ADSS 1.206 Valeri to Maglione: Situation seen from France

ADSS 1.2016 Valerio Valeri, France, to Luigi Maglione, Sec State

Reference: Report 9152/311 (AES 6938/39)

Location and date: Paris, 21.09.1939

Summary statement: International situation seen from Paris; possibility for peace; Russia’s attitude; Italian neutrality; negotiations with Turkey; possible mediators of peace.

Language: Italian

Text:

The day before yesterday, in the afternoon, I was received by M. Champetier de Ribes, who had called on me the previous day on behalf of the Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, M. Daladier. (1)

At the Quai d’Orsay everybody was waiting for the speech that Herr Hitler was going to make in Danzig and which everybody, even here, believed would open a peace offensive. (2) I understood that if this was so the speech would be given a certain amount of attention by the Government here.  There are in fact amongst the members of the Government some who would welcome the end of the conflict, if possible.  As far as I was concerned I just mentioned a few conditions which could help this, such as the restitution of the independence to Czechoslovakia and an outlet on Memel to Poland, although that country has already been deprived, unfortunately, of part of its territory.  But the peace offensive has probably been postponed and, in the meantime, the Council of Ministers yesterday proclaimed its intention to wage the war until final victory, echoing Mr Chamberlain’s reply to Hitler. (3) It is superfluous to tell Your Eminence, in this respect, that the occupation of Polish territory by Russia has dispelled the last illusions on the Soviets reaching agreement with Germany, as it has profoundly altered the facts concerning the European problem.

I believe that because of this new factor, the enormous importance of Italian neutrality is beginning to be recognised by everybody.  M. Champetier de Ribes, who belongs, as Your Eminence knows, to a group always opposed to Fascism, told me that good news was coming from Italy but it was better not to talk much about it in order not to create difficulties to those in charge.  He added that he hoped that everything would continue as present.

For my part I merely add that the rumour is circulating here that many troops are being transferred from the French to the German front on the Brenner, which in my opinion, could be a simple precautionary measure.

It is, however, difficult to see, how, after the liquidation of Poland, the war can be carried out on the western front, without going beyond sorties and aerial bombardments, which would mean terrible and total destruction, In fact the Balkan Sector, owing to circumstances, has lost its importance and Turkey itself can no longer contribute to the execution of great projects.  With reference to the latter country, some circles state that they have urged France to hand over Syria immediately and when this Government refused because of the changed circumstances, replied that they may start negotiations again with Moscow.  For this reason, perhaps, the journey of the Turkish Minister for Foreign Affairs to Moscow had been announced, a journey which has been delayed for a few days. (4)

Does Moscow intend to keep out in order to intervene late in the struggle as an intermediary?  Some people would interpret it in this way because of the fact that several Communist members of Parliament have the other day distributed some leaflets in the corridors of the Palace Bourbon (5), evidently with the consent of the Russian Embassy here, in which the failure of the famous negotiations was attributed to Britain and it was affirmed that Stalin has decided to observe the strictest neutrality (after having taken his share of Polish territory).

If this were true, it would be much better that similar action were taken, at a proper moment, by M. Mussolini and by President Roosevelt, not to speak of the Holy Father.  Some people are looking forward to the next Pan-American Conference (6), which will be presided over by Roosevelt himself; but unfortunately, it would seem very difficult for a peace initiative to have any hope of success at this moment.

Notes: 

(1) Auguste Champetier de Ribes, (1882-1947), French Senator 1934-40, a senior advisor to Edourd Daladier (1884-1970), French Prime Minister and Foreign Minister 1938-39-40.

(2) Hitler addressed a large gathering of Nazi faithful in Danzig in the evening of the same day as the Nuncio’s report to Rome.  The text can be found here: http://www.hitler.org/speeches/09-13-39.html  In the speech Hitler said Germany had no territorial claims on Britain or France but Germany had been forced into war because of Polish outrages against German minorities.  Germany had only ever sought the way of peace but the war-mongers in other states had encouraged Polish aggression.  Even so, the inferior Poles had, in many instances fought heroically at the lower levels while deserted by the Polish officers and military leadership.  Text follows below.

