Short to say, the discrimination against Ainu would be beyond all proportion, and more than likely, any reintegration of Hokkaido to Japan, would likely have along an exile of the Ainu to the Sakhalin Islands, as the punishment for their collaboration with the Soviets.........
The Footprint of Mussolini - TL
aaaand this is why the People's Republic of Ezo will FIGHT TO THE DEATH
Dude... ITTL Korea it's in its whole the bloody playground of the Kim nutcases....
.... So there is no hope for them until well after the fall of the USSR here.....
that is true... but remember a lot of what inspires glorious DPRK to keep going despite it all is the trauma of the Korean War, the American threat menacing over the DMZ, and the need to conquer the south above all else. Here Kim il-Sung has everything. Sure he's still Kim but the circumstances for him and his Red Dynasty are far superior in almost every-way. DPRK in this world might actually turn out to be quite the powerhouse and flexible when the Soviet house of cards finally falls.
Ezo on the other-hand. They're going to be utterly batshit due to the horrific existential circumstances Stalin imprisoned them in. Which is what the Old Man would have wanted for his Ainu comrades
.
Last edited:
I don't think there were enough self-identified Ainu in Ezo by 1945 to even try to enforce minority rule without involving the Japanese majority quite heavily.
Nowadays, Ainu people numbers in the low tens of thousands IIRC and most of them do not even speak the language anymore. Possibly the situation is marginally better for them in terms of proportion with the "Yamato" ITTL, but nowhere near the level where a Ainu ethnocracy is even possible. They would simply lack the numbers to enforce anything unless ethnic Japanese are co-opted into whatever system is put into place. Also, not all Ainu are going to be regarded as reliably Communist right away, and certainly Stalin would consider ideology and party line loyalty over ethnic background in such a context.
As far as I know, there was nothing like Ainu political ethnonationalism by then (I am not aware of such a thing even now, but I may be ill-informed; I would guess there's a movement to reclaim cultural heritage and perhaps some ancestral land, but AFAIK nothing serious advocating for a Ainu ethnic state).
It seems to me not unlike trying to rule an occupied England using the Cornish people as the main proxy, and using Cornish ethnic idenity (if it could be called such) culture, identity and language as the defining basis for the new England. (And yes, I am aware of a minimal degree of ethnonationalism actually existing among some people in Cornwall).
Edit: of course, OTL has some blatantly extreme cases of minority rule. For instance, colonial Northern Rhodesia was administered by a few hundred, at most, white colonial top officers, whose rule was almost entirely to the benefit of a very small, almost exclusively white minority which IIRC never exceeded the low tens of thousands. This minority lorded over a native population two orders of magnitude larger, which was largely disenfranchised, exploited and conspicuously discriminated against. However, at least in some areas, they had a level of self-rule, without which managing the system would simply be impossible. And, clearly, even with indirect rule (and some effort at benevolence by some colonial administrators, to be fair) this entire exercise in mass dispossession was only possible because Northern Rhodesia was a colony, not a country. The dominating minority had all the military, economic, political might of the colonial metropolis behind, both de facto and de jure (ok, sometimes the metropolis would have preferred to rein in the settler minorities, feeling some vague form of responsibility toward the natives, but ultimately it tended to rule for the settlers' sake; they are called colonial empires for a reason). Ainu Ezo would not be viable in the same way, let alone that Communist ideology, even in its warped Stalinist form, would need a lot of bending to accomodate that.
Nowadays, Ainu people numbers in the low tens of thousands IIRC and most of them do not even speak the language anymore. Possibly the situation is marginally better for them in terms of proportion with the "Yamato" ITTL, but nowhere near the level where a Ainu ethnocracy is even possible. They would simply lack the numbers to enforce anything unless ethnic Japanese are co-opted into whatever system is put into place. Also, not all Ainu are going to be regarded as reliably Communist right away, and certainly Stalin would consider ideology and party line loyalty over ethnic background in such a context.
As far as I know, there was nothing like Ainu political ethnonationalism by then (I am not aware of such a thing even now, but I may be ill-informed; I would guess there's a movement to reclaim cultural heritage and perhaps some ancestral land, but AFAIK nothing serious advocating for a Ainu ethnic state).
It seems to me not unlike trying to rule an occupied England using the Cornish people as the main proxy, and using Cornish ethnic idenity (if it could be called such) culture, identity and language as the defining basis for the new England. (And yes, I am aware of a minimal degree of ethnonationalism actually existing among some people in Cornwall).
