The Vatican Facilitating Peace

"This move does not promote the peace process and distances the Palestinian leadership from returning to direct and bilateral negotiations."
Israeli Foreign Ministry

"Yes, it's a recognition that the state exists."
Reverend Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman

"We appreciate that the Vatican's basic intention is to promote Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation, but believe that this diplomatic recognition will be unhelpful to that end."
"[The treaty is] counterproductive to all who seek true peace between Israel and the Palestinians."
Abraham Foxman, The American Jewish Committee

"This is a very important recognition as the Vatican has a very important political status that stems from its spiritual status."
"We expect more EU countries to follow."
Nabil Shaath, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas senior aide

In this May 25, 2014 file photo, Pope Francis is welcomed by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas upon his arrival to the West Bank city of Bethlehem. (Photo: AP)

Official recognition of the "state of Palestine" is now affirmed by the Vatican through a treaty concerning the actions of the Catholic Church in Palestinian territory. The Palestine Liberation Organization, which is what Fatah, the leading Palestinian political party that now governs the West Bank through the Palestinian Authority, was given official diplomatic standing with the Vatican. And now that diplomacy has given recognition to a Palestinian 'state'.

Pope Frances appears to be ignoring history and reality in that early 20th Century Palestinians were originally Jews living in "Palestine", which was originally part of Judea. The name Palestine is attributed to Herodotus in the 5th Century B.C.; there were no Arabs living there originally, and Arabs have been relative late-comers to Palestine; Arabs from Egypt and Jordan co-opted the name as their own for historical legitimacy.

In Israel, all religions and all ethnic groups have rights and protection. In the Palestinian Territories Christians are persecuted and loathed, intimidated and threatened. Jews present there must be given armed protection by the military. Pope Frances must obviously have his own reasons for the decision he has made to legitimize the 'state of Palestine'. As a man of peace, it is rather surprising that he has failed to cite the need for Palestinians to recognize the State of Israel as a precursor to living side by side with it, as another state.

It appears that the Vatican is prepared to 'go along to get along', having welcomed the United Nations General Assembly's decision in 2012 to recognize a Palestinian state. It chose since then to refer to the 'state of Palestine'. But the treaty now negotiated between the Holy See and the 'Palestinian state' gives official recognition by the Vatican in exchange for what? a guarantee that Christians will henceforth be respected and sheltered and given equal status in the new state?

This revelation is most certainly a victory for Mahmud Abbas, set to visit the Vatican. Bearing in mind the Pope will be welcoming a president of the PA who has overstayed his welcome, his status not now one of a duly elected parliamentarian given a long-overdue election has not been called to validate him as president, as the choice of the Palestinian people. Should such an election be called it is questionable whether he would remain president, since a majority of Palestinians support Hamas.

Is Pope Frances prepared to welcome the Hamas leadership to the Vatican? Does he, as head of the Roman Catholic Church feel that engaging in treaties with a terrorist organization whose mandate is quite specific in promising to destroy Israel does justice to the Holy See's message of universal love and peace?

The 2012 UN vote in recognition of Palestine as a non-member observer state comprising the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, represents in their entirety land that Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast war. This was one of the many wars that were imposed upon Israel, with collective Arab armies marching with the intention of destroying the State of Israel.

What other country of the world would be expected by the international community to surrender land it captured that historically formed part of its original existence, which it had defended from surrounding states determined to eradicate it from the geography? Would Russia accede to such a notion, or Pakistan?