Latest news with #Soviets'
Miami Herald
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
The Pope's Behind-the-Scenes Role in America
Newly elected Pope Leo XIV's significance as leader of the Catholic Church is beyond dispute, but the papacy's role has historically extended far beyond the altar and pews. For more than a century, the papacy has shaped American affairs—through spiritual and cultural guidance—but also by quietly influencing major geopolitical shifts and cultural developments. From Cold War diplomacy to modern discussions on climate change and human rights, various popes have engaged with U.S. leaders behind the scenes, acting as mediators, moral voices and, at times, catalysts for historic change. Some historians have suggested that the medieval papacy pioneered the concept of ambassadors, said Ben Wiedemann, lecturer at Cambridge University who specializes in the political role of the medieval papacy. "Kings would keep semi-permanent 'proctors' at the papal court," he told Newsweek. "In the middle ages, the papal court was where international disagreements tended to be mediated." Perhaps the most famous example of a pope's role in global affairs is Pope John Paul II's association with the fall of communism. John Paul, a bishop from Poland who was head of the Catholic Church from 1978 to 2005, embarked on a 1979 pilgrimage to Poland when it was still under Soviet rule and officially an atheist country. This is widely regarded as a pivotal moment in the Cold War, as his words are believed to have helped inspire the Polish Solidarity movement. Historian John Lewis Gaddis wrote in his account of the Cold War: "When John Paul II kissed the ground at the Warsaw airport on June 2, 1979, he began the process by which communism in Poland – and ultimately everywhere – would come to an end." Former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, who would capture his first term in the White House the following year, said at the time: "I have had a feeling, particularly in the pope's visit to Poland, that religion may turn out to be the Soviets' Achilles' heel." A more recent example is Pope Francis' involvement in thawing relations between the U.S. and Cuba. In 2014, he facilitated secret negotiations by sending personal letters to Presidents Barack Obama and Raúl Castro, urging them to restore diplomatic ties. After finally agreeing on a deal, both leaders thanked Francis for the role he played. "His Holiness Pope Francis issued a personal appeal to me and to Cuba's president," Obama said at the time. He called the deal some of the "most significant changes in our policy in more than 50 years." "We will end an outdated approach that, for decades, has failed to advance our interests, and instead we will begin to normalize relations between our two countries," Obama said. Grant Kaplan, professor of theology at Saint Louis University, explained why he thinks popes are able to play such a unique role in global politics. "A lot of recent popes have actually been former diplomats," he told Newsweek, "and so this kind of network of diplomacy that the Catholic Church has is an advantage in the sense that they're not a state that has economic interests or is looking to expand its territory or something - they're naturally seen as like a Switzerland kind of place." "You don't have to worry about their angle on things, so they can be more trusted," he added. "The Vatican is always sending people to intervene in the Middle East, in Ukraine - sometimes it's not very successful, but sometimes it's quite successful." The pope also has a more direct role on everyday Americans, in the sense that he is the head of a church followed by 20 percent of the country. Some 53 million U.S. adults are Catholic, according to U.S. Census Bureau data from 2024. "There's a lot of Catholics in the United States who take seriously what the pope says as part of their faith," Kaplan said. "So even if the pope isn't trying to speak to leaders, he can still influence the political wins by speaking to people as the leader of their faith community." He cited John Paul's Theology of the Body, which taught that sexuality was more than a mere biological drive but rather a "sacrament"—a sign of God's love. "It was basically insisting that the person can't be divorced from the body," Kaplan explained. "He famously said that 'the problem with pornography isn't that it reveals too much, it's that it reveals too little,' in the sense that it divorces the soul from the body as an object." John Paul delivered 129 lectures on this from 1979 to 1984, during the years following America's sexual revolution of the 1960s and early '70s. The theology "became very popular and was taught at parish levels and in schools," Kaplan said. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops incorporated it into its doctrine and family planning resources. Kaplan argued that this kind of power wielded by the pope may actually be more potent than his strength pertaining to diplomacy. "Cultural and spiritual impact matter more in the long term," he said. "One of the phrases that people use is that 'politics is downstream from culture' and I generally believe that's a good way to understand influence." Related Articles Pope Leo XIV in His Own Words: Immigration, Euthanasia, Abortion and MoreFirst American Pope Bridges Cultural, Political Divides | OpinionLGBTQ+ Catholics React to New Pope Leo XIVDoes the New Pope Root for the Chicago Cubs or White Sox? An Investigation 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Newsweek
