“It is possible to stop the recourse to the use of weapons of mass destruction”. This is according to Pope Francis who said in his address to the FAO: “We are all aware of the capacity of destruction of these instruments. But are we equally aware of the effects of poverty and exclusion? How can we stop people willing to risk everything, entire generations that may disappear because they lack their daily bread, or are victims of violence or climate change?”. “They head where they see a light or perceive the hope of life”, Pope Francis went on to say, referring to the issue of forced migration: “They cannot be stopped by physical, economic, legislative or ideological barriers: only a consistent application of the principle of humanity can do so”. Instead – he decried – “public development aid is reduced and the activity of the multilateral institutions is limited, while bilateral agreements are used which subordinate cooperation to the fulfilment of particular agendas and alliances or, simply, to a momentary tranquillity”. On the contrary, according to Pope Francis, “the management of human mobility requires coordinated and systematic intergovernmental action in accordance with existing international norms, and permeated with love and intelligence. Its objective is a meeting of peoples that enriches all and generates union and dialogue, not exclusion or vulnerability”. As for the international debate on this issue which “causes division when it comes to immigrants”, the Pope said: “A vulnerable person is one who is in an inferior situation and cannot defend himself, who has no means, or rather, experiences exclusion”. “This is because he is compelled by violence, by natural situations or, even worse, by indifference, intolerance and even hatred”. In this condition, Pope Francis stated, “it is right to identify the causes so as to act with the necessary competence”, but “it is not acceptable that, in order to avoid commitment, one entrenches oneself behind linguistic sophisms that do not honour diplomacy, but rather reduce it from the ‘art of the possible’ to a sterile exercise to justify selfishness and inactivity”.