THE TALE OF TWO MORE POPES

The election of Cardinal Robert Prevost, photo Edgar Beltrán in The Pillar Wikimedia Commons

---

BRICS will now view the Vatican as an arm of the US State Department

by RICHARD STEINHARDT

From the perspective of BRICS-aligned nations and their analytical institutions, the death of Pope Francis and the election of Pope Leo XIV (formerly Cardinal Robert Prevost) represent a victory for US global capitalist hegemonic interests, and a setback for the multipolar world that emerged at the recent Victory Day Parade in Beijing.

Though it would be impossible for a commentator like myself to find the smoking gun and the receipts, the early involvement of Hollywood in the process during the conclave with the film Conclave, argued that a narrative building operation was the prelude for some kind of religious coup d’etat. It was not Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa of Jerusalem who was elected pope in the middle of a genocide it was a conservative American, with the USA entirely complicit. Covert action in the election of Cardinal Robert Prevost to the papacy was strategic, institutional, and, in the minds of many, highly probable.

There is a well-documented history of U.S. intelligence agencies, particularly the CIA, engaging in influence operations within international institutions, including religious ones. Historical examples, such as the CIA’s links to certain elements within the Catholic Church during the Cold War, is an established fact. The prime example was the support of John Paul II for Solidarity in Poland: viewed as an example of CIA-Vatican collaboration for regime change, where the Vatican provided moral authority and the CIA provided funding and logistical support. We all remember the images of Pope John Paul II berating Father Ernesto Cardenal for his advocation of Liberation Theology while the USA armed the Contras in Nicaragua.

Pope Francis’s papacy was defined by a radical, anti-imperialist critique of the Western-led global order. Key aspects included and Economic Critique where he condemned the “idolatry of money,” trickle-down economics, and “new forms of colonialism” like debt slavery. His encyclical Laudato Si’ linked environmental and social justice. It argued that the exploitation of the planet and the exploitation of the poor are driven by the same flawed logic of predatory consumption and profit-seeking; the blame for the climate crisis is on the Global North. 

---

Pope Francis was in favour of multipolar diplomacy; he engaged with China a U.S. rival, through the Vatican-Beijing agreement, and maintained dialogue with Russia, while criticising NATO and the arms industry. Francis advocated for migrants, refugees, and indigenous peoples and challenged Western anti-immigrant policies and the residue of colonial power structures. 

His foreign policy was independent of Washington’s diktats and challenged global hegemonic capitalism based in the USA. He discussed the need to understand the “complexities” of conflicts like Ukraine and criticised of NATO and militarism. And, eventually, he strongly criticised Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Pope Francis’s death removed a significant obstacle to U.S. influence. His papacy was a problem for US corporate capitalist hegemony, and his replacement by a figure like Pope Leo XIV signified the re-alignment of the Vatican with that same hegemonic power and its foreign policy and, in doing so, echoed the incumbency of Pope John Paul II.

---

Robert Francis Prevost, before he became Leo XIV was elected to the position of the Prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops. In this role he was responsible for recommending the appointment of bishops across the globe. His subsequent elevation to the papacy as Leo XIV can be interpreted as a strategic coup and, possibly, the successful penetration and redirection of a major global religious institution into the orbit of Washington.

A Pope who can influence the selection of bishops in countries like Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cuba, Brazil, or Mexico is a classic soft power strategy to ensure the elevation of clergy aligned with US geopolitical interests. Influencing leadership in places like Asia and Africa is seen as a way to shape civil society in resource-rich nations where the US has interests, and in focal points of where the US is attempting to counter Chinese influence. The Chinese offering butter and the US threatening with guns.

The new Pope, Leo XIV, does not need to be instructed. It is enough that he is embedded in a geopolitical story that views Ukraine through a simplistic democracy vs. authoritarianism” framework, ignoring the far-right nationalist elements in Ukraine and the shelling of the Donbas for 8 whole years after the US backed Maidan coup. In his actions of support for Zelensky and the NATO position Pope Leo XIV demonstrates his geopolitical alignment, ignoring the obvious fact that NATO has tried to use Ukraine as a battering ram against the Russian Federation in order to pursue regime change. Leo XIV can still pretend that the conflict in Gaza arises out “Israel’s right to self-defence,” playing a game of false moral equivalency and downplaying genocide.

If Leo’s inherent worldview leads him to act in a way that benefits US/NATO goals, he serves the purpose of the USA’s corporate capitalist metropolis without following a single direct order. As Pope, organisationally, he is surrounded by advisors, diplomats, and a network of information flows curated by Western-dominated sources which help shape his decisions to align them with broader US corporate capitalist interests and stratagems.

The election of the American Robert Prevost as Pope Leo XIV could easily be construed to be the result of the successful covert penetration and redirection of a major global institution into the orbit of Washington and its allies. Certainly, the BRICS bloc will now view the Vatican not as a neutral diplomatic actor, but as a soft-power arm of the State Department. Every future statement, diplomatic move, and episcopal appointment will be analysed through this new lens of great power competition. The multipolar world has lost a significant voice and gained a powerful, aligned adversary.

---

Richard Steinhardt is a committed socialist and a radical humanist and has published in the Morning Star and a variety of other communist and socialist publications. He believes that human conscience and understanding should always precede dogma and deterministic formulas posturing as ‘social science’.