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
The Pope's Behind-the-Scenes Role in America
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Newly elected Pope Leo XIV's significance as leader of the Catholic Church is beyond dispute, but the papacy's role has historically extended far beyond the altar and pews. For more than a century, the papacy has shaped American affairs—through spiritual and cultural guidance—but also by quietly influencing major geopolitical shifts and cultural developments. From Cold War diplomacy to modern discussions on climate change and human rights, various popes have engaged with U.S. leaders behind the scenes, acting as mediators, moral voices and, at times, catalysts for historic change. Some historians have suggested that the medieval papacy pioneered the concept of ambassadors, said Ben Wiedemann, lecturer at Cambridge University who specializes in the political role of the medieval papacy. "Kings would keep semi-permanent 'proctors' at the papal court," he told Newsweek. "In the middle ages, the papal court was where international disagreements tended to be mediated." The Pope's Diplomatic Role Perhaps the most famous example of a pope's role in global affairs is Pope John Paul II's association with the fall of communism. John Paul, a bishop from Poland who was head of the Catholic Church from 1978 to 2005, embarked on a 1979 pilgrimage to Poland when it was still under Soviet rule and officially an atheist country. This is widely regarded as a pivotal moment in the Cold War, as his words are believed to have helped inspire the Polish Solidarity movement. Historian John Lewis Gaddis wrote in his account of the Cold War: "When John Paul II kissed the ground at the Warsaw airport on June 2, 1979, he began the process by which communism in Poland – and ultimately everywhere – would come to an end." Former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, who would capture his first term in the White House the following year, said at the time: "I have had a feeling, particularly in the pope's visit to Poland, that religion may turn out to be the Soviets' Achilles' heel." A more recent example is Pope Francis' involvement in thawing relations between the U.S. and Cuba. In 2014, he facilitated secret negotiations by sending personal letters to Presidents Barack Obama and Raúl Castro, urging them to restore diplomatic ties. After finally agreeing on a deal, both leaders thanked Francis for the role he played. "His Holiness Pope Francis issued a personal appeal to me and to Cuba's president," Obama said at the time. He called the deal some of the "most significant changes in our policy in more than 50 years." "We will end an outdated approach that, for decades, has failed to advance our interests, and instead we will begin to normalize relations between our two countries," Obama said. Faithful hold an American flag and a rosary following the election of Pope Leo XIV at the Vatican on May 8. Faithful hold an American flag and a rosary following the election of Pope Leo XIV at the Vatican on May 8. AP Grant Kaplan, professor of theology at Saint Louis University, explained why he thinks popes are able to play such a unique role in global politics. "A lot of recent popes have actually been former diplomats," he told Newsweek, "and so this kind of network of diplomacy that the Catholic Church has is an advantage in the sense that they're not a state that has economic interests or is looking to expand its territory or something - they're naturally seen as like a Switzerland kind of place." "You don't have to worry about their angle on things, so they can be more trusted," he added. "The Vatican is always sending people to intervene in the Middle East, in Ukraine - sometimes it's not very successful, but sometimes it's quite successful." The Pope's Cultural Role The pope also has a more direct role on everyday Americans, in the sense that he is the head of a church followed by 20 percent of the country. Some 53 million U.S. adults are Catholic, according to U.S. Census Bureau data from 2024. "There's a lot of Catholics in the United States who take seriously what the pope says as part of their faith," Kaplan said. "So even if the pope isn't trying to speak to leaders, he can still influence the political wins by speaking to people as the leader of their faith community." He cited John Paul's Theology of the Body, which taught that sexuality was more than a mere biological drive but rather a "sacrament"—a sign of God's love. "It was basically insisting that the person can't be divorced from the body," Kaplan explained. "He famously said that 'the problem with pornography isn't that it reveals too much, it's that it reveals too little,' in the sense that it divorces the soul from the body as an object." John Paul delivered 129 lectures on this from 1979 to 1984, during the years following America's sexual revolution of the 1960s and early '70s. The theology "became very popular and was taught at parish levels and in schools," Kaplan said. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops incorporated it into its doctrine and family planning resources. Kaplan argued that this kind of power wielded by the pope may actually be more potent than his strength pertaining to diplomacy. "Cultural and spiritual impact matter more in the long term," he said. "One of the phrases that people use is that 'politics is downstream from culture' and I generally believe that's a good way to understand influence."
