the 20,000-strong Special Republican Guard, most of whose soldiers are from Saddam's tribe and whose junior officers earn more than ordinary army generals, Saddam's security system is a fearsome apparatus specifically designed to protect its leader against a potentially hostile population.
If the blunt instrument of bombing suc- ceeds in provoking a revolt along the lines of what happened in 1991, the result is like- ly to be the same: a bloodbath with Sad- dam still firmly in power. Such is the tragic state of the land where John Paul is deter- mined to set foot that the US State Depart- ment has every reason to feel apprehensive about the effects of a papal visit. For even a purely spiritual mission will turn the spot- light on the walled-off hell that is modern Iraq, and the complete absence of a real policy in Washington and London. It will necessitate a bombing halt in the no-fly zones and may provide a boost for the French government, which is campaigning at the UN for a relaxation of the sanctions.
With an unerring instinct for a political raw nerve, the Pope has sought inspiration in the Book of Genesis and plunged into one of the most dangerous of modern con- troversies. As December approaches, anx- ious behind-the-scenes negotiations are under way. The Iraqi government is said to be 'desperate' for the visit to be confirmed and, in what it presumably believes to be a reassuring gesture, has told the Vatican that its elite forces will guarantee the Pope's security. The 'acceptable face' of the regime, the deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz, who is a Christian, has taken personal charge of arrangements for what he plainly sees as a propaganda bonanza.
In Rome there are unconfirmed reports of a stormy meeting between Madeleine Albright, whose diplomatic weapon of choice has always been the club rather than the rapier, and Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran of the Vatican — lempestoso' was the word used in the Italian press.
Meanwhile, I learned from well-placed sources here in the Jordanian capital that an idea being floated is to cut the visit down to its core of spiritual content. No stopover in Baghdad, no meeting with Sad- dam Hussein, no embrace from those blood-stained hands which are said to have gunned down disloyal lieutenants inside his own office, and which are the models for the giant concrete fists holding crossed sabres that form an arch at each end of the triumphal avenue in the Iraqi capital. Instead, the plan goes, the Pope would fly with the help of the United Nations to an airfield south of Baghdad, and then travel by helicopter to Ur. There would be time for prayer and contemplation of the ruined but still impressive ziggurat where, at the time of Abraham before 2000 BC, the Sumerians communed with their gods halfway between earth and heaven. Per- haps there would also be time to consider what a Sumerian scribe wrote about the fall of their kingdom 4,000 years before the agony of modern Iraq: 'Ur, its weak and strong perished through hunger. Mothers and fathers who did not leave their homes were overcome by fire.'
It is not yet clear whether such a truncat- ed visit would meet with approval on all sides. There are doubts over whether the Iraqi leader would be ready to forgo what he must see as an unrepeatable opportunity to cock a snook at his enemies. Some Pen- tagon officials are said to be pressing for the bombing campaign to be stepped up, which could destroy the chances of a papal visit. There is also the question of the Pope's health and whether he will remain strong enough to undertake this epic journey.
There is irony in the fact that it may well be the world's most important temporal leader — and best-known sinner — who decides whether John Paul can fulfil his ambition. In considering whether to assist the Pope's visit to Ur, Bill Clinton may do well to remember that day in January this year when, at a crucial stage of his impeachment trial, John Paul flew to meet him in St Louis and granted him the sort of photo-opportunity that beleaguered presidents pray for. Clinton might also reflect on whether the cruel futility of the situation in Iraq might not benefit from the attentions of a man who remains reso- lute in his belief that all man-made suffer- ing is wrong; a man who may be able to express gently, but unmistakably the need to end the bombing, the sanctions and, indeed, the dictatorship which presently afflict the land that was the birthplace of human civilisation. On the eve of the Christian millennium, there is surely no better place for the Pope to be.
The author is ITN's Middle East corre- spondent. This article is also reproduced for ITN online and can be seen at www. itn. c o.uk.
Previous page
