Pope Francis and peace with Islam
Asharq al-Awsat, London, April 25
We, Arabs and Muslims, often exaggerate both in our celebration of positives and in our lamentation of negatives. The positive sentiment we are reflecting on today concerns statements made by Arabs and Muslims after the death of Pope Francis, declaring that peace with Islam was his highest priority.
From close observation since 2015, I can say with some certainty that the primary focus of the Argentinian cardinal, who ascended to the papacy in 2013 following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, was internal reform within the church.
Perhaps his second major concern was fostering relations with marginalized communities around the world. His engagement with Islam, while sincere and meaningful, ranked third among his many proliferating activities and perhaps even lower before his elevation to the papacy.
It is fair to say that during his pontificate, Francis made a concerted effort to improve relations with Muslims, and his very choice of papal name had historical resonance in that regard. Saint Francis of Assisi (1180-1226), founder of the Franciscan Order, is remembered for two major themes in his short life: his compassion for the poor, the sick, and the hungry during the plagues that devastated Central Europe, and his extraordinary efforts to seek peace with Muslims during an era of ferocious conflict between East and West.
Francis of Assisi famously traveled to Cairo and met with Sultan Al-Kamil Ayyubi (1180-1238), ruler of Egypt and nephew of the famed Saladin. While Muslim historians scarcely mention this encounter, Crusader sources claim that Assisi sought to persuade the Sultan to embrace Christianity after sensing his openness to peace. Regardless of historical interpretations, the encounter itself has come to symbolize a rare gesture of reconciliation during the age of the Crusades.
As Ibn Khaldun observed, history is not only about recording events but also about the choices, interpretations, and meanings we attach to them. Over the centuries, the narrative surrounding Assisi’s visit has come to represent a vision of peace, just as Saladin’s own preference for negotiated settlements shaped his legacy.
I digress here because Pope Francis, too, elevated world peace – and peace with Islam in particular – to a priority of his papacy. He embraced the story of Assisi as a model for his outreach, visiting Muslim-majority countries and championing the cause of interfaith dialogue.
In his first homily after his election, Pope Francis warned of the perils surrounding world peace, emphasizing that it must be preserved at all costs because war brings nothing but misery, destruction, and death. He stressed the need to address the suffering in Muslim lands, asserting that global peace is unattainable without peace with Islam and Muslims.
These themes recurred throughout his papacy, and he visited seven Arab and Islamic countries, each time delivering messages extolling dialogue, cooperation, and the mercy that Christians and Muslims alike believe to be the foundation of God’s relationship with humanity.
The pinnacle of these efforts came with his historic visit to Abu Dhabi and the signing of the Document on Human Fraternity alongside Grand Imam Ahmed el-Tayeb of al-Azhar on February 4, 2019.
The document opens with a profound reflection on faith and divine mercy, affirming that all human beings are encompassed by God’s care, regardless of their beliefs. It then addresses a broad spectrum of global challenges, calling on world leaders and religious figures to approach these problems with unwavering moral and ethical commitment.
It stresses that religious, ethical, and humanitarian dialogue must overcome obstacles and evolve into a path toward greater understanding, cooperation, and peace. Yoannis Lahzi Gaid, the Egyptian-born priest who served as Pope Francis’s secretary during the signing, shared that the document demanded immense courage and sincerity from both leaders.
It is significant that the document’s title and central message revolve around the principle of brotherhood, a value deeply rooted in Islamic tradition. In his subsequent messages and public addresses, Pope Francis frequently cited the document, linking it to the values of neighborliness and hospitality, particularly in the context of welcoming migrants and refugees.
His empathy was evident when he visited Rohingya refugee camps in Bangladesh, describing the denial of human fraternity as a denial of humanity itself.
In the final hours of his life, Pope Francis reportedly called for an end to the wars in Ukraine and Palestine – a plea he may have reiterated during a conversation with the US vice president.
According to statements by the grand imam of al-Azhar and the king of Morocco, Pope Francis was the Christian leader most attuned to Muslim suffering and concerns since the era of the Second Vatican Council. It is hoped that his profound legacy of compassion, dialogue, and solidarity will endure within the venerable institution of the Catholic Church. – Radwan al-Sayed
No more Hamas
Nida Al Watan, Lebanon, April 24
The decision has been made, and there is no turning back: Hamas will no longer have a foothold in Lebanon.
The so-called Hamasland, which had morphed into a military and security entity operating parallel to the state within certain Palestinian camps, is being systematically dismantled and will no longer exist on Lebanon’s security map.
This decision, taken at the highest political and security levels, is being steadily implemented with the full support of the Lebanese army, which has already begun tearing down the security and military infrastructure established by Hamas and other factions directly backed by Hezbollah.
Hamas’s military apparatus in Lebanon did not emerge spontaneously; it was deliberately crafted as a reserve tool, cloaked under the Palestinian flag, and used to pursue agendas that stretch far beyond the Palestinian cause, chiefly in service of Tehran’s regional ambitions.
This model is no longer tolerable, neither within Lebanon nor among the broader international community, and the protective cover once provided by its “official sponsor” is rapidly eroding, setting the stage for an inevitable confrontation.
What further empowers the Lebanese state to proceed down this path is the full coordination with the Palestinian Authority, whose military and political arm, Fatah, has shown transparent and unconditional cooperation. In fact, it is expected to take a pivotal step by placing its weapons under the authority of the Lebanese state, possibly even ahead of President Mahmoud Abbas’s forthcoming visit to Beirut.
The message is unequivocal: there will be no place for mercenary weapons, nor for any illegitimate arms using the refugee camps as springboards for external agendas.
The era of Qusaya and Naameh – areas that once hosted armed factions aligned with the so-called axis of resistance – is drawing to a close.