Edit: of course, OTL has some blatantly extreme cases of minority rule. For instance, colonial Northern Rhodesia was administered by a few hundred, at most, white colonial top officers, whose rule was almost entirely to the benefit of a very small, almost exclusively white minority which IIRC never exceeded the low tens of thousands. This minority lorded over a native population two orders of magnitude larger, which was largely disenfranchised, exploited and conspicuously discriminated against. However, at least in some areas, they had a level of self-rule, without which managing the system would simply be impossible. And, clearly, even with indirect rule (and some effort at benevolence by some colonial administrators, to be fair) this entire exercise in mass dispossession was only possible because Northern Rhodesia was a colony, not a country. The dominating minority had all the military, economic, political might of the colonial metropolis behind, both de facto and de jure (ok, sometimes the metropolis would have preferred to rein in the settler minorities, feeling some vague form of responsibility toward the natives, but ultimately it tended to rule for the settlers' sake; they are called colonial empires for a reason). Ainu Ezo would not be viable in the same way, let alone that Communist ideology, even in its warped Stalinist form, would need a lot of bending to accomodate that.
Last edited:
That's true... But the TL said the Soviets put an Ainu clique in the highest positions of power in Ezo.
So that clique will need to be overthrown for Ezo to fall.
An Ainu clique is possible. An Ainu ethnocracy, I think, is not.
I mean, like white minority in North Rhodesia, they have very little staying power when the external backing retreats.
Last edited:
I think it’s already been said that Korea will be the same as OTL North Korea.
Mussolini really is in an odd position. One the one hand he holds the public loyalty as much as most any dictator could want. Has succeeded in numerous conquests. His colonial empire is still standing in era when most are shrinking. He has extended Italy's influence in Asia beyond anything in the past. The list goes on. But despite all that his Third Way economic ideology is being eroded away on the homefront, and his dreams of a Fascist Italian republic are further away than ever. And the Chinese War elevated Italy's status ad influence, but also demonstrated how even when winning they can be hobbled by punishing outside their weight class. He likely has some complex feelings on his achievements vs setbacks.
How is his health thus far I wonder?
One factor for the Second Arab War would be Mussolini. If he does or has some kind of of publicized health failure, Aflaq may decide to attack feeling Israel will fall without Il Duce to defend it.
How is his health thus far I wonder?
One factor for the Second Arab War would be Mussolini. If he does or has some kind of of publicized health failure, Aflaq may decide to attack feeling Israel will fall without Il Duce to defend it.
Considering what the Jews have been through they could use a second one in all honesty.
It would be most reasonable combine all these memorising of all atrocities against Jews as one day. Otherwise they wouldn't do much else as memorise some event. List against Jews is very long even if we don't account Biblical ones. Tons of expulsions since Judean revolts, persecution and even genocides... Probably they just combine them all as one.
It’s also used as an Anti-Communist measure by Begin to stamp the Right’s power on Israel.
I'd just suppose that the Ainu on Ezo are used as a window dressing, and an unconvincing at that, for the more or less direct Soviet administration. Imagine OTL Asian republics of the USSR, with pretty much every local party and government head having a Russian deputy (either to pull the strings or just in case), only applied to a nominally independent state. Or, if you wish, a Soviet-aligned 'Manchukuo' (which used exactly that scheme).
Last edited:
Intermission - The Pope
Hello to all, today we will have an insight over Pius XII's pontificate, and my first attempt of a biography. All with the review and approval of Sorairo. Enjoy!
Princeps Ecclesia: the Pontificate of Pius XII of Orazio Maffei
When Eugenio Pacelli was elected Pope the 2nd March of 1939, nobody was surprised – his proven diplomatic skills and administrative actions in the Holy See made him the most suitable candidate for the throne of Saint Peter, in such a delicate moment when Europe was falling towards the precipice of war.
The reactions from Italy and Germany were lukewarm to say the least – messages of congratulations were sent from the Berlin Chancellory and the east side of the Tiber, but both Hitler and Mussolini had reasons to question the new Pope. The Fuhrer was suspicious of the influence Pius XII would exercise on the German Catholic Church, considering that the Pope had great knowledge of German affairs – he was Nuncius for Bavaria, Prussia, and then Weimar Germany for several years. He managed to get a concordat with Hitler, which soon would be repeatedly violated by the Nazi government. Over such violations, Pius XI was so close to breaking relations with Germany – Pius XII was not. The new Pope believed a denunciation of the violation of the concordat would have put Hitler on a more intransigent position against the Catholic Church, while he still wanted to keep open a diplomatic channel with Berlin in a hopeless attempt to prevent war in Europe. This decision, among with other apparent controversial ones during the conflict, would lead later to certain criticism especially in the US, France, and Central Europe against him, being accused to have been pro-Nazi or at least pro-German.