(3) Neville Chamberlain, (1869-1940), British Prime Minister 1937-40. Formal Declaration of War, 03.09.1939: http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/ww2outbreak/7957.shtml?page=txt

(4) Mehmet Sukru Saracoglu (1886-1953), Turkish Minister for Foreign Affairs 1938-42, visited Moscow in late September and October 1939 for talks regarding Soviet proposals to revise the 1936 Montreux Convention which had given Turkey an internationally recognised and exclusive right to control access to the Bosphorus and Dardenelles.  The Soviet Union wanted control over the straits, a foreign policy direction that traced former Imperial Russian policy back to the reign of Catherine the Great.  Turkey refused.  Tensions between the USSR and Turkey were not resolved until 1947 when Turkey abandoned neutrality and sided with the Western Powers.

(5) The Bourbon Palace housed the National Assembly.

(6) The Pan-American Conference or the International Conference of American States, made up of the republics of the Americas, met periodically from 1889.  There was no Pan-American Conference during the war, although there were several meetings of Foreign Ministers (September 1939, July 1940 and July 1942).  The 1939 meeting was held in Panama City and the delegates issued statements affirming Northern and Southern American neutrality south of Canada, and warnings to belligerent states to respect North and South American territorial waters. (Canada joined the Union of American States in 1989)

ADSS 1.56 Borgongini Duca to Maglione: fears of war

ADSS 1.56 Francesco Borgongini Duca (1), Italy to Luigi Maglione, Sec State

Reference: Report 6941, (AES 3529/39)

Location and date: Rome, 03.06.1939

Summary statement:  Conversation with the Turkish Ambassador to Italy, fear that war could occur within 3 months

Language: Italian

Text:

During the last week in May I had many contacts with the principal Ambassadors of this Diplomatic Corps, especially with Sir Percy Loraine, British Ambassador, Francois-Poncet, French Ambassador and Huseyin Ragip Baydurm Turkish Ambassador. (2)

During a luncheon at the Turkish Embassy on 31 May the Ambassador, after having assured me that on the next day he would send the file regarding the registration of the Holy See’s properties in Istanbul to Ankara (about which I did not forget to recommend what your Eminence instructed me in the message of 22 May, Number 1608) (3), told me that, in his opinion, the situation was greatly improved, because through the various agreements between the democratic countries, the balance of power had been re-established between the two sides into which Europe was divided.  He, too, believed that the danger of war had been pushed back two or three months.  He also agreed with me that the Polish Corridor, where it is difficult to suggest a solution, which would satisfy both parties, is the greatest stumbling block.

Arab feelings, as expressed to me by the Iraq minister and Legation Secretary, are the following: Italy and Germany are in a state of absolute inferiority as Franco-British and Russian forces are drawing closer together.  I had the impression that Iraq was also leaning towards Great Britain.

More interesting appeared to be some confidential communications made to me by the new British Ambassador on 20 May, when I went to return his first visit.  He spoke at length about the Franco-Turkish Treaty on the Sanjak.) (4) The Ambassador is a specialist on this subject having been High Commissioner in Egypt and the Ambassador to Ankara until his appointment in Rome.)

He told me that he does not understand why Turkey accepted the Sanjak where the majority of the population is Christian and Arab and not Turkish, especially if one bears in mind that the Kemal Pasha’s revolution and the oath given by the Turkish Constituent Assembly had explicitly declared that the New Turkey, contrary to Ottoman Empire policy, wanted to rule only on Turkish territories. (5) But the Ambassador was aware of the great material advantage to Turkey to have the port of Alexandretta, which is the only one on the coast.  It is clear that Ismet is somewhat modifying Kemal Pasha’s policy and returning to the Islamic Ottoman policy with the evident intention of reaching Haleb. (6)

I asked the British Ambassador if the Christian people’s uneasiness for the Turk’s entry into Sanjak was not well founded; the Armenians, who live there in about thirty mountain villages and, as is well know, fought against the Turks in the great War, would be exposed to reprisals as was the case in Cilicia when France ceded it to Turkey who in turn promptly massacred all Armenians living there.

