Russian Orthodox Church returns to Mideast

14/11/13

Given the diplomatic and military presence that Moscow has  recently established on the Mediterranean and in the Levant, it is only  natural that its ecclesiastical role experience a resurgence as well.  During the last few days, the Russian banner of the two-headed  eagle, representing the church and the state, has been personified in  Beirut by the visiting Metropolitan Hilarion, chairman of the Department of  External Church Relations in the Russian Orthodox Church. The church’s “foreign  minister” met with a number of state, political and religious  officials in the Lebanese capital, bringing with him a number of messages. The  most important was Russia’s decision to effectively act as the protector of  Christians in the Levant and as their defender and legal representative, perhaps  the only real one they have on an international level.
In a closed meeting held at Hilarion’s Beirut hotel and attended  by Al-Monitor, the metropolitan expounded on the reasons and  goals of his visit. He began by laying out Russia’s official stance vis-à-vis  the Arab Spring. He contended, “It is not a natural process resulting from  internal developments that took place in the countries that witnessed its  effects. What occurred was more of a foreign plan executed by external factions  to control these countries, a plan that began with the Iraq war in 2003.” As a  result, “It was not democracy that prevailed in those countries, but utter and  total chaos, the price of which was primarily paid by the Christian inhabitants  of these countries, who were persecuted, killed and driven out.”

The metropolitan said that according to his church’s information,  nine-tenths of Iraq’s Christians were made homeless as a result of the war  there. The same type of dispossession also occurred later in Libya,  recently in Egypt, and is occurring now in Syria. Wherever opposition  militants take control, Hilarion asserted, Christians are forced to either  leave or die. It was as if an intersection of interests occurred between  the secular administrations of the West and their counterparts in Muslim  Gulf states.

Hilarion went on to emphasize that the goals, principles and interests  of the Russian Federation are predicated on “the survival of Levantine Christians in their countries, and their peaceful coexistence with their Muslim compatriots, away  from external attempts to destabilize those countries.” He further explained  that this was of utmost importance to Russia in its capacity as the home to  a multitude of Muslim factions as well as to his church, whose territory  extends over numerous countries, from Ukraine, Belarus, all the way to  Moldova, the Baltic states and Central Asia. The church is present in areas  where Christians form the majority, as well as others where they are the  minority. Levantine Christians’ successful coexistence with their Muslim  countrymen is necessary and of vital importance to nearby Russian church’s  subjects, Hilarion said, as well as to the Russian state. While he called  on Levantine Christians to remain on the land of their forebears, refrain from  emigrating, and maintain their demographic growth and their unity as Christians,  he reiterated Moscow’s stance, as state and church, to stand by their side,  repeating, “We will not forsake you. You are not alone.”

Apart from the public rhetoric, other aspects of the bishop of Moscow’s visit  to Beirut have elicited observations. One concerns the choice of this  particular man for the job. He is a young Orthodox Church official, only 45  years of age, who rose meteorically in the church’s hierarchy within a  relatively short period of time. He now occupies the same post previously filled  by the current patriarch of Moscow, Kirill I, prior to the latter assuming his  current office. Hilarion’s age and position will allow him to  continue to follow up on his currently assigned dossiers for a long time to  come, as well as assure him a promising future within the church’s ranks.

Hilarion’s competency to hold his current job appears beyond reproach. He is  fluent in seven languages and knowledgeable about international political  matters. He is a charming orator, as well as a capable diplomat, yet, his  rhetoric revealed another interesting point — his repeated mention of  Vladimir Putin, in every paragraph and attached to every idea, to the  point where he seemed to be more of a state official than a church  representative. As such, his church responsibilities and his activities in  the region were given added breadth.

Another interesting aspect was the bishop’s focus on Christian unity,  which translated into a lengthy meeting with the Lebanese Maronite patriarch,  head of the largest Rome-affiliated Eastern church. It was also perhaps not a  coincidence that Hilarion left Beirut for Rome, where he had an  appointment with Pope Francis on Nov. 11.  At the meeting with the  head of the Catholic Church, the status of Levantine Christians will be at the  forefront of discussions, Hilarion said.

It would appear that Moscow, as a state and a church, has the following  in mind: Just as the Syrian chemical weapons crisis constituted an opportunity  for US-Russian “reconciliation” and paved the way for a strong Russian  resurgence on the world stage as a full-fledged decision-making partner, so  the issue of Levantine Christians could be an opportunity for Moscow to achieve  reconciliation between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches. This would  be deemed necessary and vital by Russia in its quest to complement  said political resurgence, in the Middle East, Europe and farther afield  internationally. In light of the dwindled Christian dimension to Western  policies, and as Muslim affairs continue to gain importance in the  identities, policies and countries of the  Muslim world, a reconciliation between  Moscow and the Vatican might be the first opportunity toward the former  imposing itself as a Christian equalizer vis-à-vis the Muslim world around the  globe.

The Russian state’s agenda might entail a third aspect, for  it seems that Moscow is trying to recover the role it played when it was  the capital of the Soviet Union. The difference is that during the Kremlin’s  communist days, revolutionary Marxism stood at the core of the regime’s  ideology, which was reflected in foreign policy rhetoric centered around backing  liberation movements, revolution in third world countries, and  establishment of a series of international institutions, ranging from the  Comintern to global conferences of communist youth. Now that Moscow is  Orthodox again, it seems that this religious component has merely replaced  communism as the most prevalent aspect at the regime’s ideological core.  This is a core whose legitimacy, to be consecrated, requires an external  element, the best embodiment of which would be the issue of protecting Christian minorities, in particular, those of the Levant.

Behold, then, the return of the two-headed Russian eagle. And here lies  Beirut, the first stop on its flight back.

Source: