The Holy See has no army, no intelligence service and no counterterrorism capability. Yet, Shreya Nautiyal argues, Pope Leo XIV’s recent interventions in Nigeria and his push for stronger Christian-Muslim relations show how moral diplomacy can support preventive security and build social cohesion, even if it can’t replace traditional state tools

The Holy See, or See of Rome, is the universal government of the Catholic Church, based in the sovereign city-state of Vatican City. Its head, and the Church’s supreme authority, is Pope Leo XIV.

In February 2026, Pope Leo decried a wave of violent Islamist extremist attacks in Nigeria’s Kwara State. He called on authorities 'to work with determination to ensure the safety and protection of the life of every citizen'. His response followed a familiar pattern of papal diplomacy, one that expressed moral concern, called for restraint, and offered prayers for those affected.

Three months later, while addressing an interfaith colloquium in Rome, the Pope emphasised that Christians and Muslims must work in tandem to ‘revive humanity’ and build solidarity:

Christians and Muslims, drawing from the richness of our respective traditions, are called to a common mission: to revive humanity where it has grown cold, to give voice to those who suffer, and to transform indifference into solidarity. Compassion and empathy can be our instruments as they have the power to restore the dignity of the other

Greeting of his holiness pope Leo XIV

These words might sound like a routine papal preaching but they aim to sketch a clearer message: a theory of prevention that treats polarisation and apathy, not just armed groups, as security problems.

An avid diplomat with no weapons

The Holy See has no formal military but maintains diplomatic relations with almost 180 countries, including the EU. It also holds a permanent observer seat in the United Nations (UN). Established as a sovereign state in 1929, Vatican City provides the territorial base that guarantees the independence of the Holy See, the Catholic Church’s central government. With no economy worth mentioning, it trades in what Joseph Nye refers to as soft power; the ability to shape the behaviours and preferences of others through persuasion rather than coercion.

This influence often takes the form of moral suasion. Scholars have described the papacy as a ‘global conscience’, whose power rests on credibility and its worldwide network of bishops rather than on hard capability.

Prevention, not policing

Over the past few decades, counterterrorism practices have increasingly accepted that radicalisation of individuals is rarely driven by ideological motives alone. It can also take root in permissive environments where communities feel abandoned, religious identities are pitted against each other, and populations become desensitised to others’ suffering – whether through State practices or societal indifference. Pope Leo XIV's focus on the 'globalisation of indifference' resonates with these realities. It also warns us about the divisions in society and apathy that can foster violence and extremism.

We are growing accustomed to violence, resigning ourselves to it, and becoming indifferent. Indifferent to the deaths of thousands of people... There is an ever-increasing 'globalization of indifference,' …an expression dear to Pope Francis

Pope Leo XIV

This is not a one-off gesture of papal diplomacy, but a longstanding practice. Pope Francis’ 2019 Document on Human Fraternity, supported by the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, explicitly framed interfaith cooperation as a means to counter 'extremism and division' and promote peaceful coexistence. The current Pope’s May colloquium with Jordan’s Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies continues this line of thought. In highlighting dialogue, empathy and solidarity between Christians and Muslims, the Holy See is practicing a type of ‘normative diplomacy’ that aims to promote social cohesion and diminish divisions from which the narratives of extremism can take hold. This is not counter-radicalisation as usually defined. Instead, it works further upstream where it aims to influence the social and moral landscape where radicalisation can grow.

As the moral capital dwindles

Of course, a papal statement is no match for a militia, and the unilateral nature of papal interventions is evident. It's much easier to appeal for 'solidarity' between religions than it is to ask: why are security forces in Global South countries, including Nigeria, so often failing the communities they are supposed to serve? Moral capital might travel more easily through public discourse than it does into a state’s security policy. There is a risk that the discourse on ‘prevention’ of radicalisation and extremism becomes a substitute for scrutinising the states responsible for protecting civilians.

Pope Leo may invite Christians and Muslims to awaken their dormant humanitarian sympathies, but he cannot force them to do so

Additionally, soft power lacks an enforcement system. Pope Leo may invite Christians and Muslims to awaken their dormant humanitarian sympathies, but he cannot force them to do so. There is no metric through which we can ever know if the papacy succeeded.

A complement, rather than a substitute

The Holy See cannot arrest anybody, infiltrate a cell, or sponsor a deradicalisation programme. But what it can – and perhaps did – do, in the course of three months in 2026, is to keep polarisation and indifference in the discussion, as security issues, using a normative form of authority that traditional counterterrorism agencies lack. That’s not nothing. Any serious government interested in the prevention of radicalisation and extremism should take the Pope's moral capital as one of several inputs; as a complement to, rather than a substitute for, the institutional and security measures required for comprehensive prevention.