The Ambassador replied that after the separation between State and Caliphate proclaimed by Kemal Pasha the various religions live peacefully on Turkish soil and therefore he thought it very unlikely that the same incident would occur again; to which statement I took the liberty of raising my doubts especially after having heard the confidential report of Monsignor Peter Kedidjian, Vicar General of the Armenian Patriarchate, on the flight of eminent Armenians to Syria following the advance of the Turks in the territory and their first hostile acts against the Armenian clergy. (7)

I had occasion to speak to Francois-Poncet during the dinner given at Palazzo Farnese on 1 June, where the only Italians invited were Baron Aloisi and ex-Ambassador De Martino and their wives. (8)

I wanted to know if certain rumours regarding recent secret contacts between France and Italy were true; the supposition arising from the presence in Paris of Senator Volpi. (9)

He replied that there is no new development or at least not an important one; twice Foreign Minister Ciano, who had been courteous to him, had recently received him but it cannot be said that real and proper negotiations have taken place.  He added that the Italian Authorities show a stiff attitude towards him contrary to the practice of the German Authorities in Berlin. (10)

He also affirmed that the general situation has really improved and one can expect that there will not be any shocks until the end of the harvest.  Mussolini’s speech in Turin was a moderate one, but the words pronounced shortly after in front of the students of Turin could be defined as alarming. (11)

The new Brazilian Ambassador, Senor Pietro Leao Velloso, told me – during his first official call on me yesterday – that he had been received by Mussolini, who told him that he wants to supply the Italian people with coffee and wishes that the negotiations now taking place in Rio de Janeiro between the Italian Ambassador and the Brazilian Government should be concluded as quickly as possible, and as satisfactorily as the trade agreement with Argentina had been concluded. (12) Italy proposes to exchange Brazilian coffee with Italian manufactured goods.  The ambassador, although favourably inclined towards Italy, points out that Brazil too, is a poor country and needs gold and foreign currency more than manufactured goods, in order to meet its commitments with other nations; however, a solution will be found.

The Ambassador, proceeding to describe the international satiation, then said: “Gold production in the world is 1,200 millions; the among of gold which entered the United States during last year was – if I understood correctly – 1,800 millions, that is 35% more than the total production.”  Which proves that there are countries dying of starvation and countries dying of indigestion and, according to his opinion, the abnormal gold circulation can be compared with the abnormal blood circulation in the individual; hypertension is also deadly.

I send these items of news to your Eminence in the form in which they were collected by me, leaving the responsibility to their authors, and your Eminence will give them the value they deserve.

Notes:

(1) Francesco Borgongini Duca (1884-1954), Nuncio to Italy 1929-53.

(1) Percy Lorraine (1880-1961), British Ambassador to Italy 1939-40; Andre Francois-Poncet (1887-1978), French Ambassador to Italy 1938-40; Huseyin Ragip Baydur (1890-1955) Turkish Ambassador to Italy 1934-43.

(2) Not published in ADSS.

(3) The Franco-Turkish Treaty or the Franco-Turkish Agreement of Ankara of 20.10.1921 ended the short war between French imperial troops in Syria and Turkish forces engaged in the war of independence that marked the end of the Ottoman Empire.  Under provisions made in the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 France was to be given control of Ottoman Syria and southern Anatolia.  France also agreed to support the Armenians against the Turks.  French troops along with Colonial soldiers and a French Armenian Legion fought in different parts of Turkey from May 1920 to October 1921.  Surprised at the strength of Turkish resistance, France eventually withdrew from areas claimed by the Turks, especially the region of Cilicia with its ancient Armenian Christian community.  Turkey agreed to respect the French occupation of Syria and France agreed to respect Turkish sovereignty.  The Alexandretta Sanjak, with its large Christian minority, was incorporated into the French Mandate but in 1936 a growing pro-Turkish group alongside a Syrian independence movement led to a league of Nations intervention granting the Sanjak autonomy within the Mandate but with links to both France and Turkey on matters of defence.  The Turkish government encouraged the migration of thousands of Turks into the Sanjak prior to the election of July 1938, effectively creating a Turkish majority.  On 02.09.1938 the newly elected assembly proclaimed the Sanjak as Hatay State and sought incorporation with Turkey. Hatay became a province of Turkey on 29.06.1939.  Thousands of Arabs and Armenians, fled to Syria.

(4) Kemal Attaturk (1881-1938), founder of the Republic of Turkey.  Attaturk argued, using the pseudo-scientific Sun Language Theory, popular in the 1930s, that Hatay had been a Turkish homeland for over 4,000 years.