Malay Mail
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Shadow of Ukraine war looms over Berlin's ‘German-Russian' museum
BERLIN, May 5 — As Germany marks 80 years since the end of World War II, one historic Berlin site is grappling with how to commemorate the Soviets' crucial role in defeating Nazism against the backdrop of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. In Karlshorst, a leafy area of former East Berlin, stands the imposing building where on the night of May 8, 1945, the Nazis formally capitulated to the victorious Allies, including the Red Army. A tank outside bears the slogan 'For the Fatherland!' in Russian, a jarring reminder of Moscow's current rhetoric justifying the invasion of Ukraine, which often invokes the Soviet victory in World War II. The director of the museum, Joerg Morre, said he is well aware of the dangers of 'the instrumentalisation of history for political ends' by President Vladimir Putin's government. He said that the display nevertheless aims to include 'a Russian perspective' on history 'but not from the Kremlin'. 'Instead we want to hear from academics who are able to express themselves freely, which happens more and more often in exile,' he added. The Russian flag previously flew outside the museum, but that changed on February 24, 2022, when the Kremlin launched its invasion. 'In the early morning, when it became clear that Russia was attacking all of Ukraine and trying to conquer Kyiv, we decided as a team that it just wasn't right to raise the Russian flag,' Morre remembers. The Ukrainian flag now flies outside the building alone as 'a symbol of solidarity'. The episode is just one example of how Morre and his team are trying to deal with the site's tumultuous past—and present. Previously known as the 'German-Russian Museum', the site has since been renamed as the 'Museum Berlin-Karlshorst'. Hopes for reconciliation Originally built for use by Nazi Germany's army in 1938, after the war the building became the headquarters of the occupying Soviet army. They set up a museum there in honour of the Red Army troops who captured Berlin. Vestiges of this can still be seen near the ceremonial hall, for example in a diorama showing heroic Soviet troops storming the Reichstag. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and its East German ally, the decision was taken to run the museum as a joint project between Russia and the newly reunified Germany. Later, representatives from Ukraine and Belarus were also invited to take part in the running of the museum to reflect the fact that much of the fighting took place on their territory. The building houses the impressive parquet-lined hall where the capitulation was signed as well as an extensive permanent exhibition on the war along the Eastern Front, which was updated in 2013. Marcel Krueger, a writer who spoke to AFP during a recent visit to the museum, said that he still felt the site retained some 'Soviet pomp' but that 'as a German I find it very, very important that this remain here'. The exhibition recounts in unsparing detail the Nazis' crimes in occupied eastern Europe, while also referring to abuses by Soviet troops against German civilians, albeit much more briefly. In a post-Cold War context it was hoped the museum would foster 'understanding between peoples and reconciliation,' said Morre. There was long an expectation of 'permanent peace,' he said. 'Nobody believed there would be bad times ahead.' Definitive break Despite the heightened tensions between Kyiv and Moscow over the war in eastern Ukraine since 2014, the museum was for a while able to keep some dialogue going with all sides. Morre said Russia's full-scale invasion represented 'a definitive break'. 'Since then I've had almost no contact with the Russian side,' he said, adding that there has been little contact with Moscow-allied Belarus either. Even the reaction to the Russian tricolore being taken down was 'more informal', with Russian diplomats coming to public events to make their displeasure clear to Morre. Within Germany, Morre says that the museum's attempts to distance itself from the Russian government can lead to accusations that 'we want people to forget about the consequences of the Second World War'. With no end to the war in Ukraine in sight, Morre says he and his staff will need 'a lot of patience' to continue navigating the turbulent political context while continuing their mission of bringing the tragic history of the Eastern Front to life. Museum visitor Maria became visibly emotional as she told AFP she found the exhibition 'very moving and very painful'. 'I ask myself: 'What lessons have been learnt from the Second World War?' — AFP
RTÉ News
02-05-2025
- Politics
- RTÉ News
From typewriters to TikTok: how espionage evolved from ink to algorithms
