Pope Leo XIV Addresses Cardinals in English at His First Mass 

A visitor reads an edition of L'Osservatore Romano newspaper covering the election of newly elected pope Leo XIV, with the Vatican's St Peter's Basilica in the background, in Rome on May 9, 2025. (AFP)
A visitor reads an edition of L'Osservatore Romano newspaper covering the election of newly elected pope Leo XIV, with the Vatican's St Peter's Basilica in the background, in Rome on May 9, 2025. (AFP)
TT

Pope Leo XIV Addresses Cardinals in English at His First Mass 

A visitor reads an edition of L'Osservatore Romano newspaper covering the election of newly elected pope Leo XIV, with the Vatican's St Peter's Basilica in the background, in Rome on May 9, 2025. (AFP)
A visitor reads an edition of L'Osservatore Romano newspaper covering the election of newly elected pope Leo XIV, with the Vatican's St Peter's Basilica in the background, in Rome on May 9, 2025. (AFP)

Pope Leo XIV, history’s first North American pope, celebrated his first Mass as pontiff on Friday, presiding in the Sistine Chapel with the cardinals who elected him to succeed Pope Francis and follow in his social justice-minded footsteps.

Wearing white vestments, Leo processed into the Sistine Chapel and blessed the cardinals as he approached the altar and Michelangelo’s “The Last Judgment” behind it. He delivered the opening prayers and hymns in Latin, and women read the initial Scripture readings.

Addressing the cardinals in English, he said, “you have called me to carry the cross and to be blessed” and asked for their help to spread the Catholic faith. It was the first time Leo made public remarks in English, after he spoke in Italian and Spanish only in his first comments from the loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica on Thursday.

Leo, the Chicago-born Augustinian missionary Robert Prevost, was elected Thursday afternoon as the 267th pope, overcoming the traditional prohibition against a pope from the United States.

In his first appearance to the world Thursday evening, the 69-year-old wore the traditional red cape of the papacy — which Francis had eschewed on his election in 2013 — suggesting a return to some degree of rule-following after Francis’ unorthodox pontificate.

But in naming himself Leo, after the 19th century social justice reformer pope and referring to some of Francis' priorities, the new pope could also have wanted to signal a strong line of continuity: Another Leo in church history was Brother Leo, the 13th-century friar who was a great companion to St. Francis of Assisi, the late pope’s namesake.

“Together, we must try to find out how to be a missionary church, a church that builds bridges, establishes dialogue, that’s always open to receive — like on this piazza with open arms — to be able to receive everybody that needs our charity, our presence, dialogue and love,” Leo said in near-perfect Italian in his first comments to the world.

Francis, the first Latin American pope, clearly had his eye on Prevost and in many ways saw him as his heir apparent. He sent Prevost, who had spent years as a missionary in Peru, to take over a complicated diocese there in 2014. Francis then brought Prevost to the Vatican in 2023 to head of the Vatican’s powerful Dicastery for Bishops, which vets bishop nominations around the world and is one of the most important jobs in church governance.

Earlier this year, Francis elevated Prevost into the senior ranks of cardinals, giving him prominence going into the conclave that few other cardinals had.

There had long been a taboo on a US pope, given America’s superpower status in the secular world. But Prevost prevailed, perhaps because he’s also a Peruvian citizen and had lived for two decades in Peru, first as a missionary and then as bishop.

Since arriving in Rome, Prevost had kept a low public profile but was well-known to the men who count, and respected by those who worked with him. Significantly, he presided over one of the most revolutionary reforms Francis made, when he added three women to the voting bloc that decides which bishop nominations to forward to the pope.

In a 2023 interview with Vatican News, the then-cardinal said the women had enriched the process and reaffirmed the need for the laity to have a greater role in the church.

“Even the bishops of Peru called him the saint, the Saint of the North, and he had time for everyone,” said the Rev. Alexander Lam, an Augustinian friar from Peru who knows the new pope.

The crowd in St. Peter’s Square erupted in cheers Thursday when white smoke poured out of the Sistine Chapel shortly after 6 p.m. on the second day of the conclave. Waving flags from around the world, tens of thousands of people were surprised an hour later when the senior cardinal deacon announced the winner was Prevost.

US President Donald Trump said it was “such an honor for our country” for the new pope to be American. The president added that “we’re a little bit surprised and we’re happy.”