(5) Mustafa İsmet İnönü (1884-1973), second President of Turkey, 1938-1950.  Much of the Province of Haleb, or Halep (Aleppo) was annexed to Turkey after the First World War and during the Turkish War of Independence.

(6)

(7) Pompeo Aloisi (1875-1949) former Italian Foreign Minister 1932-36; Giacomo De Martino (1868-1957), former Italian ambassador to Germany, Britain, Japan and the USA between 1919-32.

(8) Giuseppe Volpi (1877-1947), president of Confindustria (Fascist Confederation of Italian Industry) 1934-43.

(9) Francois-Poncet mentions this in him memoirs Souvenirs d’une Ambassade a Berlin, p 340.

(10) 10.05.1939.

(11) Pedro Leao Veloso (1887-1947), Brazilian Ambassador to Italy 1939-44.

ANZAC 1915-2015 Armenia

Yesterday my school community commemorated ANZAC Day at a special assembly attended by our local Federal Member, Craig Laundy.

Australian schools mark ANZAC Day on their calendars as part of our civic education of our students.  It is an occasion to stop and remember people that, in inner-west Sydney, have little direct connection with many of our students, but who nonetheless have become part of the fabric of the narrative of Australian identity.  My school is made up of young people who reflect in their cultural diversity the tapestry of multi-cultural Australia.  Our Australian-Armenian students sit alongside our Australian-Turkish students in exactly the same way our Italo-Australians, Arabic-Australians, Australian-Greeks and Anglo-Celtic-Australians do.  Memories of ancient conflicts are precisely that, memories, that for the most part lie quietly and peacefully.  Many of our young people have a greater resilience than many to accept, absorb and understand issues of justice and peace than many others.  If our schools are places where they can learn about our collective histories in a safe environment, then may be as adults they will be willing to stand up and speak the truth.

I teach in a Good Samaritan - Benedictine school that is part of the network of Catholic schools across Sydney.  It is a faith-based school and our ANZAC Ceremony wove elements of the religious and civic dimensions of ANZAC Day into the ritual.

The ceremony began with Acknowledgement of Country,  the Procession of the Cross and then the flags of Australia, Indigenous Australia followed by Turkey, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.  The Paschal Candle was lit symbolising the presence of the Risen Christ who triumphed over death.  "Advance Australia Fair" was sung and our senior history student lead the proceedings.  "Voices from Gallipoli" allowed students to name their relatives who fought in the 1914-1918 War as well as other conflicts.  From the Auditorium we moved to the front lawn of the school where each student and member of staff along with guests, planted a field of poppies.  Each hand-made poppy carried the name of an Australian who fought and died at Gallipoli.  We stood in silence as we remembered.  Another student played the Last Post, the flags were lowered, and we prayed for peace.

I was enormously proud of the students.

That evening I attended another commemoration at Sydney Town Hall.  I was honoured to be present for the centenary of the Armenian Genocide Commemoration.  Among the various speakers two constant themes played over and over - what happened between 1915-1923 was not a tragedy; it was a crime.  The second theme was the sense of disbelief and shame that the Australian Government is unwilling to recognise the Genocide using a smorgasbord of excuses and paltry rationalisations.  As an Australian I am embarrassed at the Commonwealth Government's position.  It has echoes of the Howard government's refusal to apologise to Indigenous Australians for the policy of forced removal of children that took place here over most of the twentieth century.

Geoffrey Robertson was the key note speaker who said in his elegant and eloquent way, that the Armenian Genocide is a crime that demands an answer; it will not go away.  No sane person, he said, denies the historical truth that a genocide occurred.  It was planned and executed by the agents of the Ottoman Empire - there is no question about it.

For the first time I felt the power of the Armenian cry: I Remember, I Demand.

I have copied Professor Colin Tatz's article "Out of Step" published for ANZAC Day.  Colin is a long-time advocate for recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

The Conversation

24 April 2015

Out of Step

Colin Tatz

There's no escaping the media blitz on the centenary of Gallipoli. That's understandable. Less easy to grasp is the way we shut our eyes to the simultaneous events in the same country: the Turkish genocide of 1.5 million Armenians, between 750,000 and 900,000 Greeks, and between 275,000 and 400,000 Christian Assyrians.

            Last June, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop reassured the Australian Turkish Advocacy Alliance that "we do not recognise these events as a 'genocide'". Australia, she wrote, has a long-standing approach "not to become involved in this sensitive debate". Minister Bishop is wrong on two counts: the genocide doesn't warrant quotation marks, and what happened is no more of a debate than the realities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. She is right on two points. First, Australia has misconceived the Turkish reaction as merely "sensitive" when in fact their ferocious denial is a vital lie, one that goes to the very essence of the modern Turkish Republic. Second, we refuse to join in the moral reaction of other democracies which officially recognise the catastrophe. Many of our friends and allies— Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, the Vatican — have adopted a moral stance rather than a foreign policy ploy in recognising those events as the Armenian Genocide.

            Tonight Geoffrey Robertson QC will address the centenary commemoration in the Sydney Town Hall on "An Inconvenient Genocide", the title of his recent book. The Turkish Military Tribunal of 1919–1920 initially tried 112 people, including the "Big Seven" leaders of the Ittihad ve Terakki Party, as well as members of wartime cabinets, provincial governors, and high-ranking military and political officers. The principal charges were "massacres and unlawful, personal profiteering" therefrom. (The word "genocide" was not coined until 1944.) While lamenting the destruction or disappearance of much of the trial transcript material, Robertson argues that the surviving records "do serve as a reminder of the time when Turks were prepared to confront their criminal past".

            By early 2015, 22 nation-states had officially recognised the Genocide, as had 43 of 50 American state governments, and two of Australia’s six state parliaments – New South Wales and South Australia. Recognition has also come from the European Parliament, the Council of Europe, the World Council of Churches, and the International Association of Genocide Scholars. Some countries have criminalised denial of the event. Is it conceivable that these nations and reputable bodies have got it wrong, or been hoodwinked by a conspiracy by those who wish Turkey ill? The "debate" question is a manufactured debate. As with the tobacco industry, and more latterly, the global warming deniers, the tactic is to inject the assertion that not all scientists agree, and suddenly there is a "debate" — or the Bishop-like insistence that "we" simply do not "recognise these events" and do not stoop to explain why.

            For decades the Turkish government has lobbied the American Congress not to pass a resolution recognising the Genocide. It requires a two-thirds majority to pass and each year the required number comes closer. Individual Presidents — like Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter — and senior figures like Hilary Clinton have used the "g" word, and it seems likely that Congressional recognition is not far away.

            True, the countries that have recognised the Genocide do not have our especial Australian–Turkish relationship. Our "mutual alliance" is borne out of Australia's somewhat bizarre notion that we were not a nation until the disaster of Gallipoli: somehow all that happened between 1788 and 1915 counted for very little, and nationhood began at Anzac Cove. This "brothers-in-war" theme in Australian life may have its place, but it cannot be sustained by Australian complicity in the juggernaut of often thuggish and aggressive Turkish denialism.

            In the 1980s, the state of Maine mandated school textbooks on the Holocaust. The title of one text was "Facing History and Ourselves", a powerful argument that relationships can only "move on" once the disputants have faced their histories. Australians have a strong proclivity not to remember, or to refuse to remember, the dark side of history, as with the eras of physical killings of Aborigines and, later, the forcible removal of their children.

            Gladys Berejeklian is now Treasurer of New South Wales. Joe Hockey is national Treasurer. Both are of Armenian descent and both have worked assiduously for a reasoned recognition of historical realities. Hockey has so far been rebuffed in his steadfast efforts. It is just possible that in his lifetime he will get a hearing in Federal Cabinet, that the incontrovertible evidence will penetrate our foreign policy strategists, that governments will see that they won't fall at elections because sections of the Turkish community — none of whom has had anything whatever to do with the events of 1915 to 1923 — is either upset or vengeful, or both.

Geoffrey Robertson

The Colonialist Papacy - it has to be fiction because it certainly is not fact!

This column appeared in the Turkish right-wing and pro-government Daily Sabah.

I am willing to take a guess that this flight of fancy was prompted by Pope Francis' homily last week on the occasion of the Centenary of the Armenian Genocide.  The Turkish government responded with some less than helpful comments.  I find it somewhat ironical that Francis' use of the word "genocide" was from a reference made by Pope St John Paul II in 2001. (See below)

Ihsan Aktas has written an appalling piece of non-historical propaganda.  He places all the wrongs of western colonialism, and I agree, there are many, at the feet of the papacy.  How bizarre.  Using the time-tested method of "cherry picking" the pieces of historical data that best suit the predetermined conclusion, Mr Aktas attempts to make a judgement in a few hundred words on issues that need far greater depth and attention. He appears woefully ignorant not only of the role of the pope within the church, but of the entire complex history of Pius XII and the Holocaust.  Enough said.