Mussolini was wary as well of Pius XII. Despite the facade of cordiality in the various encounters they would have in several years, the Duce didn’t approve of certain diplomatic activism of the Pope which could have forestalled his projects of a parallel war during the main European conflict, or the influence he would exercise in certain Roman palaces and among the Italians in general, due to his anti-clerical views. At the same time, even if the Pope would acknowledge Franco’s regime when the Nationalists won in Spain, the Fascist regime had reasons to think deep inside, Pius XII intimately supported or at least was aligning more towards democratic feelings. So, despite the Lateran pacts, Mussolini would be suspicious of the intentions of the Holy See and only his pragmatism allowed Church and Italian State to cooperate during the years of the war and beyond.
These relationships would prove to change with the times: Pius XII appreciated the declaration of Italian neutrality and the decision to not take advantage of the French defeat, while being against the invasion of Yugoslavia, a nation which the Holy See just signed a concordat with a few years before. But he acknowledged the creation of the Catholic kingdom of Croatia, and while not sold on Pavelic’s regime, he supported the coronation of Amedeo Aimone of Savoia-Aosta as king of Croatia to potential counterweight against the dictator. The coronation of “Tomislav II” was by the archbishop of Zagreb, Alojzije Viktor Stepinac. Stepinac was one of the youngest archbishops of the time and would prove to be one of the most energetic and charismatic high prelates during the war and the Cold War as well, in Croatia and beyond; assuming the title of Primate of Croatia, he would become the natural leader of his national Church. The Archbishop, while supporting Croatian independence and the union with Bosnia, he would progressively contest Pavelić’s pogroms in Bosnia, despite the same Catholic Church of Croatia being divided on the matter. Stepinac, who was previously active in giving asylum and protection to political refugees from the Nazi occupied territories, made sure to safeguard hundred of Serbian and Muslim Bosnians where possible (actions which later contributed to accelerate his beatification process); he would later support the Brutus conspiracy against Pavelic and therefore Kvaternik’s more pro Italian, Fascist aligned, government.
Pius XII also didn’t appreciate the invasion and the slicing up of Greece, albeit its aftermath which led to the creation of the Roman Alliance brought the Holy See to gradually normalize relations with Bulgaria, after the past tensions with Tsar Boris III (when he agreed to marry Giovanna di Savoia with a Catholic marriage in Assisi through a Papal dispensation, he then performed a new Orthodox wedding in Sofia and claim the latter to be the official one hence disregarding the dispensation; he even backpedalled over the promise to baptize his children in the Catholic faith). Relations with Turkey would slowly and progressive improve as well, in the early 1940’s due to the diplomatic effort of Angelo Roncalli. Roncalli, who in the 30’s was nuncius in Bulgaria, being burned by Boris’s treachery towards the Holy See, in Turkey was able to organize a relief organization over war refugees from Central and Oriental Europe. Turk-Vatican cooperation would increase in the wake of the Arab-Israeli wars and the rise of the Arab Federation, when Ankara would start to see the Christian minorities in Syria as potential allies against Aflaq’s regime, thinking only the Catholic Church had enough leverage to coalesce them into a united front.
When the Roman Alliance was established, Pius XII was supportive of it – believing the phase of Italian expansionism was ended and the same alliance to be a valid counterweight against Nazi Germany and above all, the Soviet Union. The fact the alliance was religiously diverse didn’t bother him much despite certain isolated murmurs in the curia. In the meanwhile, with the Allied invasion of Normandy, the Pope would attempt to barter a peace deal between Germany and the Allies – but Hitler scoffed away those attempts. Pius XII was also concerned of the growing grip of the Nazi regime against the Catholic Church, where isolated voices started to attempt a feeble opposition. Also concerning voices over the persecutions of Jewish communities and their potential, tragic fate as for other minorities (Jehovah’s witnesses, Roma, homosexuals and more) started to leak south of the Alps. Even converted Hebrews weren’t considered safe. The Holy See allowed, whenever possible, escape or hiding plans so that later several courageous prelates, being alive or died, would receive the title of “Just among the nations” from the Israelis. But the people saved was still too few; this would later lead to the controversy about Pius XII knowing or not of the holocaust and making few or nothing to denounce it during the war.
