#appeasment

IN HIS visit to the United States beginning Tuesday, Pope Francis will meet not just President Obama and Congress but also those marginalized by our society: homeless people, immigrants, refugees and even the inmates of a jail. He’s expected to raise topics that many Americans will find challenging, such as his harsh critique of capitalism. His supporters say it’s all part of the role the pope has embraced as an advocate for the powerless, one that has earned him admiration from both Catholics and some outside the church.

How, then, to explain Pope Francis’s behavior in Cuba? The pope is spending four days in a country whose Communist dictatorship has remained unrelenting in its repression of free speech, political dissent and other human rights despite a warming of relations with the Vatican and the United States. Yet by the end of his third day, the pope had said or done absolutely nothing that might discomfit his official hosts.

Pope Francis met with 89-year-old Fidel Castro, who holds no office in Cuba, but not with any members of the dissident community — in or outside of prison. According to the Web site 14ymedio.com, two opposition activists were invited to greet the pope at Havana’s cathedral Sunday but were arrested on the way. Dozens of other dissidents were detained when they attempted to attend an open air Mass. They needn’t have bothered: The pope said nothing in his homily about their cause, or even political freedom more generally. Those hunting for a message had to settle for a cryptic declaration that“service is never ideological.”

Sadly, this appeasement of power is consistent with the Vatican’s approach to Cuba ever since Raúl Castro replaced his brother in 2006. Led by Cuban Cardinal Jaime Ortega, the church committed to a strategy of working with the regime in the hope of encouraging its gradual moderation. The results have been slight. Cardinal Ortega obtained Raúl Castro’s promise to release all political prisoners, but arrests have continued and dissident groups say the number of jailed is now above 70. One leading Christian dissident, Oswaldo Payá, was killed in a suspicious 2012 auto crash.

'CONTEXTUAL'

Washington Naval Conference (1922) - disarmament (L of N aim); but much opposition from the public post-conference; semblance of a naval race between non-capital ships on Japan, US & Britain anyway, although fixed ratio on cruisers in 1930 stopped this; Britain lost naval supremacy, no capital ships for ten years rendered her fleet obsolete; politicians often regarded it as a great achievement

Draft Treaty of Mutual Assistance (1923) - lack of support for the League

Geneva Protocol (1924) - lack of support

Upper Silesia (1921) - (lukewarm) support for the League

Vilna (capital of Lithuania captured by Poland, 1920) - Conference of Ambassadors, inc. Britain, France & Italy, support Poland against the League; in 1923 with Corfu again Conference of Ambassadors opposes the League's actions (asking Italy to withdraw from the Greek island & perceiving Italy as an aggressor)

1925-33

Locarno Pact (1925) - Germany being 'welcomed' into the L of N showed British support for the League; guaranteed borders were a move towards a stronger Europe & 'collective security'

Kellogg-Briand Pact (1928) - British support for peace

Wall Street Crash (1929) - reduction in defence spending, anti-war organisations, left, Lab & Lib press for disarmament (idealistic)

1930 Naval Agreement (Britain, US, Japan ... fixed non-capital ship ratio)

1932 World Disarmament Conference at Geneva (failed, but Ramsay Mac very definitely did not want it to ... British attempt & desire for disarmament idealistic under the Labour leader/National government leader?)

October '33, Conservative candidate advocating increased defence spending defeated by a pacifist Labour candidate

Oxford Union pledge not to "fight for King or Country"

1932, Lord Lytton's report on the situation in Manchuria weak, Britain's response possibly even weaker ... Lytton claimed Japanese grievances were legit & they were merely handling the situation badly, so Britain morally condemned Japan but did nothing else ... work was resumed on the Singapore naval base in case of Japanese attack, 'Ten Year Rule' was abandoned ... but Britain did not seriously believe that she was threatened by Japan ... Japan leaves the League

1933, Germany leaves the Disarmament Conference & the L of N

JUDGEMENT