In Australia an Assyrian Memorial in the western Sydney suburb of Bonnyrigg was vandalised with anti-Assyrian, anti-Armenian and antisemitic graffiti.  Efforts by some local Turkish community groups to prevent the memorial's construction in 2010  were frustrated because of considerable community and government support for the memorial.

Turkey has nothing to lose by acknowledging the history of the Armenian genocide.  Denial and denialism only fuels more tension, hurt and nurtures hatreds.  Turkey has everything to gain by acknowledging the past; it will help heal old wounds and promote openness and understanding and create a way forward that is honest and built on truth.  2015 is an opportunity not to be missed; but the language from Istanbul suggests the old pattern of denial remains firmly entrenched. 

And in today's Sydney Morning Herald there is an article on the Turkish Prime Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu​, saying that the European Community's call for Turkey to acknowledge the atrocities against the Armenians as genocide is tantamount to an act of racism.  Again the Pope's comments figured in the article.

So what did Francis say?

Dear Armenian brothers and sisters,

Dear brothers and sisters.

On a number of occasions I have spoken of our time as a time of war, a third world war which is being fought piecemeal, one in which we daily witness savage crimes, brutal massacres and senseless destruction. Sadly, today too we hear the muffled and forgotten cry of so many of our defenceless brothers and sisters who, on account of their faith in Christ or their ethnic origin, are publicly and ruthlessly put to death – decapitated, crucified, burned alive – or forced to leave their homeland.

Today too we are experiencing a sort of genocide created by general and collective indifference, by the complicit silence of Cain, who cries out: “What does it matter to me? Am I my brother’s keeper?” (cf. Gen 4:9; Homily in Redipuglia, 13 September 2014).

In the past century our human family has lived through three massive and unprecedented tragedies. The first, which is widely considered “the first genocide of the twentieth century” (John Paul II and Karekin II, Common Declaration, Etchmiadzin, 27 September 2001), struck your own Armenian people, the first Christian nation, as well as Catholic and Orthodox Syrians, Assyrians, Chaldeans and Greeks. Bishops and priests, religious, women and men, the elderly and even defenceless children and the infirm were murdered. The remaining two were perpetrated by Nazism and Stalinism. And more recently there have been other mass killings, like those in Cambodia, Rwanda, Burundi and Bosnia. It seems that humanity is incapable of putting a halt to the shedding of innocent blood. It seems that the enthusiasm generated at the end of the Second World War has dissipated and is now disappearing. It seems that the human family has refused to learn from its mistakes caused by the law of terror, so that today too there are those who attempt to eliminate others with the help of a few and with the complicit silence of others who simply stand by. We have not yet learned that “war is madness”, “senseless slaughter” (cf. Homily in Redipuglia, 13 September 2014).

Dear Armenian Christians, today, with hearts filled with pain but at the same time with great hope in the risen Lord, we recall the centenary of that tragic event, that immense and senseless slaughter whose cruelty your forebears had to endure. It is necessary, and indeed a duty, to honour their memory, for whenever memory fades, it means that evil allows wounds to fester. Concealing or denying evil is like allowing a wound to keep bleeding without bandaging it!

I greet you with affection and I thank you for your witness.

With gratitude for his presence, I greet Mr Serž Sargsyan, the President of the Republic of Armenia.

My cordial greeting goes also to my brother Patriarchs and Bishops: His Holiness Karekin II, Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians; His Holiness Aram I, Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia, His Beatitude Nerses Bedros XIX, Patriarch of Cilicia of Armenian Catholics; and Catholicosates of the Armenian Apostolic Church and the Patriarchate of the Armenian Catholic Church.

In the firm certainty that evil never comes from God, who is infinitely good, and standing firm in faith, let us profess that cruelty may never be considered God’s work and, what is more, can find absolutely no justification in his Holy Name. Let us continue this celebration by fixing our gaze on Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, victor over death and evil!

Pope Francis with Armenian Catholic Patriarchs 2015