When Italy was invaded by Germany, Pius XII had no other choice than breaking all relations with the Reich and officially condemn Hitler, but still hesitating to excommunicate him (the Fuhrer was Catholic baptized after all) to not cause a definitive persecution of the Catholic Church in Germany and the other occupied nations. It was reason of a debate between the Holy See and several Allied delegations to discuss of how the same Church could contribute in putting further pressure against the Nazi regime. But it was decided in the end the Vatican effort would be, aside than publicly endorsing the effort of the Allies, more based on an underground level. There was also the fact Pius XII didn’t want to commend the efforts of the Soviets, considering they partitioned Poland and invaded Lithuania; the Pope was pretty rigid towards Stalin for this. It was a compromise that left many unhappy at the time, probably mostly Churchill and Mussolini for propaganda reasons, but in the end all went for it.
Still the Vatican made its own plans and projects during the last phase of the war. Pius XII for example was highly supportive of the Italian plans to put Otto of Haspburg on the throne of Hungary – one of the few things the Pope and the Duce really agreed over would have been the revival or the defence of European monarchism in Central Europe, as bulwark against potential Nazi threats, and above all Communism. At the same time, he would have been highly supportive of the Hohenzollern restoration in Germany, a nation that later would sign a new and fairer concordat. But Pius XII and Mussolini diverged over the fate of Austria and Hungary – the Pope even arrived to support a reconstruction of the Austrian-Hungarian union through Otto, Mussolini wasn’t interested. When the fate of Austria and Hungary was delineated for good at Potsdam, the Pope invited the Austrian Church to work with the restored Schuschnigg government and the Hungarian Church to support the monarchists, while funds arrived from Rome. The Vatican would support the democratic Czech government as well.
Towards the end of the war, with the discovery of the Holocaust, Pius XII felt compelled to revise the historic bias of the Church against the Jews, arriving to declare Ex Cathedra in 1947 - the abolition of the accusation of “deicide” against them. With a generally favourable Catholic and in particular Italian public mood, the Pope would eventually commence a phase of distension and discussion with the Jewish communities across the world and in private with the Zionist movement. Pius XII would agree to acknowledge Israel after its declaration of independence, not before, believing it would have irked the newly independent Arab nations and bring them to act against the Christian and Catholic minorities in the Middle East and believed through the United Nation, a compromise would have been found. But the Arabs would prove intransigent since the start. After the Israeli-RA victory in the First Arabian war, the Catholic Church obtained moral leadership of the guardianship of the Christian sites in Jerusalem and Israel, albeit it was agreed such sites would be shared with other Christian Churches. Through the years, the Vatican would contribute to the development of Israel through IOR investments in infrastructures in order to develop religious tourism in the country, albeit with the growing reason of pride for the Church. Those moves lead to the consolidation and preservation of a vital Catholic community in Israel. This would provide the springboard for the momentous events that would shape Lebanon and Egypt in the 1950s and 1960s.
But more than the Arab-Israeli conflict, in the immediate post war the Pope was more concerned with the Soviet campaign in Poland. The Polish Catholic Church sided mostly with the Polish insurgency since the start, the Vatican sending financial assistance along with supplies of all possible sort. But the nuclear bombing of Warsaw was a red line for the Pope as well – three days after the tragic event, Pius XII excommunicated the Soviet Union and whoever was actively communist, even in the democratic countries. At the same time, he upheld “the fate of Russia to be offered over the immaculate heart of Mary. “ As later was revealed, that particular declaration was done in reference to the prophecies of Fatima, of which Pius XII was devoted.
At the same time, the Pope cried “blessed be those in the time of persecution and martyrdom arrived for the Polish and the Polish Catholic Church, for their suffering will open unto them the gates of Heaven”, attempting to reorganize the remnants of said clergy. The attack on Warsaw’s victims included the archbishop of the city and Primate August Hlond, who was one of the strongest voices of protest of the Polish resistance. Therefore Pius XII would elevate as new archbishop Stephan Wyszynski, the second of Hlond. Wyszynski wasn’t in Warsaw at that time, as Hlond sent him in the countryside to overlook the needs of the population and also as a liaison with the rebel forces.
