I read a comment made by a reporter for an American Catholic newspaper about the visit of Pope Benedict XVI's to Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian territories, saying: "If he simply manages to get back to Rome without starting a war, some might declare the trip a success!"

It may seem strange for such discourse to come from a Catholic writer, but the truth is that the pope is visiting a region filled with tension and sentiments of religious extremism, which can start a war with or without a visit from the pope. However, Pope Benedict carries the baggage of the blunders that have occurred during the four years for which he has led the Catholic Church, through which he managed to anger everyone at different degrees. The Muslims were angered by his famous speech at that German university, which required a great deal of apologizing and remodeling. The Jews were angered because he returned British Bishop Richard Williamson to the bosom of the Church despite the latter's statements denying the Nazi Holocaust (although the pope later retracted his decision), and also because of constant Jewish accusations over the "collusion" of his predecessor Pius XII with the Nazis during World War II, such that they have even nicknamed him "Pope Hitler". Benedict also angered a substantial portion of Catholics because of the Church's strict traditional positions on the issues of abortion, contraception and gay marriage, issues which a great many of them now consider to be disconnected from the developments of the modern age and the new life conditions it brings.

In a region such as this, inflamed with religious sentiments, it will require a miracle for a religious leader, even one with the weight that the pope has, to act as mediator in what political leaders and previous mediators have failed to achieve. Hence the pope was realistic when he indirectly made it clear that this was not the purpose of his visit, which he describes as a 'pilgrimage' in the region rather than a political visit.

But how can politics be absent when the German pope visits the memorial to the victims of Nazism in Jerusalem (Yad Vashem), and refuses to visit the Holocaust Museum or to read a letter placed inside in which the Jews affront his predecessor, the 'Nazi' pope? How can politics be absent when there is a controversy over the podium from which he is supposed to give a speech in a refugee camp near Bethlehem, as it is close to the separation wall built by Israel? And how can politics be absent from the pope's visit, when we still hear Islamic voices demanding an apology for his university speech and calling on him to announce a clear stance towards Israeli aggressions, for his trip not to turn into a mere visit to the stones - as someone said - instead of looking to the state of human beings?

And because the pope's visit is non-political, as the Vatican media sought to describe it, it becomes illogical to wait for the messages he might have sent, to the Israelis inviting them to make the compromises necessary for peace, and to the Palestinians inviting some of their movements and factions to renounce extremism and to commit to policies tending more towards moderation and tolerance. Because any message of this kind, considering the background that Pope Benedict brings with him, will be understood as the opposite of what is intended, whether on the Jewish side or on that of the Palestinian factions, whose support for peace and the two-state solution is considered a necessary condition.

Even the declining numbers of Christians in the Palestinian territories, which have regressed from 20 percent under the British Mandate to less than 2 percent today, is not expected to meet with a solution after this visit. Indeed, it is unlikely for those who have emigrated to Europe, Canada and Australia, to escape the rise of violence and strictness on every side, to hear of the pope's visit and decide to pack their bags and return home. They too realize that this "pilgrimage" will only be a matter of a few days… and then everything will return to its previous state!