VZCZCXRO4004
PP RUEHBC RUEHDA RUEHDBU RUEHDE RUEHGI RUEHKUK RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHROV #0153/01 2091310
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 281310Z JUL 06
FM AMEMBASSY VATICAN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0424
INFO RUCNISL/ISLAMIC CONFERENCE COLLECTIVE
RUEHROV/AMEMBASSY VATICAN 0452

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 VATICAN 000153 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL VT LE
SUBJECT: HOLY SEE:  FOREIGN MINISTER'S INTERVIEW ON LEBANON 
 
REF: (A) VATICAN 150 (B) VATICAN 146 AND PREVIOUS 
 
VATICAN 00000153  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
¶1. (U) Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo, the Holy See's Secretary for 
Relations with States (i.e., Foreign Minister) gave an interview 
to Vatican Radio July 27 on the Rome Conference which met July 
26 on the Lebanon crisis.  The interview was published under the 
headline, "4 Positive Aspects of Talks on Lebanon:  Analysis of 
Vatican Secretary for Relations With States."   Full text of 
this interview follows in para 2 below. 
 
¶2.  (U) Begin text: 
 
VATICAN CITY, JULY 27, 2006 (The 15-nation conference held in 
Rome on Wednesday failed to produce an immediate cease-fire, but 
there were significant results, says the Vatican secretary for 
relations with states.  Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo participated 
as an observer in the international conference, and in this 
interview aired today on Vatican Radio, he offers his analysis 
of the meeting. 
 
Q: The international conference for Lebanon was held yesterday, 
at the initiative of the United States and Italy, in which the 
Core Group on Lebanon and other countries took part. The Vatican 
press office announced that a delegation led by you was present 
in the capacity of observer. Can you explain this? 
 
Archbishop Lajolo: As is known, the Holy See is directly 
interested in peace in the Middle East, as it has demonstrated 
on several occasions. Yesterday, at the invitation of the United 
States and Italy, the Holy See was able to participate in the 
capacity of observer; by its nature, this is the role with which 
the Holy See generally participates in international 
organizations. 
 
Q: What is your judgment on the conference? 
 
Archbishop Lajolo: Of course it is positive that it was called 
with such speed at the initiative of the Italian government, and 
that it focused its attention on the most urgent needs of the 
present time. 
 
Q: The conclusions gathered in the declaration of the two 
co-presidents, the secretary of state of the United States, 
Condoleezza Rice, and the Italian minister of foreign affairs, 
Massimo D'Alema, have been considered rather disappointing. What 
is your opinion? 
 
Archbishop Lajolo: It's true, the expectations of the public 
were certainly high, but for the well-informed who understand 
the difficulties, it could perhaps be said that the results were 
significant. Above all, I would like to underline these positive 
aspects:  One, the fact that countries from various parts of the 
world, from Canada to Russia, came together in an awareness of 
the gravity of what is happening in Lebanon, reaffirming the 
need for the country to regain full sovereignty as soon as 
possible, and that they made a commitment to help her.  Two, the 
request to form an international force, under the mandate of the 
United Nations, to support the regular Lebanese army in security 
matters.  Three, the commitment to offer immediate humanitarian 
aid to the people of Lebanon and the guarantee of support in 
rebuilding by calling a conference of donor states. Several 
participant countries have anticipated the offer of considerable 
aid, though it is still insufficient to cover the country's 
enormous needs.  Four, also positive is the commitment adopted 
by the participants, after the official closing of the 
conference, to remain in constant contact concerning further 
developments in the intervention of the international community 
in Lebanon. 
 
Q: But, what has caused this sense of disappointment? 
 
Archbishop Lajolo: Above all, by the fact that there was no 
request for an immediate cessation of hostilities. Unanimity 
among the participants was not achieved because some countries 
maintained that an appeal would not have produced the desired 
effect. And it was felt more realistic to express a commitment 
to achieve without delay a cessation of hostilities, a 
commitment which can, in fact, be maintained.  Another 
problematic issue was the fact that the conference limited 
itself to inviting Israel to exercise the greatest restraint. By 
its nature, this call has a certain inevitable ambiguity, while 
respect for the innocent civilian population is a precise and 
binding duty. 
 
Q: What is the judgment of the Lebanese government? 
 
Archbishop Lajolo: On one hand, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora had 
the opportunity to fully explain the dramatic nature of the 
situation of the country and to present his own plan for the 
immediate and definitive resolution of the conflict with Israel. 
On the other, he was also able to witness and further encourage 
the positive efforts being made by the international community 
to help the Lebanese people, to put an end to the conflict and 
to reinforce his government's control of the country.  Yesterday 
 
VATICAN 00000153  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
evening, Prime Minister Siniora, accompanied by the minister of 
foreign affairs, Fauzi Salloukh, requested a meeting with the 
Vatican secretary of state and with me.  He expressed great 
appreciation for the commitment with which the Holy Father in 
person, and the Holy See, follow the conflict that is racking 
Lebanon, and he requested continuing support for his country in 
the international arena.  He also recalled Pope John Paul II's 
words, who defined Lebanon not only as a country, but as "a 
message" for all peoples of harmonious coexistence among various 
religions and confessions in one state.  This is the historical 
vocation of the Lebanon, which must be able to be realized. The 
Holy See will continue to offer all the means at its disposition 
so that the country will return to be that "garden" of the 
Middle East, as it was before. 
 
Q: In the capacity of observer, have you had the possibility to 
influence, at least indirectly, in the works of the conference? 
 
Archbishop Lajolo: An observer does not have the right to speak, 
and I was not asked. I believe, however, that the silent 
presence of the observer of the Holy See at the table of the 
leaders of delegations had a clearly perceptible significance. 
 
Q: After this conference, what is the Holy See's position on 
this subject? 
 
Archbishop Lajolo: The Holy See remains in favor of an immediate 
cessation of hostilities. The problems on the table are many and 
extremely complex, and precisely for that reason cannot all be 
dealt with together, while bearing in mind the general picture 
and the overall solution to be achieved, the problems must be 
resolved "per partes," beginning with those that are immediately 
resolvable.  The position of those who maintain that conditions 
must first be created so that any truce is not once again 
violated, is only apparently one of realism, because those 
conditions can and must be created with means other than the 
killing of innocent people.  Benedict XVI is close to those 
peoples, victims of confrontations and of a conflict foreign to 
them. The Pope prays, and with him the entire Church, for the 
day of peace to come today and not tomorrow.  He prays to God 
and appeals to political leaders. The Pope weeps with every 
mother weeping for her children, with all those weeping for 
their loved ones. An immediate suspension of hostilities is 
possible, and, therefore, necessary. 
 
 
 
ROONEY 
SANDROLINI