After managing to contact him, the Holy See informed him of the Pope’s decision to make him new archbishop of Warsaw and Primate of Poland – a decision that he accepted with a heavy heart. Due to the inability to reach the Polish city, Wyszynski agreed to reach Krakow, receiving his consecration there few hours before the official surrender of the city to the Soviets. The new leader of the Polish Catholic Church managed to release a message of hope to his battered nation, to be later arrested and put in isolation – he was spared only because Stalin was satisfied enough of the supposed end of the Polish resistance and didn’t mind at all of “an archbishop without a city”. But in the hearts and the minds of the Poles, Wyszynski would be another symbol of their endless struggle against the Russian (be they Soviet or else) ogre…
“…Rome, I admit myself, was truly an oasis of peace compared to my battered Poland, defeated but also ready to stand again. I was so proud when I heard of the liberation of Warsaw; all believing our nation would become free and independent soon. But, as the Soviets betrayed us in 1939, they were ready to betray us in 1945 as well (…)
I never experienced first hand the conflict between the Soviet occupiers and my nation’s patriots, as my superiors sent me in Rome to complete my studies at the Angelicum. But, how I wanted to abandon them and return to Poland a hundred times! I wrote several letters to Krakow, which always took some time because they had to be rerouted through Czechia, asking to be reassigned back home, eventually completing my studies later. But they wrote them back “we need people like you for the future of Poland and the Polish Church, not right now. “ It seemed unfair to me back then, but today I recognize the wisdom of that order to stay. (…)
In the summer of 1948 I would have completed my studies. I was happy, because I would have finally returned to Poland though my nation was in grim times. I was already preparing for my return… then the nuclear holocaust of Warsaw happened. The Jews will forgive me for using this term, but for me there aren’t other words to express the horror – no, the total loss of innocent lives in the city, included Soviet soldiers as well, over such an act of diabolic sadism. Today, I am totally indifferent against who claims to be Communist, but I need to be sincere, that in those days of despair, I really hated with all my heart the Communist doctrine and whoever was part of it, God forgive me for those youthful, vengeful thoughts.
My voyage to Poland was immediately stopped – there was nowhere to safely return to in my country. They said, “It would be a waste sending such a brilliant mind here to die,” and “You will be more useful to Poland in the future and at the moment here in Rome”. I heard they were planning for me some role in the Vatican administration back then, though in truth I was filled by darkness and despair. I was in a crisis of faith. How could God allow such devastation and further sufferance over his people – my people? Back then I failed to see his design (…)
I was so near to renounce the Church itself in those two terrible months, I just wanted to return to Poland, to join the remnants of the rebel army. We wouldn’t stand a chance – it would be fitting punishment of my neglect. I didn’t realize back then I was so close to damning my own soul to wrath eternal. Then a companion of mine suggested a trip to Puglia, in San Giovanni Rotondo, to see a mass of Padre Pio of Pietrelcina. I heard of the mystic friar during my Italian period, of his visions and the miracle of the stigmata on him. After facing a period of reclusion and isolation Pius XI lifted any investigation and accusation on him.
Commoners and noble people started to visit him, the then princess Maria José, Mafalda and Giovanna di Savoia, and other royals, especially during the war, though the Italian secret services kept an eye on him. The Duce, I heard later, didn’t approve of such popular manifestations of religious fervour, he was convinced Padre Pio was a sort of imposter. About me, I was so numb in my anger I decided to go anyway during the Easter celebration, away from Rome just to go somewhere. (…)
The manners and the words of Padre Pio were so surprising, so direct, even irreverent in form during the mass, my doubts and anger started to dissipate, and after the confession I had with him, I was healed from the rage which was destroying me those days. I found myself crying on bended knee. (…)
Now, those voices that say Padre Pio told some prophecy about me, or Poland, are totally false, but I can tell he told me he would pray God and the Virgin for the wellcare of my people, as for me as well.
Returning to Rome, refreshed in my spirit, restored my soul, I put my life in the hands of the Almighty and the Virgin. I was ready to take any position my superiors wanted me to offer. But, my mind and my heart were still in Poland and I would pray each day for the moment I would finally return in my motherland… “
Princeps Ecclesia: the Pontificate of Pius XII of Orazio Maffei
When Eugenio Pacelli was elected Pope the 2nd March of 1939, nobody was surprised – his proven diplomatic skills and administrative actions in the Holy See made him the most suitable candidate for the throne of Saint Peter, in such a delicate moment when Europe was falling towards the precipice of war.