Prevost has shared criticism of the Trump administration 's migration policies: In past social media posts, Prevost shared articles criticizing Vice President JD Vance's justification of the administration's mass deportation plans.

An Augustinian pope

The last pope to take the name Leo was Leo XIII, an Italian who led the church from 1878 to 1903. That Leo softened the church’s confrontational stance toward modernity, especially science and politics, and laid the foundation for modern Catholic social thought. His most famous encyclical, Rerum Novarum of 1891, addressed workers’ rights and capitalism at the beginning of the industrial revolution and was highlighted by the Vatican in explaining the new pope’s choice of name.

That Leo also had close ties to the Augustinian order: He rebuilt an ancient Augustinian church and convent near his hometown of Carpineto, outside Rome, which is still in use by the new pope's order today.

Vatican watchers said Prevost’s decision to name himself Leo was particularly significant given the previous Leo’s legacy of social justice and reform, suggesting continuity with some of Francis’ chief concerns. Specifically, Leo cited one of Francis’ key priorities of making the Catholic Church more attentive to lay people and inclusive, a process known as synodality.

“He is continuing a lot of Francis’ ministry,” said Natalia Imperatori-Lee, the chair of religious studies at Manhattan University in the Bronx. But she also said his election could send a message to the US church, which has been badly divided between conservatives and progressives, with much of the right-wing opposition to Francis coming from there.

“I think it is going to be exciting to see a different kind of American Catholicism in Rome,” Imperatori-Lee said.

Leo said in a 2023 interview with Vatican News that the polarization in the church was a wound that needed to be healed.

“Divisions and polemics in the church do not help anything. We bishops especially must accelerate this movement towards unity, towards communion in the church,” he said.

Archbishop Bernard Hebda, of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, told reporters he never thought he would see an American pope, given the questions of how he would navigate dealing with a US president, especially someone like Trump.

“And so I just never imagined that we would have an American pope, and I have great confidence that Pope Leo will do a wonderful job of navigating that,” he said.

Leo's brother, John Prevost, was so shocked that his brother had been elected pope that he missed several phone calls from Leo during an interview Thursday with The Associated Press. He called the pope back and Leo told him he wasn't interested in being part of the interview.

John Prevost described his brother, a fan of Wordle, as being very concerned for the poor and those who don’t have a voice. He said he expects him to be a “second Pope Francis.”

“He’s not going to be real far left and he’s not going to be real far right,” he added. “Kind of right down the middle.”

Looking ahead

In his first hours as pope, Leo went back to his old apartment in the Sant'Uffizio Palace to see colleagues, according to selfies posted to social media. Vatican Media also showed him in the moments after his election praying at a kneeler in the Pauline Chapel before emerging on the loggia.

On Sunday, he is to deliver his first noon blessing from the loggia of St. Peter’s and attend an audience with the media on Monday in the Vatican auditorium, Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni said.

Beyond that, he has a possible first foreign trip at the end of May: Francis had been invited to travel to Türkiye to commemorate the 1,700th anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea, a landmark event in Christian history and an important moment in Catholic-Orthodox relations.

The new pope was formerly the prior general, or leader, of the Order of St. Augustine, which was formed in the 13th century as a community of “mendicant” friars — dedicated to poverty, service and evangelization. Vatican News said Leo is the first Augustinian pope.

In Peru, he is known as the saintly missionary who waded through mud after torrential rains flooded the region, bringing help to needy people, and as the bishop who spearheaded the lifesaving purchase of oxygen production plants during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“He has no problem fixing a broken-down truck until it runs,” said Janinna Sesa, who met Prevost while she worked for the church’s Caritas charity.



US Senate Sides with Trump in Fresh Vote on Iran War Powers

US President Donald J. Trump arrives for a Senate Republican luncheon meeting, at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, USA, 24 June 2026. EPA/GRAEME SLOAN
US President Donald J. Trump arrives for a Senate Republican luncheon meeting, at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, USA, 24 June 2026. EPA/GRAEME SLOAN
TT

US Senate Sides with Trump in Fresh Vote on Iran War Powers

US President Donald J. Trump arrives for a Senate Republican luncheon meeting, at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, USA, 24 June 2026. EPA/GRAEME SLOAN
US President Donald J. Trump arrives for a Senate Republican luncheon meeting, at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, USA, 24 June 2026. EPA/GRAEME SLOAN

The US Senate rejected a resolution on Wednesday to rein in President Donald Trump's handling of the Iran war -- an apparent U-turn following pressure from the Republican leader.