Analysis: The lessons from Cold War operation Project Gunman carry a disturbing resonance in the face of today's digital espionage In the early 1950s, the Cold War was at its height, and tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union were escalating. Amid the nuclear arms race and ideological battles, both sides were locked in a relentless struggle for intelligence, trying to outwit and outmanoeuvre each other at every turn. Interestingly however, one of the most audacious acts of espionage came not from high-tech equipment or clandestine spies, but from something far more mundane: a typewriter. At the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, American diplomats believed they had implemented robust security measures to protect their communications. The typewriters they used to write confidential documents appeared completely ordinary, nothing about them suggested they were anything but typical office equipment. But in a stroke of ingenuity, the Soviet Union had managed to weaponise these seemingly benign machines. The Soviets had covertly inserted listening devices into the typewriters, allowing them to capture every keystroke made by American diplomats. The Soviets compromised U.S. Embassy typewriters by secretly implanting keystroke loggers-tiny, sophisticated bugs that transmitted typed data via radio signals to nearby listening posts. Most likely introduced through supply chain infiltration or discreet on-site tampering by unauthorised personnel, these hidden devices operated undetected for years, quietly transmitting classified information. The U.S. remained oblivious as its most sensitive diplomatic and military communications were intercepted in real time. From Cybernews, The Spy Hack That Made US a Superpower: Project Gunman The operation, later revealed as Project Gunman, was an extraordinary example of hardware-based espionage, relying on a combination of technical craft and deceptive simplicity. It wasn't the kind of sophisticated digital hack that would dominate headlines in the decades to come - it was a physical, in-person infiltration, where the most basic office tools were turned into tools of national sabotage. The Soviets had successfully harvested a wealth of classified information, including critical military strategies and diplomatic secrets. This covert operation stayed undetected for a remarkably long time, proving just how vulnerable even the most secure communication systems can be when overlooked by those who use them. The Soviets' ability to transform a piece of office equipment into a tool of surveillance was a masterstroke of subversion, providing an early example of how easily trusted technologies can be turned against their users. The principle of deception remains critical in modern intelligence operations, where adversaries routinely manipulate the technologies we trust to conduct surveillance, gather intelligence, and influence our actions. The lessons from Project Gunman carry a disturbing resonance in the face of today's digital espionage and cybersecurity threats. Take TikTok, the popular Chinese-owned social media platform, which has become the focal point of global concerns about data security. TikTok isn't merely an app for dance videos and viral trends-it is a massive data collection machine. The app collects a staggering amount of personal data, far beyond what most users realise: location information, browsing habits, device identifiers, and even biometric data, including facial recognition and voiceprints. From RTÉ Radio 1's Today with Claire Byrne, Signal security saga: more trouble for Pete Hegseth TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, is based in China, raising serious questions about how the Chinese government might gain access to this treasure trove of data. Critics fear that the app's massive user base makes it an ideal tool for conducting global surveillance on a scale previously unimaginable. In this context, TikTok becomes not just a social platform but a potential tool for influence and information operations. The typewriters of the Cold War era have been replaced by our smartphones, social media apps, and everyday digital services, each of which could be exploited by foreign actors to compromise national security or manipulate public opinion. It's important to note that while many social media platforms collect vast amounts of user data, the concern with TikTok lies in the potential access that certain nations may have to this information. Indeed, the U.S. government has expressed significant concern over the potential risks posed by TikTok, citing China's surveillance laws that could compel ByteDance to hand over user data for espionage, political manipulation, or national security threats. Under Chinese law, any company operating within the country can be legally forced to assist with government data requests, leading critics to argue that, despite ByteDance's claims of independence, the company could still be subject to Chinese government pressure. From DW News, Could TikTok 'go dark' in the