The reactions from Italy and Germany were lukewarm to say the least – messages of congratulations were sent from the Berlin Chancellory and the east side of the Tiber, but both Hitler and Mussolini had reasons to question the new Pope. The Fuhrer was suspicious of the influence Pius XII would exercise on the German Catholic Church, considering that the Pope had great knowledge of German affairs – he was Nuncius for Bavaria, Prussia, and then Weimar Germany for several years. He managed to get a concordat with Hitler, which soon would be repeatedly violated by the Nazi government. Over such violations, Pius XI was so close to breaking relations with Germany – Pius XII was not. The new Pope believed a denunciation of the violation of the concordat would have put Hitler on a more intransigent position against the Catholic Church, while he still wanted to keep open a diplomatic channel with Berlin in a hopeless attempt to prevent war in Europe. This decision, among with other apparent controversial ones during the conflict, would lead later to certain criticism especially in the US, France, and Central Europe against him, being accused to have been pro-Nazi or at least pro-German.
Mussolini was wary as well of Pius XII. Despite the facade of cordiality in the various encounters they would have in several years, the Duce didn’t approve of certain diplomatic activism of the Pope which could have forestalled his projects of a parallel war during the main European conflict, or the influence he would exercise in certain Roman palaces and among the Italians in general, due to his anti-clerical views. At the same time, even if the Pope would acknowledge Franco’s regime when the Nationalists won in Spain, the Fascist regime had reasons to think deep inside, Pius XII intimately supported or at least was aligning more towards democratic feelings. So, despite the Lateran pacts, Mussolini would be suspicious of the intentions of the Holy See and only his pragmatism allowed Church and Italian State to cooperate during the years of the war and beyond.
These relationships would prove to change with the times: Pius XII appreciated the declaration of Italian neutrality and the decision to not take advantage of the French defeat, while being against the invasion of Yugoslavia, a nation which the Holy See just signed a concordat with a few years before. But he acknowledged the creation of the Catholic kingdom of Croatia, and while not sold on Pavelic’s regime, he supported the coronation of Amedeo Aimone of Savoia-Aosta as king of Croatia to potential counterweight against the dictator. The coronation of “Tomislav II” was by the archbishop of Zagreb, Alojzije Viktor Stepinac. Stepinac was one of the youngest archbishops of the time and would prove to be one of the most energetic and charismatic high prelates during the war and the Cold War as well, in Croatia and beyond; assuming the title of Primate of Croatia, he would become the natural leader of his national Church. The Archbishop, while supporting Croatian independence and the union with Bosnia, he would progressively contest Pavelić’s pogroms in Bosnia, despite the same Catholic Church of Croatia being divided on the matter. Stepinac, who was previously active in giving asylum and protection to political refugees from the Nazi occupied territories, made sure to safeguard hundred of Serbian and Muslim Bosnians where possible (actions which later contributed to accelerate his beatification process); he would later support the Brutus conspiracy against Pavelic and therefore Kvaternik’s more pro Italian, Fascist aligned, government.
Pius XII also didn’t appreciate the invasion and the slicing up of Greece, albeit its aftermath which led to the creation of the Roman Alliance brought the Holy See to gradually normalize relations with Bulgaria, after the past tensions with Tsar Boris III (when he agreed to marry Giovanna di Savoia with a Catholic marriage in Assisi through a Papal dispensation, he then performed a new Orthodox wedding in Sofia and claim the latter to be the official one hence disregarding the dispensation; he even backpedalled over the promise to baptize his children in the Catholic faith). Relations with Turkey would slowly and progressive improve as well, in the early 1940’s due to the diplomatic effort of Angelo Roncalli. Roncalli, who in the 30’s was nuncius in Bulgaria, being burned by Boris’s treachery towards the Holy See, in Turkey was able to organize a relief organization over war refugees from Central and Oriental Europe. Turk-Vatican cooperation would increase in the wake of the Arab-Israeli wars and the rise of the Arab Federation, when Ankara would start to see the Christian minorities in Syria as potential allies against Aflaq’s regime, thinking only the Catholic Church had enough leverage to coalesce them into a united front.