This transformation is not merely a security shift; it marks a profound political realignment, dovetailing with a broader regional moment that seeks to reassert the primacy and dignity of the Lebanese state over the existence of armed fiefdoms.
High-level consultations are ongoing among the Lebanese authorities, the Palestinian leadership, and other factions, aiming to eradicate all pockets of illegal weaponry, particularly in Ain al-Hilweh and other camps.
The goal extends beyond mere disarmament to dismantling the culture of security chaos and ensuring that the Palestinian cause is no longer exploited as a facade for foreign agendas.
Today, the Lebanese state is advancing with determination, and the tide of illegal arms is receding. The “Hamasland” experiment in Lebanon will not be resurrected, and the era of investing in chaos and paramilitary armament has ended.
There will be no room to revive such experiences under any pretext or protective shield. The next phase will be characterized by the exclusive legitimacy of state authority, and from now on, there will be no “Hamas” or any other form of ministate within the Lebanese state. – Assaad Bechara
The West is divided
Al-Ahram, Egypt, April 25
A deep divide, not merely a disagreement, is now widening across the West. It is no longer just a clash between the Trump administration and most Western governments over matters of security, trade, and the economy, but, rather, an ideological rift between two fundamentally opposing sets of values.
At the heart of this divide lies the contentious issue of social diversity, with homosexuality and transgender rights standing as its most sensitive and visible symbols. The US president’s decision to roll back recognition of gender diversity and assert that there are only males and females has only served to deepen this division, both within the United States and between his administration and the governments of most European nations.
In the US, nearly half the population supports the inclusion of homosexuality and transgenderism as integral aspects of social diversity. Among the most liberal segments of society, support for LGBT rights is particularly strong. A Gallup poll revealed that 7.6% of Americans now identify as LGBT, a figure that has doubled since Gallup first began tracking this data in 2012, and the trend suggests it could surpass 10% in the near future, as younger generations continue to express higher levels of identification.
This is merely the most visible expression of the broader ideological divide fracturing the West, though it is by no means the only one, and arguably not even the most significant.
It is important to recognize that the divide is complex and nuanced; not all members of the far Right oppose gay and transgender rights, and not all those on the Left or Center embrace them. Indeed, even on the far Left, there are those who resist full acknowledgment of gender and sexual diversity.
A telling example of these divergent approaches can be seen in the stances adopted by far-right leaders. In contrast to Trump’s hardline position, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who is far-right both intellectually and politically, has shown a measure of pragmatism on the issue. Since taking office in 2022, Meloni has refrained from repealing legislation that grants equal rights to gay and transgender individuals, including marriage rights, though she does oppose the registration of children adopted by same-sex couples.
From this, it is possible to sketch a broad dividing line that now bisects the West: on one side stands a growing far Right, and on the other, a coalition comprising the traditional Right, centrists, and the Left. – Wahid Abdel-Meguid
The Chinese era has begun
Okaz, Saudi Arabia, April 23
In the face of the most complex trade war in modern history, China has proven itself not only a formidable adversary but also a strategic force actively reshaping global power dynamics.
During US President Donald Trump’s first term, China found itself at the epicenter of an escalating economic conflict, after Washington imposed sweeping tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of Chinese goods, as part of a broader strategy to curb Beijing’s rise. Yet China did not retreat; instead, it met these challenges with impressive political acumen and economic resilience, leveraging its vast industrial base, skilled human resources, and remarkable adaptability under pressure.
China swiftly countered the US tariffs with its own measures, targeting sensitive American agricultural and industrial sectors, particularly those comprising President Trump’s electoral base. Simultaneously, it diversified its global markets by signing trade agreements with the European Union, Southeast Asian nations, and Latin American countries, thus mitigating the impact of American pressure.
Beyond merely retaliating, China expanded its economic reach by investing heavily in the Belt and Road Initiative projects and in institutions like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, creating alternative economic pathways outside the Western sphere of influence.
Over the past five years, China has undertaken qualitative transformations that have positioned it for any future trade battles. It has expanded its production capabilities to historic heights, now accounting for nearly 30% of global manufacturing output, compared to just 15% for the United States.
China has also overtaken the US in the production of automobiles, steel, cement, solar panels, and drones, and now leads the world in industrial robot assembly and boasts the largest naval fleet on the planet.
In nuclear technology, China is more than a decade ahead of the US, with plans to construct over 100 nuclear reactors in the next two decades – a bold testament to its ambitions for sustainable energy dominance.
The Chinese economy has already surpassed that of the United States in terms of purchasing power parity and has demonstrated a remarkable ability to sustain growth despite global turmoil, including the COVID-19 pandemic, supply chain disruptions, and the economic stagnation of Western markets.
More crucially, China’s strategy is not limited to survival; it seeks to actively reshape the global order. It is stepping in to fill the void left by the United States, which has weakened its own leadership through the dismantling of traditional alliances and the imposition of tariffs even on close partners like Canada, Mexico, and the European Union, thus eroding its strategic clout.
Despite internal challenges such as an aging population, a heavily indebted real estate sector, and stringent Internet censorship, China’s economic dynamism and its meticulous long-term planning have created a pivotal moment in world history.
China is no longer merely contesting America’s position; it is preparing the world for a new era of international balance. This may well be the dawn of the “Chinese era” in every sense – a period in which global economics, politics, and technology are increasingly shaped by Chinese hands and according to new equations that move beyond the gravitational pull of Washington’s orbit. – Rami Al-Khalifa Al-Ali
Translated by Asaf Zilberfarb. All assertions, opinions, facts, and information presented in these articles are the sole responsibility of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of The Media Line, which assumes no responsibility for their content.