Lets say the Pope (or whoever) wants to claim the Holy Land for the Catholic Church. The Church raises a grand army and launches a crusade. Is it even allowed to raise an army or launch a crusade? What would the U.N. do? Would it still have to follow international law? What about the recruits, would they be charged with breaking any laws?
This may get moved to Debates. Its a bit of a what if question.
The laws they would be breaking would likely be more localized. Such as those governing weapons posession and armed militias.
The UN would likely respond in one of two ways:
- As they would to any agressor nation, vis a vis the first war in Iraq.
- As they currently treat religious based terrorist organizations. The trick with the Catholics would be that they have a clear and defined central command and its farily common knowledge.
Int’l law is largely bullplop. Its there to give the appearance of control, like any legal system the laws only affect those who consent to follow them.
If they were to want to raise a proper army (disregarding the Swiss Guards that’re more of a police force and/or bodyguard service for the Pope), I don’t see why they couldn’t and I am sure they could attack any country they wanted to as any country that wants to declare war can do so, regardless of international law, much like the US did last year.
I’m sure it’d be a PR nightmare though, not to mention a total defeat considering Israel’s military.
It’d be interesting to see Italy’s response. They’re responsible for the defense of the Vatican by treaty and its inside their capital city of Rome to boot. Anyone else have any good ideas as to what might happen?
Foreign Legion?
>> Is it even allowed to raise an army or launch a crusade?
“Allowed” by who? I didn’t realize there was an office where you had to get a permit to “raise an army or launch a crusade”. I believe you can raise an army or launch a crusade on your own private property but maybe you need a permit if you go out on public property. Maybe others here have more experience raising armies and launching crusades and can fill in the details. It’s been a long time since I’ve last done it.
>> What would the U.N. do?
That’s an easy one to answer: They would do what they always do: Nothing. 
>> Would it still have to follow international law?
No, just divine law as interpreted by the Pope himself.
>> What about the recruits, would they be charged with breaking any laws?
I do not think being a crusader would be a valid excuse for, say, speeding but I do not think there are specific laws against crusading.
One problem: Where would they ASSEMBLE this army? The Vatican’s doesn’t exactly have a lot of space to spare.
What sailor said.
Well, as part of the Lateran Accords, which established the Vatican as an independent state:
“The Vatican promised to always remain neutral and to stay out of international politics and diplomacy.”
I believe that rules out going crusading. 
Since Vatican City is a sovereign nation, it is certainly allowed by international law to defend its teritory and sovereignty like any sovereign nation. However, as Aesiron said, it has a treaty with Italy by which Italy provides these services. Any change in this status would have to be accepted (at least tacitly) by Italy. If they started massing Swiss Guards at the borders with Rome, I suspect Italy would object, and could put a stop to it pretty quicky. The only remotely (and I do mean remotely) plausable senario would be if the Vatican felt threatened by a terrorist nation and felt it couldn’t rely on Italy to protect it. Under those circumstances, it could probably negotiate something with Italy, since Italy wouldn’t be threatened. The UN wouldn’t do anything, as long as it limited itself to long-range conventional weapons. (I can’t see much use or feasability for anything involving large numbers of troops.) If it obtained nuclear weapons, the UN would treat it like any violation of the anti-proliferation treaty. (The Vatican observer would no longer be invited to some ambasadorial cocktail parties.) Italy might welcome this, if they felt it would deter attacks that might affect Rome, but more likely, they would object because it would make Rome a more likely target.
The Pope is internationally recognised as a sovereign, and already has an army; the Swiss Guard, which has already been mentioned. It’s a pretty token, ceremonial army now, but it has been larger. Up until 1870 the Pope ruled a largish chunk of central Italy, and had a commensurate army.
Raising an army is not, of itself, a breach of international law (unless it infringes a specific treaty obligation) though it may very well be a breach of domestic law in the state in which you raise it. If the Pope could raise an army in the Vatican, there would be no breach of international law unless there is a treaty obligation preventing him from doing this, or limiting the size of the forces he can maintain. (And my WAG is that there probably is such a treaty obligation to Italy, in return for Italy accepting the obligation to defend the Vatican.)
Invading another state is a breach of international law (unless there is a lawful justification for the attack). If State A invades State B without lawful justification, State A is in breach of international law. If State A allows someone to use its territory to mount an invasion of State B (whether a private individual or organisation or a third state) State A is again in breach of international law.
What would the UN do? The answer, as always depends on what its members want it to do, and in particular what the permanent members of the Security Council (the US, Russia, the UK, France and China) want it to do. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990 there was fairly rapid action; in this wildly unlikely hypothetical situation I would expect something similar.
It’s not likely that it would be necessary to invade the Vatican to bring the Pope to heel. Lesser reprisals (police action against church property in other states, sanctions against the Vatican, cutting off the water, that kind of thing) would be fully effective.
Would the pope/his army have to follow international law? Same answer as for anyone else; he/they would be legally obliged to, but whether in practice they would have to would depend on the willingness of other states to enforce international law.
Would the recruits be charged with breaking any laws? Depends. They presumably wouldn’t be breaking any laws in the Vatican. In the country invaded, if arrested or captured they would be prisoners of war. This is so regardless of whether there is legal justification for the invasion, but it crucially depends on the fact that the Pope is internationally recognised as a sovereign. If the invasion were mounted by, say, the Southern Baptist Conference they’d probably be regarded as just common-or-garden criminals.
Even as members of a recognised army, they could be charged with crimes if they had committed any, but merely being a member of an invading army is not, of itself, a crime. But they might be guilty of looting, rape, war crimes . . .
In their home countries, they might be charged; in many countries enlisting in a foreign army is a crime.
If the Vatican were threatened by another country’s weapons they could just hold a Mass of Weapon Destruction.
Good one, DanBlather.
And when does that provision take effect?
In one of his novels, Tom Clancy wrote about a Middle Eastern peace plan where the Vatican took over military security for Jerusalem via treaty. To accomplish this the Swiss Guard was expanded into a larger (brigade level?) mechanized force.
Also, please note that my referral to that website does not mean that I endorse or agree with any of the religious or political positions taken on that website.
From the living or from the dead?