When the Roman Alliance was established, Pius XII was supportive of it – believing the phase of Italian expansionism was ended and the same alliance to be a valid counterweight against Nazi Germany and above all, the Soviet Union. The fact the alliance was religiously diverse didn’t bother him much despite certain isolated murmurs in the curia. In the meanwhile, with the Allied invasion of Normandy, the Pope would attempt to barter a peace deal between Germany and the Allies – but Hitler scoffed away those attempts. Pius XII was also concerned of the growing grip of the Nazi regime against the Catholic Church, where isolated voices started to attempt a feeble opposition. Also concerning voices over the persecutions of Jewish communities and their potential, tragic fate as for other minorities (Jehovah’s witnesses, Roma, homosexuals and more) started to leak south of the Alps. Even converted Hebrews weren’t considered safe. The Holy See allowed, whenever possible, escape or hiding plans so that later several courageous prelates, being alive or died, would receive the title of “Just among the nations” from the Israelis. But the people saved was still too few; this would later lead to the controversy about Pius XII knowing or not of the holocaust and making few or nothing to denounce it during the war.
When Italy was invaded by Germany, Pius XII had no other choice than breaking all relations with the Reich and officially condemn Hitler, but still hesitating to excommunicate him (the Fuhrer was Catholic baptized after all) to not cause a definitive persecution of the Catholic Church in Germany and the other occupied nations. It was reason of a debate between the Holy See and several Allied delegations to discuss of how the same Church could contribute in putting further pressure against the Nazi regime. But it was decided in the end the Vatican effort would be, aside than publicly endorsing the effort of the Allies, more based on an underground level. There was also the fact Pius XII didn’t want to commend the efforts of the Soviets, considering they partitioned Poland and invaded Lithuania; the Pope was pretty rigid towards Stalin for this. It was a compromise that left many unhappy at the time, probably mostly Churchill and Mussolini for propaganda reasons, but in the end all went for it.
Still the Vatican made its own plans and projects during the last phase of the war. Pius XII for example was highly supportive of the Italian plans to put Otto of Haspburg on the throne of Hungary – one of the few things the Pope and the Duce really agreed over would have been the revival or the defence of European monarchism in Central Europe, as bulwark against potential Nazi threats, and above all Communism. At the same time, he would have been highly supportive of the Hohenzollern restoration in Germany, a nation that later would sign a new and fairer concordat. But Pius XII and Mussolini diverged over the fate of Austria and Hungary – the Pope even arrived to support a reconstruction of the Austrian-Hungarian union through Otto, Mussolini wasn’t interested. When the fate of Austria and Hungary was delineated for good at Potsdam, the Pope invited the Austrian Church to work with the restored Schuschnigg government and the Hungarian Church to support the monarchists, while funds arrived from Rome. The Vatican would support the democratic Czech government as well.
Towards the end of the war, with the discovery of the Holocaust, Pius XII felt compelled to revise the historic bias of the Church against the Jews, arriving to declare Ex Cathedra in 1947 - the abolition of the accusation of “deicide” against them. With a generally favourable Catholic and in particular Italian public mood, the Pope would eventually commence a phase of distension and discussion with the Jewish communities across the world and in private with the Zionist movement. Pius XII would agree to acknowledge Israel after its declaration of independence, not before, believing it would have irked the newly independent Arab nations and bring them to act against the Christian and Catholic minorities in the Middle East and believed through the United Nation, a compromise would have been found. But the Arabs would prove intransigent since the start. After the Israeli-RA victory in the First Arabian war, the Catholic Church obtained moral leadership of the guardianship of the Christian sites in Jerusalem and Israel, albeit it was agreed such sites would be shared with other Christian Churches. Through the years, the Vatican would contribute to the development of Israel through IOR investments in infrastructures in order to develop religious tourism in the country, albeit with the growing reason of pride for the Church. Those moves lead to the consolidation and preservation of a vital Catholic community in Israel. This would provide the springboard for the momentous events that would shape Lebanon and Egypt in the 1950s and 1960s.
But more than the Arab-Israeli conflict, in the immediate post war the Pope was more concerned with the Soviet campaign in Poland. The Polish Catholic Church sided mostly with the Polish insurgency since the start, the Vatican sending financial assistance along with supplies of all possible sort. But the nuclear bombing of Warsaw was a red line for the Pope as well – three days after the tragic event, Pius XII excommunicated the Soviet Union and whoever was actively communist, even in the democratic countries. At the same time, he upheld “the fate of Russia to be offered over the immaculate heart of Mary. “ As later was revealed, that particular declaration was done in reference to the prophecies of Fatima, of which Pius XII was devoted.
At the same time, the Pope cried “blessed be those in the time of persecution and martyrdom arrived for the Polish and the Polish Catholic Church, for their suffering will open unto them the gates of Heaven”, attempting to reorganize the remnants of said clergy. The attack on Warsaw’s victims included the archbishop of the city and Primate August Hlond, who was one of the strongest voices of protest of the Polish resistance. Therefore Pius XII would elevate as new archbishop Stephan Wyszynski, the second of Hlond. Wyszynski wasn’t in Warsaw at that time, as Hlond sent him in the countryside to overlook the needs of the population and also as a liaison with the rebel forces.