The move came just one day after the Senate voted 50-48 to pass a resolution calling for an end to the Iran war, delivering a rebuke to the White House as it seeks to negotiate a lasting deal with Tehran, AFP said.

The legislation is seen as largely symbolic and has little chance of curbing executive authority because Trump has the presidential power of veto.

Trump slammed the Tuesday vote as "poorly timed and meaningless," saying that it made his job more difficult.

The president lashed out on Wednesday at Republican lawmakers during a closed-door lunch on Capitol Hill, US media reported.

Hours later, Republican Senators Rand Paul and Bill Cassidy -- who had called for a check on the president's war on Iran -- changed their stance in the late Wednesday vote to align with Trump, CNN reported.

The Wednesday resolution, which was defeated 50-47, did not nullify or change the outcome of Tuesday's vote.

Trump took a more positive view of Wednesday's result, writing on Truth Social that "This vote puts Iran on notice!"

During his lunch with Republicans on Wednesday, Trump "was mad as a murder hornet," Senator John Kennedy told the New York Times.

Other attendees told the newspaper that Trump aired a long list of grievances and complaints.


Iran Accuses NATO of ‘Complicity’ in War

Mark Rutte gestures while delivering a speech during a press conference on the eve of the NATO defense ministers' meeting at the Alliance's headquarters in Brussels (AFP)
Mark Rutte gestures while delivering a speech during a press conference on the eve of the NATO defense ministers' meeting at the Alliance's headquarters in Brussels (AFP)
TT

Iran Accuses NATO of ‘Complicity’ in War

Mark Rutte gestures while delivering a speech during a press conference on the eve of the NATO defense ministers' meeting at the Alliance's headquarters in Brussels (AFP)
Mark Rutte gestures while delivering a speech during a press conference on the eve of the NATO defense ministers' meeting at the Alliance's headquarters in Brussels (AFP)

Tehran accused NATO on Thursday of "complicity" in the US-Israeli war against Iran, after the bloc's chief noted its support for the United States in the conflict.

Responding to US President Donald Trump's criticism of allies for not supporting the war, NATO boss Mark Rutte told Fox News that hundreds of American planes launched from bases in Italy.

Trump's second term has been marked by tensions with NATO allies, who have voiced skepticism over the need for the conflict in the Middle East.

"Country after country, ally after ally after ally, have made their bases available for Epic Fury," Rutte told US TV channel Fox News, referring to the US military operation in Iran.

"Five hundred US planes took off from US bases in Italy to support Epic Fury," he said, referring the US name for the operation against Iran.

Trump had told Rutte on Wednesday he was "let down" by members of the alliance who did not back his war against Iran.

Rutte also told Fox News that Romania "cut down on commercial air flights and airplanes because they had to use the airports for the tanker facilities" during the Iran war.

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei condemned the NATO chief's admission of "active complicity" in the "unlawful war.”

"This is a clear and damning admission of NATO's active complicity in an unlawful war of aggression against a sovereign UN Member State," Baqaei wrote on X.

According to AFP, he accused NATO of "a flagrant violation of peremptory norms of international law and the core principles of the UN Charter.”

Italy was quick to distance itself from Rutte's words, which the defense ministry said gave "a completely misleading message by confusing the type of flights that were authorized.”

It said Italy had allowed only "technical and logistical" US flights during Epic Fury under existing agreements with the United States.


The Strait of Hormuz: How Can the World Avert Iran’s ‘Economic Bomb’?

Ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz (Reuters) 
Ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz (Reuters) 
TT

The Strait of Hormuz: How Can the World Avert Iran’s ‘Economic Bomb’?

Ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz (Reuters) 
Ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz (Reuters) 

The Prussian military strategist Carl von Clausewitz famously likened war to a chameleon: once unleashed, it develops a momentum of its own. You may start a war, but after the first shot is fired, it begins to dictate events. Its dynamics often outpace the decision-making of political and military leaders alike. As Winston Churchill observed, once war begins, statesmen cease to be masters of events and instead become their servants. The consequences it generates are frequently unforeseen and impossible to control.

