The Kremlin media have discovered in the West an influential supporter of the Russian view of the causes of the war in Ukraine. It turned out to be Pope Francis I. RIA Novosti in the article under the heading "The media named an unexpected supporter of the "position of Russia on Ukraine" in the West" writes :

“Pope Francis supports the view that NATO is responsible for launching the Russian special operation,” Fiona Hill, adviser to former US President Donald Trump on Russia, and Angela Stent, professor at Georgetown University, write in an article for Foreign Affairs .

According to them, Moscow's position is that the US and other Western countries are waging a proxy war in Ukraine, and the religious leader of the Catholics agrees with this point of view.

“At the international level, beliefs <...> about NATO and a proxy war with the United States and the collective West have won many supporters, from prominent scientists to Pope Francis, who said that the conflict in Ukraine may have been provoked in some way ”, the publication says.

The authors noted that Western politicians and analysts continue to argue about the fault of the North Atlantic Alliance in the escalation of the conflict.

“Whether Ukraine wanted to join the EU, NATO, or have bilateral relations with the United States, any of these efforts would be an insult to the history and dignity of Russia,” writes the FA.

The headlines of other media are even more definite: REN - "The Pope supports the opinion about the guilt of NATO in the Ukrainian conflict", Lenta.ru - "The Pope was called a supporter of Russia's position on Ukraine and NATO", Ura.ru - "FA: The Pope accused NATO of conflict in Ukraine. On the Business FM website, in a publication titled "FA: Pope shares Russian point of view on the causes of the situation in Ukraine", it is said :

“Pope Francis supports Russia's point of view on the causes of the Ukrainian conflict. The Pontiff believes that NATO provoked Russia's actions in Ukraine. Fiona Hill, adviser to former US President Donald Trump on Russia, and Angela Stent, professor at Georgetown University, wrote about this in their column for Foreign Affairs, the Kommersant newspaper cites the translation of the article.

But on the Kommersant website there is no translation of the article by Hill and Stent, there is only the same summary of the paragraph about the pope as that of colleagues in the propaganda workshop. And no wonder: in an article titled “The world that Putin wants. How distorted ideas about the past feed delusions about the future” is not pleasant for the Russian regime. Here are just a few snippets:

“Vladimir Putin is determined to make the future look like his version of the past. The Russian President invaded Ukraine not because he felt threatened by NATO expansion or Western “provocations”. He ordered his "special military operation" because he believes it is Russia's divine right to govern Ukraine, erase the country's national identity and integrate its people into Greater Russia. <…>

He [Putin] stepped up the repression by committing targeted assassinations and jailing opponents. He conducted disinformation operations and was involved in attempts to bribe and blackmail politicians abroad. Putin has constantly adapted his tactics to soften the West's reaction, to the extent that on the eve of his invasion, when Russian troops were massing on Ukraine's borders, he boasted to some European interlocutors that he had "bought the West." He thought there was nothing the United States or Europe could do to contain him.

So far, the West's response to the invasion has generally been united and decisive. Russia's aggressive attack on Ukraine has been a wake-up call for the United States and its allies. But the West must understand that it is dealing with a leader who is trying to change the historical narrative of the last hundred years, not just the post-Cold War period. Vladimir Putin wants to adjust Ukraine, Europe, and the whole world to his version of history. Understanding his goals is critical to coming up with the right answer.”

And only one paragraph of a rather long article mentions Pope Francis:

“Putin’s incantations about the Ukrainian Nazis received more support at home than anywhere else. Yet internationally, Putin's claims of NATO and proxy wars with the United States and the collective West have won a wide variety of supporters, from prominent academics to Pope Francis, who in June 2022 said that the war in Ukraine "may have somehow been provoked." Western politicians and analysts continue to debate whether NATO is to blame for the war. These arguments persist despite the fact that Putin’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 was a response to Ukraine’s attempts to associate with the European Union rather than NATO.”

However, Hill and Stent are not quite right about the Pope. The phrase about the provocation appeared on May 3 in an article in the newspaper Corriere della Sera based on an interview with Francis in the following context:

“Pope Francis is worried that Putin is not going to stop. He also tries to talk about the roots of such behavior, about the motives that push him to such a brutal war. Perhaps “NATO barking at the gates of Russia” made the head of the Kremlin react badly and unleash a conflict. “Anger that I can’t tell if it was provoked,” he muses, “but it contributed to it, maybe yes.”

The phrase about “barking at the gate”, by the way, does not belong to Francis. In June, in an interview with Civiltà Cattolica magazine, he said :

“A couple of months before the start of the war, I met with the head of state, a wise man who speaks little, but is actually very wise. After talking about the things he wanted to talk about, he told me that he was very concerned about the way NATO was behaving. I asked him why, and he replied: “They bark at the gates of Russia. And they do not understand that the Russians are imperials and will not allow any foreign power to approach them.” He concluded: "The situation could lead to war." <…>

This head of state was able to read the signs of what was happening. We see the brutality and ferocity with which this war is waged by troops, mostly mercenaries, used by the Russians. And the Russians actually prefer to send Chechens, Syrians, mercenaries. But the danger is that we see only this, which is monstrous, and do not see the whole drama that is unfolding behind this war, which may have been somehow provoked or not prevented. <…>

Someone may say to me at this moment: “But you are a supporter of Putin!” No, it's not. It would be simplistic and wrong to say so. I'm just against reducing complexity to the difference between good guys and bad guys without talking about roots and interests, which are very complex. While we see the ferocity, the cruelty of the Russian troops, we must not forget about the problems in order to try to solve them. It is also true that the Russians thought that everything would be over in a week. But they miscalculated. They have found a brave people, a people who are fighting for survival and who have a history of struggle."

About how Francis perceived the outbreak of war, he told in the same interview with Corriere della Sera :

“I wanted to make a clear gesture for the whole world to see, and that is why I went to the Russian ambassador. I asked them to explain, I said please stop. Then, after twenty days of war, I asked Cardinal Parolin to convey to Putin a message that I was ready to come to Moscow. <...> We have not yet received an answer and continue to insist, although I am afraid that Putin cannot and will not hold this meeting now. But how can such cruelty not be stopped? Twenty-five years ago in Rwanda, we experienced the same thing.”

The fact that the pope turned to Russia, and not to both sides of the “proxy war”, shows who he considers the real culprit. NATO, he believes, bears only part of the responsibility for the fact that the war could not be prevented.