After managing to contact him, the Holy See informed him of the Pope’s decision to make him new archbishop of Warsaw and Primate of Poland – a decision that he accepted with a heavy heart. Due to the inability to reach the Polish city, Wyszynski agreed to reach Krakow, receiving his consecration there few hours before the official surrender of the city to the Soviets. The new leader of the Polish Catholic Church managed to release a message of hope to his battered nation, to be later arrested and put in isolation – he was spared only because Stalin was satisfied enough of the supposed end of the Polish resistance and didn’t mind at all of “an archbishop without a city”. But in the hearts and the minds of the Poles, Wyszynski would be another symbol of their endless struggle against the Russian (be they Soviet or else) ogre…
Shepherd of my Own People, by Karol Wojtyla
“…Rome, I admit myself, was truly an oasis of peace compared to my battered Poland, defeated but also ready to stand again. I was so proud when I heard of the liberation of Warsaw; all believing our nation would become free and independent soon. But, as the Soviets betrayed us in 1939, they were ready to betray us in 1945 as well (…)
I never experienced first hand the conflict between the Soviet occupiers and my nation’s patriots, as my superiors sent me in Rome to complete my studies at the Angelicum. But, how I wanted to abandon them and return to Poland a hundred times! I wrote several letters to Krakow, which always took some time because they had to be rerouted through Czechia, asking to be reassigned back home, eventually completing my studies later. But they wrote them back “we need people like you for the future of Poland and the Polish Church, not right now. “ It seemed unfair to me back then, but today I recognize the wisdom of that order to stay. (…)
In the summer of 1948 I would have completed my studies. I was happy, because I would have finally returned to Poland though my nation was in grim times. I was already preparing for my return… then the nuclear holocaust of Warsaw happened. The Jews will forgive me for using this term, but for me there aren’t other words to express the horror – no, the total loss of innocent lives in the city, included Soviet soldiers as well, over such an act of diabolic sadism. Today, I am totally indifferent against who claims to be Communist, but I need to be sincere, that in those days of despair, I really hated with all my heart the Communist doctrine and whoever was part of it, God forgive me for those youthful, vengeful thoughts.
My voyage to Poland was immediately stopped – there was nowhere to safely return to in my country. They said, “It would be a waste sending such a brilliant mind here to die,” and “You will be more useful to Poland in the future and at the moment here in Rome”. I heard they were planning for me some role in the Vatican administration back then, though in truth I was filled by darkness and despair. I was in a crisis of faith. How could God allow such devastation and further sufferance over his people – my people? Back then I failed to see his design (…)
I was so near to renounce the Church itself in those two terrible months, I just wanted to return to Poland, to join the remnants of the rebel army. We wouldn’t stand a chance – it would be fitting punishment of my neglect. I didn’t realize back then I was so close to damning my own soul to wrath eternal. Then a companion of mine suggested a trip to Puglia, in San Giovanni Rotondo, to see a mass of Padre Pio of Pietrelcina. I heard of the mystic friar during my Italian period, of his visions and the miracle of the stigmata on him. After facing a period of reclusion and isolation Pius XI lifted any investigation and accusation on him.
Commoners and noble people started to visit him, the then princess Maria José, Mafalda and Giovanna di Savoia, and other royals, especially during the war, though the Italian secret services kept an eye on him. The Duce, I heard later, didn’t approve of such popular manifestations of religious fervour, he was convinced Padre Pio was a sort of imposter. About me, I was so numb in my anger I decided to go anyway during the Easter celebration, away from Rome just to go somewhere. (…)
The manners and the words of Padre Pio were so surprising, so direct, even irreverent in form during the mass, my doubts and anger started to dissipate, and after the confession I had with him, I was healed from the rage which was destroying me those days. I found myself crying on bended knee. (…)
Now, those voices that say Padre Pio told some prophecy about me, or Poland, are totally false, but I can tell he told me he would pray God and the Virgin for the wellcare of my people, as for me as well.
Returning to Rome, refreshed in my spirit, restored my soul, I put my life in the hands of the Almighty and the Virgin. I was ready to take any position my superiors wanted me to offer. But, my mind and my heart were still in Poland and I would pray each day for the moment I would finally return in my motherland… “