History offers abundant proof. Germany entered World War I believing the conflict would be brief and that Paris would quickly fall. Instead, the war lasted more than four years, cost Germany 2.1 million soldiers, and ended with the humiliating Treaty of Versailles. Imperial Russia believed in 1905 that it could expand eastward to secure access to warm-water ports, only to suffer a devastating naval defeat by Japan. That defeat became one of the factors that ultimately contributed to the fall of Tsar Nicholas II during the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.

Japan, in turn, concluded that as the first Asian power to defeat a major Western state, it could impose its dominance across its region. The result was the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, which drew the United States into World War II and ultimately led Washington to use nuclear weapons against Japan.

More recently, Russian President Vladimir Putin appeared to believe that his 2022 “special military operation” in Ukraine would last no more than ten days and that Ukrainian people would welcome Russian troops with flowers. Reality proved otherwise. The war continues. Russia has exhausted much of its military machine, suffered nearly one million casualties — dead and wounded — and damaged both its reputation and its prestige. It has also lost much of its ability to dominate its traditional Near Abroad, long regarded as Russia’s historical sphere of influence. Perhaps the greatest strategic loss has been its transformation from an independent great power into a “junior” player alongside a rising China. Analysts estimate the overall economic cost of Putin’s war between $2.4 trillion and $2.5 trillion.

Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon likewise achieved its immediate objective of expelling and militarily defeating the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Yet Israel was ultimately confronted by another actor: Hezbollah. Iran subsequently developed the “Unity of the Arenas” strategy through a classic Hub-and-Spoke relationship, seeking to surround Israel, establish a deterrence network against it, and gradually wear it down. Within that framework, Tehran’s principal proxy in Gaza drew Iran itself into a war that began on October 7, 2023, and continues today. Even if a future US-Iran agreement is reached, the conflict may well persist, albeit through different methods and instruments.

Last February, the United States and Israel appeared to believe that a swift aerial strike against Iran could fundamentally alter both Iran’s domestic balance of power and the regional strategic equation. Instead, both encountered the classic law of unintended consequences. Their primary objective was to eliminate what they feared was Iran’s path toward acquiring a nuclear weapon through its stockpile of enriched uranium. Yet the conflict revealed another strategic reality: the Strait of Hormuz itself represents an economic equivalent of an atomic bomb for the global economy.

The World’s Strategic Chokepoints

More than one hundred maritime straits exist worldwide, but only a handful occupy a position of exceptional strategic importance.

Foremost among them is the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil supply — about 20 million barrels per day — passes, in addition to petrochemicals and Qatar’s helium exports, an increasingly important resource for advanced industries, including artificial intelligence. At present, no alternative maritime route exists for shipping Gulf exports to international markets.

The Bab el-Mandeb Strait connects the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean. Nearly eight million barrels of oil pass through it each day, while approximately 12 percent of global trade depends on this waterway.

The Suez Canal forms the shortest maritime link between Europe and Asia and functions as a natural extension of Bab el-Mandeb: if one is blocked, so is the other. The canal generates roughly $4 billion annually for Egypt. Its nationalization by President Gamal Abdel Nasser triggered the 1956 Suez Crisis.

The Strait of Malacca carries more than 60 percent of China’s trade and the bulk of its imported energy. Because the United States dominates the surrounding maritime environment, Chinese strategists have long referred to this vulnerability as the “Malacca Dilemma.” The strait is equally indispensable to Japan, an island nation comprising more than 14,000 islands, and formed part of Imperial Japan’s strategic sphere before World War II.

The Panama Canal, linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans as well as America’s eastern and western seaboards, reflected the maritime vision of US naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan, whose thinking strongly influenced President Theodore Roosevelt.

Finally, the Bosporus and Dardanelles provide the only maritime outlet to the Black Sea. Around 5 percent of global oil shipments transit these waterways, which are essential not only for Russia but also for Romania, Ukraine, Bulgaria, and Kazakhstan, whose oil exports reach world markets through Russia and the Black Sea.

Taken together, these maritime passages are the arteries of global commerce and energy. Control over them confers strategic influence even without overwhelming naval power. As geopolitical scholar Robert D. Kaplan has argued, the Strait of Malacca is likely to become one of the principal geopolitical theaters of the twenty-first century. Bab el-Mandeb remains Europe’s shortest and least expensive gateway to the Indian Ocean because of its integration with the Suez Canal. Yet the world’s primary strategic center of gravity remains the Strait of Hormuz, for which no true maritime substitute currently exists.

