Political controversy in Jerusalem

Political controversy in Jerusalem

The tests this trip was going to throw at Pope Benedict XVI came, as expected, during the second, and most challenging phase of the journey: Jerusalem. A shared city, a crucial place for Christianity, Islam and Judaism, and one of the main sticking points of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

During Benedict's two hectic days here (hectic for the press too, so please forgive the  two days in one diary entry) it would have been easy to forget that one of the key parts of his trip was to support and visit the region's dwindling Catholic community.

When the word Christian was mentioned in news reports it was in passing: what all the headlines focused on was the pope's relationships with Israelis and Palestinians.

Never have the Vatican's protestations that this pilgrimage did not have a political agenda sounded more pointless.

A mere glance around the city tells you that: The shared religious sites, the street signs in three languages, the stark contrast between East and West Jerusalem.

Religion and politics are so intrinsically linked here that to separate them is impossible.

The pope began his trip more strongly than many thought he would.

Only minutes after landing at Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, he alluded to the need for a two-state solution (a "homeland within internationally recognised borders" were his words), something the new Israeli government does not seem to support.

But it wasn't this comment that caused the following day’s disastrous headlines.

Rather, it was the pope's speech at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial. No mention of "six million" when speaking of the number of Jews who died in the Holocaust, and no hint of apology that the Vatican could have done more to prevent the extent of the killing.

An opportunity lost was how most Israeli papers summed it up. Headlines which apparently surprised and worried the Vatican.

That wasn't the only embarrassment of the day.

Criminal behaviour

During a conference on inter-religious dialogue (without, ironically, any simultaneous translations) a Muslim cleric unexpectedly took the floor, accused Israel of criminal behaviour against Palestinians, actions that he then asked the pope to condemn.

The Vatican looked embarrassed, but the incident should hardly have been a surprise, seeing as the same cleric did something very similar during the last papal visit in 2000.

It would be easy to think the pope should not have come to the Holy Land right now.

When Pope John Paul II came in  2000, the second intifada hadn't started, there had been no 9/11, and the visit certainly didn't come just months after the deaths of more than 1,300 Palestinians in the war on Gaza.

Now, the tension is palpable.

Should the bad timing have stopped him? One senior member of the local Latin clergy thinks not.

"The timing is never right in this part of the world. Benedict XVI is now 82. He wanted to visit the Holy Land and his followers now. This trip, and its timing, are the actions of a very brave man."