Pope Francis is a contradictory figure.

Despite leading a church with a long and shameful history of being synonymous with conflict, injustice and abuse, the ailing old Argentine Jesuit strikes me as, at heart, a humble cleric who abhors human suffering and misery.

Like you and me, the Pope can see what Israel has done with such brutal ferocity to Palestinians trapped for more than a year in the barren remains of Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

I believe Francis recognizes that bearing witness to human suffering and misery on an almost incomprehensible scale demands a response, and that silence under the prevailing terrible conditions means, at the very least, cheerful acceptance and, at worst, conscious complicity.

So, to his credit, the Pope said what needed to be said.

In fact, the Pope abandoned neutrality in favor of the refreshingly raw frankness with which he declared – in frank language – his sympathy and solidarity with the millions of Palestinians who are victims of Israel’s ongoing murderous lust.

I am convinced that Francis will be remembered in history for taking an honorable stand at the right time for the right reasons, while so many other “leaders” in Europe and beyond armed the apartheid regime with weapons and diplomatic cover to engineer the still-unfolding 21st century. Genocide of the century.

Francis will also be remembered for rejecting efforts to intimidate or bully him into qualifying or withdrawing statements from the Heart that Israel is guilty of “cruelty” as it systematically reduces much of Gaza and the West Bank to dust. And memory.

Instead, the Pope, backed by truth and an appropriate sense of justice, refused to retract or “soften” his statements.

The Pope’s defiance is not only admirable, it is also tangible evidence that he has no intention of abandoning the Palestinians. A large number of warlocks have deserted them, claiming unconvincingly that they are horrified by the large number of innocents killed and the horrific manner in which they died.

What did Pope Francis and the Vatican say or do to incite the intense anger of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the corps of defenders of the accused war criminal at home and abroad?

Israel’s stroke began in earnest in February. Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin He denounced Israel’s so-called military campaign is disproportionate given the number of Palestinians killed suddenly under constant bombardment or slowly by starvation and disease.

“Israel’s right to self-defense must be proportionate, and with 30,000 people killed, it most certainly is not,” Parolin said at the time.

Israel’s response was as quick as expected. Angry diplomats attached to Israel’s embassy in the Holy See issued a letter calling Parolin’s comments “unfortunate.”

Yes, I agree. The truth can sometimes be “unfortunate”. However, the fact remains.

Since then, of course, the “unfortunate” number of Palestinian casualties has swelled, with more than 45,000 people killed – mostly children and women – with another 108,000 or so injured, often seriously.

At the same time, dozens of Palestinians suffered forced marches to and from fictitious “safe zones” in Gaza, where they were bombed as they sought futile shelter in makeshift “homes” amid rubble or Freeze to death In flimsy tents soaked by rain and mud.

Then, in excerpts from the book published by Italian daily La Stampa in late November, the pope said a number of international experts had found that “what is happening in Gaza has the characteristics of genocide.”

“We must investigate carefully to assess whether this fits the technical definition [of genocide] The Pope said: “It was formulated by human rights activists and international organizations.”

Once again, Israeli officials reacted angrily, insisting that the Pope’s comments were “baseless” and amounted to “belittling” the term “genocide.”

The exaggerated response has been curious since the International Court of Justice in The Hague to rule In January, there was almost unanimous agreement that South Africa had presented a plausible case that Israel had demonstrated an intent to carry out genocide.

As a result, the court is required, under international law, to hold a full hearing and ultimately issue a decision on the question posed by the Pope: Is Israel responsible for the crime of genocide in Gaza?

Amnesty International Delivered It was sentenced in early December, concluding that “Israel has committed and continues to commit the crime of genocide against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip.”

Agnes Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International, said Israel’s “specific intention” was “to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza.”

She added: “Month after month, Israel treats Palestinians in Gaza as a sub-human group undeserving of human rights and dignity, demonstrating its intent to physically destroy them.”

In a credible sign, Israel and its agents dismissed Amnesty International as a den of anti-Semites in a passing attempt to discredit its findings.

It is very difficult to smear the spiritual leader of 1.4 billion Catholics with the same tired lies after he accused you of “cruelty.”

In his Christmas address, Francis condemned Children were killed in an Israeli air strike the day before.

“Yesterday, children were bombed. This is cruelty. This is not war. I wanted to say this because it touches the heart,” the Pope said.

Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs He was summoned The Vatican ambassador had a tough conversation to reportedly express his “deep dissatisfaction” with the pope’s rude comments.

According to Israeli media reports, the meeting did not constitute an “official reprimand.” I’m sure the Vatican was relieved.

What I find useful is that the Israeli Foreign Ministry expressed “deep dissatisfaction” with the Pope’s justified use of a three-syllable word, not the fact that its invading forces have killed 45,541 Palestinians, and counting in just over 14 months.

However, I think the Pope showed remarkable restraint. He could describe the grief, loss, and suffering brought on by Israel in Gaza and the occupied West Bank – without a moment’s remorse or contrition – as obscene, abhorrent, or contrary to morality and humanity, let alone the rules of “war.”

I suspect that “cruelty” hits the mark because it is a scathing reflection of Amnesty International’s finding that it is Israel’s overarching intent to mastermind the wholesale destruction of Gaza and the desperate souls it already deems “subhuman.”

Israel’s “cruelty” is deliberate. It is not a “mistake” or an unfortunate by-product of the unpredictable vagaries of the “madness” of war.

Cruelty is a choice.

The unspoken benefit of this choice is that the perpetrator derives an intoxicating amount of satisfaction, if not pleasure, from his unrestrained revenge on a largely defenseless people.

This is the essence of cruelty.

Pope Francis didn’t say that, but he might as well have said that.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.