US? Another 75-day reprieve granted These concerns were voiced through official statements, hearings, and legislative actions, with lawmakers, intelligence agencies, and security experts warning about the potential misuse of TikTok's data. Congressional inquiries and public warnings raised alarms, prompting discussions on the possibility of banning the app or forcing the sale of its U.S. operations. The bipartisan push to ban TikTok in the U.S. was based on the belief that TikTok's data harvesting capabilities posed a significant threat to national security, as this treasure trove of data could be weaponised by the Chinese government to gain unprecedented insight into the personal lives of millions of Americans. The ripples of these malpractices are still being felt, as recent revelations show that senior members of the Trump administration used Signal to share sensitive, and at times classified information - including war plans - while unaware that their conversations were being eavesdropped on. This raises serious questions about the context of using commercially available apps for secure communication, and the broader implications for both individual privacy and national security. Signal's end-to-end encryption has long been touted as a gold standard for protecting private communications. It is used globally by activists, journalists, and even government officials to safeguard their messages from surveillance. However, the use of Signal by high-ranking officials, including those with access to sensitive government information, underscores a troubling potential vulnerability: reliance on commercially available apps for secure communication, when these apps are not subjected to the same level of scrutiny or accountability as classified government systems. A key vulnerability also comes from metadata, which is data about data. Even with strong encryption, metadata can reveal who is communicating with whom, when, and from where. While Signal's encryption may prevent unauthorised users from easily intercepting the messages, the fact that these individuals were using an external, third-party application to discuss critical security issues points to a deeper vulnerability: reliance on commercial platforms that could, intentionally or inadvertently, expose sensitive data to foreign adversaries. At the end of the day, Signal is a tool, and if you misuse a tool, bad things will happen. Drawing from the lessons of Project Gunman, we can see how vulnerabilities in communication tools - whether physical or digital - can have far reaching consequences. TikTok highlights the risks of data collection on a massive scale. What started as a fun, user-centric app has become a vehicle for potential political manipulation, with its data being accessible to foreign powers. In contrast, Signal presents a different challenge: while it provides secure, encrypted communication, it remains a third-party app that could still be compromised through misuse. The use of Signal by high-ranking officials shows that even encrypted platforms carry inherent risks, such as accidentally granting unauthorised parties access to highly classified material. It's crucial to recognise the eerie symmetry between the past and present. Once, secrecy was something we guarded with locks, codes, and vigilance. Today, we give it away - freely, carelessly - with every tap, swipe, and click. The typewriter's keystrokes were once stolen in silence; now, the buttons we press willingly record our lives in plain sight. And that data - our thoughts, habits, desires - isn't just collected. It's watched, analysed, and weaponised by those who understand its power better than we do. The technology may have evolved, but the risks of data interception and exploitation remain deeply rooted in the nature of human interaction with devices. The past reminds us that if we aren't careful, the tools we trust most can become weapons in the hands of others. And just as the U.S. government had to reckon with the consequences of its blind trust in the unassuming typewriter, so too must we carefully consider the risks of the technologies we now rely on for communication and decision-making in an increasingly interconnected world.
Wall Street Journal
04-02-2025
- Science
- Wall Street Journal
Can We Trust AI to Prevent the Start of World War III?
In his column 'It's Time for AI to Come Home' (Business World, Feb. 1), Holman W. Jenkins Jr. writes: 'Supersmart weapons are coming and will be able to recognize and neutralize threats before a human can get in the loop.' In September 1983, Oko, the Soviets' early-warning missile-detection system, identified five incoming American missiles. Reasoning that if the U.S. had meant to attack they would have done so with a more significant strike, officer Stanislav Petrov correctly judged it to be a false alarm, thus avoiding major retaliation. I wonder if artificial intelligence would have reasoned the same way.
