Seating Plan for a Pope’s Funeral – It’s Complicated, or Compliqué

Police officers patrol as visitors queue to enter St. Peter's Basilica of the Vatican, viewed in the background, a day prior to the Pope's funeral, in Rome on April 25, 2025. (AFP)
Police officers patrol as visitors queue to enter St. Peter's Basilica of the Vatican, viewed in the background, a day prior to the Pope's funeral, in Rome on April 25, 2025. (AFP)
TT
20

Seating Plan for a Pope’s Funeral – It’s Complicated, or Compliqué

Police officers patrol as visitors queue to enter St. Peter's Basilica of the Vatican, viewed in the background, a day prior to the Pope's funeral, in Rome on April 25, 2025. (AFP)
Police officers patrol as visitors queue to enter St. Peter's Basilica of the Vatican, viewed in the background, a day prior to the Pope's funeral, in Rome on April 25, 2025. (AFP)

They may be the most powerful people on earth, but for the seating arrangement at Pope Francis' funeral on Saturday, all foreign leaders will play second fiddle to the Argentines and Italians and surrender to the whims of the French alphabet.

About 130 foreign delegations had so far expressed their desire to attend the funeral, the Vatican said on Friday, and more were expected to do so throughout the day. Those include around 50 heads of state who have been confirmed as attending, among them US President Donald Trump and 10 reigning monarchs.

Apart from the VIPs, hundreds of thousands of people are expected to attend the funeral in St. Peter's Square, which starts at 10 a.m. (0800 GMT) on Saturday. Italian police have laid on one of the most complex security operations in decades.

The official delegations will sit at a section to the right of the altar at the top of the steps leading toward St. Peter's Basilica.

Pride of place goes to Argentina, Francis' native country, whose president, Javier Milei, will sit in the front row. Milei, a maverick right-wing libertarian, had heaped insults on Francis while he was campaigning in 2023, calling him an "imbecile who defends social justice". But the president shifted his tone after he took office that year.

Next comes Italy, the country that surrounds the Vatican and which agreed in 1929 to recognize its sovereignty as the world's smallest state. It gets the second-best seats in the VIP section also because the pope is bishop of Rome and primate of the Catholic bishops of Italy.

That is when the alphabet in French – still considered the language of diplomacy – kicks in for the other delegations. The countries following Italy are ordered according to their names in French and not in their native languages.

So, it is Etats Unis and not United States, Allemagne instead of Deutschland (Germany), and Pays-Bas instead of Nederland (The Netherlands).

Royalty will take precedence. Reigning monarchs -- expected to include royalty such as the kings and queens of Spain and Belgium and Prince Albert of Monaco -- will be seated in front of other heads of state.

Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni said on Friday that no distinction would be made between Catholic and non-Catholic royalty for the seating order. After the royals come the remaining heads of state. Trump, who attracted criticism from Francis because of his immigration policies, will sit ahead of many other leaders because Etats Unis begins with an "E".

That alphabetic logic means that Trump - currently engaged in trying to get a peace deal in the war in Ukraine - will not be sitting near Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

Former US President Joe Biden, who has been the target of constant criticism by Trump, is attending the funeral, but will not be part of the official US delegation, a diplomatic source said. This means Biden, a lifelong Catholic, should be sitting further back, with other VIPs.



Ceasefire Ends Iran-Israel War, Stakeholders Weigh Costs and Benefits

US President Donald Trump (Reuters)
US President Donald Trump (Reuters)
TT
20

Ceasefire Ends Iran-Israel War, Stakeholders Weigh Costs and Benefits

US President Donald Trump (Reuters)
US President Donald Trump (Reuters)

In a stunning development, US President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire that effectively ended the conflict between Iran and Israel.

The announcement came shortly after a carefully calibrated Iranian retaliation targeted a US military base in Qatar, an attack that caused no casualties or material damage.

Trump expressed gratitude to Iran for pre-warning Washington about the strike, framing the gesture as a face-saving move.

The question now gripping regional and international capitals is: What have the United States, Iran, and Israel each gained if the ceasefire holds?

United States

The United States has once again asserted itself as the dominant and decisive power in the Middle East. It delivered a crippling blow to Iran’s nuclear facilities without escalating into full-scale war, thereby undermining the very justification for Israel’s initial strike on Tehran.

Recent events have underscored that Israel cannot engage Iran militarily without close coordination with Washington, nor can it exit such a conflict without a pivotal American role.

The confrontation has also highlighted the unparalleled strength of the US military machine, unmatched by any other power, large or small.

Iran, for its part, clearly showed reluctance to escalate the conflict in a way that could trigger direct, open confrontation with the United States.

Trump himself demonstrated tactical skill by combining military pressure with diplomatic overtures, swiftly moving to invite Iran back to the negotiating table.

Meanwhile, the limited role of Europe and the modest involvement of Russia became apparent, unless aligned with US efforts. China appeared “distant but pragmatic,” despite its broad interests in Iran and a vested concern in keeping the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz open.

Iran

Iran demonstrated that the devastating initial strike it suffered from Israel did not undermine its military or political resolve despite the severity of the attack.

The Tehran regime confirmed that, although Israeli fighter jets controlled Iranian airspace briefly, its missile arsenal remained capable of unleashing scenes of destruction across Israeli cities unseen since the founding of the Jewish state. Iran’s missile forces, it showed, could sustain a costly war of attrition against Israel.

Tehran also succeeded in preventing calls for regime overthrow from becoming a shared objective in a US-Israeli war against it.

Yet, Iran appeared to lack a major ally comparable to the United States or even a lesser power, despite its “strategic” ties with Russia and China.

The confrontation revealed Tehran’s inability to fully leverage its proxy forces in Gaza and Lebanon following the fallout of the “Al-Aqsa flood” escalation.

The exchange of strikes further highlighted Israel’s clear technological superiority and the success of Israeli intelligence in penetrating deep inside Iran itself, raising alarming concerns in Tehran.

Israel

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can claim credit for persuading the Trump administration to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, particularly those beyond the reach of the Israeli military.

Israeli forces succeeded in gaining control over distant Iranian airspace within days, a feat Russia has not achieved after three years of war in Ukraine.

Israeli intelligence breakthroughs inside Iran played a crucial role in the conflict, culminating in Israel’s public release of videos it labeled “Mossad-Tehran branch” and drone bases.

Netanyahu can argue that he made a difficult decision to attack Iran and convinced the Israeli public that the fight was existential. He can also remind critics that he expelled Iran from Syria and curtailed Hezbollah’s ability to wage war on Israel.

He may also point to new regional power balances he has imposed - part of his broader ambition to reshape the Middle East - with Israel maintaining the region’s most powerful military force.

However, Netanyahu’s policies risk renewed clashes with many, especially as tensions over Gaza and the “two-state solution” resurface.

Observers say the gains made by the parties at the end of the Iran-Israel conflict remain fragile and could shift depending on how events unfold.

Any calm could enable Israeli opposition forces to reopen debates on Netanyahu’s “wars” and their costs. It might also prompt the Iranian public to question their leadership’s responsibility for the military setbacks and Iran’s regional and global standing.

For now, the spotlight remains firmly on the primary player: Trump.