France’s national security strategy illustrates the enduring significance of these chokepoints. Paris sees itself as both a continental and maritime power. In addition to its Atlantic and Mediterranean coastlines, France possesses overseas territories that provide access to every major ocean: French Polynesia and New Caledonia in the Pacific; Mayotte and Réunion in the Indian Ocean; and Guadeloupe and Martinique in the Caribbean. Within this global geography, the deployment of the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle near the Strait of Hormuz — officially to support future mine-clearing operations once hostilities cease — together with France’s broader naval presence in the Gulf, reflects a long-term strategy of protecting the world’s vital sea lanes.

Adapting to a New Strategic Reality

The latest regional war has once again demonstrated that the Strait of Hormuz constitutes the strategic center of gravity for the Gulf. Political geographer Saul Bernard Cohen described this region as a geopolitical “shatterbelt” — an area where the interests of great powers intersect and compete continuously, generating chronic instability.

Events since the late 1970s support that assessment. The 1979 Iranian Revolution overthrew the Shah, prompting President Jimmy Carter to announce the Carter Doctrine in 1980, declaring that the United States would use military force if necessary to defend its interests in the Gulf. This was followed by the Iran-Iraq War, the US-led coalition that liberated Kuwait in 1991 after Saddam Hussein’s invasion, the 2003 US invasion that toppled Saddam’s regime, and today’s confrontation involving Iran, the United States, and Israel.

These successive conflicts have disrupted the region’s states’ plans to transform their territory and waters from a geopolitical shatterbelt into a global commercial hub linking East and West. The latest war has undoubtedly complicated those plans. It therefore becomes imperative not only to absorb the shock but also to create strategic alternatives — particularly where the Strait of Hormuz is concerned.

For years, Hormuz represented Iran’s strongest negotiating card in its dealings with Washington. The reopening of the strait became the clearest indication that the latest war had ended. Yet the conflict also demonstrated the urgent need for countries of the region to strengthen their national security while simultaneously developing alternatives that would protect both their energy exports and their broader vision of transforming the Gulf from a geopolitical fault line into a regional hub.

If Hormuz has indeed been Iran’s most valuable strategic card, then the recent crisis also illustrates a timeless principle: once a card is played on the battlefield to improve one’s position at the negotiating table, it inevitably loses some of its strategic value. The strait will reopen, and countries of the region will continue using it. But they will almost certainly accelerate efforts to create alternative export routes because the region’s strategic balance will not return to what it once was. Preparing for worst-case scenarios while continuing to pursue ambitious long-term development strategies has become a strategic necessity.

Accordingly, Gulf energy projects are increasingly focused on diversifying export routes and reducing dependence on vulnerable maritime chokepoints by expanding overland transport corridors and linking major maritime basins. Among the most ambitious proposals is reviving the “Four Seas” vision, connecting the Arabian Gulf, the Caspian Sea, the Black Sea, and the Mediterranean through integrated pipeline networks capable of delivering energy securely to global markets, particularly Europe.

Iraq is pursuing greater logistical flexibility through multiple export options, including studying the revival of a strategic pipeline linking its southern oil fields to Saudi Arabia’s pipeline network. Baghdad also continues to explore restoring the Kirkuk-Baniyas pipeline while maintaining coordination over exports through the Kirkuk-Ceyhan pipeline to Türkiye, thereby expanding its geographical options.

The United Arab Emirates is working to increase the capacity of the pipeline to the Fujairah terminal to as much as three million barrels per day, allowing more exports to bypass the Strait of Hormuz. At the same time, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye seek to revive regional railway links — including the historic Hejaz Railway — connecting the Arabian Peninsula with Türkiye through Jordan and Syria and ultimately extending toward Europe.

The world is entering an exceptionally dangerous period of strategic uncertainty. The balance of power is shifting in unpredictable ways, threatening stability across multiple regions. In such a world, the traditional nation-state is gradually losing ground while non-state actors assume greater influence. Small disruptors, despite their limited capabilities, have become capable of frustrating the strategies of great powers. Even nuclear weapons no longer guarantee deterrence against adversaries that do not possess them. It is a world that has yet to determine what the next international order will look like, or where the new balance of power will ultimately settle.