Criticisms from the Holy See towards Brussels
- Sometimes the strongest criticism comes not from a geopolitical opponent, but from an institution that for centuries has sought to speak from a position of moral authority. That is why the messages that arrived from the Vatican these days to Brussels deserve much more attention than was given to them in the European public, and they refer to the “selective application of international law, the different attitude towards armed conflicts and the tendency to adapt moral principles to political interests” by Brussels-based European elites
At the gathering of cardinals convened by Pope Leo the Fourteenth, the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez, opened a topic that has long simmered in European politics, namely “the selective application of international law, the different attitude towards armed conflicts and the tendency to adapt moral principles to political interests”.
Vatican with criticism on a principled level
His words were not directed at just one country or one conflict. On the contrary, the criticism was placed on a principled level. According to Fernández, “contemporary politics increasingly operates according to the logic of who is friend and who is adversary” instead of universal criteria.
– It is precisely in that part that the strongest message is found. If human rights, democracy, freedom of speech and respect for international law only apply when it suits political interests, then they cease to be universal values and become an instrument of daily politics. That is why the assessment that “there is no longer a real and stable framework of truth and values” should not be read as a diplomatic phrase. It is a warning that the European and broader Western political system risks losing the strongest capital it possesses – moral credibility – say our interlocutors, career diplomats and political analysts.
In essence, although the Vatican directly points to Brussels for double standards and two-track policy, it does not only challenge the specific policy of the European Union. The Vatican and more widely raises the question of whether the same principles really apply equally to everyone, and Brussels and the EU are just one metaphor and example through which the answer is reached.
– When the European Union introduces sanctions against one country, and has a significantly different approach towards another, the question inevitably arises as to what the criteria are. Are they legal, moral and value oriented or above all geopolitical? This question has long been asked by a large number of analysts, professors of international law and diplomats. The Vatican has now given it extra weight, as the criticism comes not from a political rival of the European Union, but from an institution that traditionally insists on the universality of moral principles. A wider dilemma arises from this. If international law is applied selectively, then its authority gradually weakens. And when the authority of law weakens, political power takes its place. In that sense, Fernandez’s statements are not only a criticism of the current European policy. They represent a warning that the world is moving towards an order in which the rules depend on who interprets them – say our interlocutors, experienced diplomats and occasional columnists in “Nova Macedonia”.
For Macedonia, this kind of debate has a special meaning and is an interesting parallel with the messages from the Vatican
Recently, the Macedonian authorities have intensively pointed out that the process of European integration has incredibly moved away from the classic Copenhagen criteria and more and more our European integration is tied to the resolution of bilateral disputes.
– Let’s make an interesting parallel with the messages from the Vatican. Cardinal Fernandez did not speak about Macedonia. But his criticism raises a broader question. Does the European Union manage to consistently apply its own principles in foreign policy and enlargement policy? It is a legitimate political question, especially when trust in European institutions is declining in many countries. For decades, the European Union has built its soft power precisely on the belief that the rules apply equally to everyone. That is why any deviation from that principle carries a much greater political cost than it might seem at first glance. Not because the European Union is not allowed to make political decisions. But because those decisions must be convincingly reasoned and appear consistent. Otherwise, any different application of the same principles will be perceived as a double standard. Such a perception is not only a problem for candidate countries. It is also a problem for the European Union itself, because it undermines confidence in the European project – explained our interlocutors, diplomats and political analysts.
The weight of criticism of Brussels from the Vatican
When an institution that claims to speak from a position of universal moral principles warns that values are beginning to be applied selectively, then it is not just a criticism of a particular policy. It is a warning that any international order that wants to be based on law, not force, must constantly prove its consistency. Otherwise, the rhetoric of values risks remaining only rhetoric, and trust – the most difficult to restore political capital – to gradually disappear. And that’s exactly why his message can have more weight than it seems today, our interlocutors finally point out.
