Few Australians could be more suitable for the position of full-time ambassador to the Vatican were Australia to decide that it needed one than Tim Fischer. But there would be many who quite reasonably suspect that we need no such full-time position, and that the decision to create such an appointment owes rather more to the Government's mania to control the news cycle and perhaps to capitalise on some of the goodwill excited by the success of World Youth Day than it does to any real need to upgrade our representation, particularly when Australia is downgrading its representation in more important countries.
Traditionally, our diplomatic representation at the Holy See has been a part-time job for our ambassador to Ireland, and it would be stretching it to suggest that the Rome end of the position has been arduous. By tradition or Vatican pressure, based on ultimate fears of the durability of its concordat with Italy diplomats accredited to Rome cannot be our representatives at the Vatican, so the task cannot be delegated to Amanda Vanstone, who has a sinecure there.
But that does not amount to much by way of a crisis since, although the nation's relations with the Vatican are important, they rarely present urgent problems or ones that cannot be addressed by a non-resident making the occasional visit and otherwise attending to business by email.
It is much the same at this end, other than that there is an alternative workload for Vatican diplomats here. The Pope is represented in Australia by a nuncio, traditionally diligent in attending to the ceremonial diplomatic duties of endless embassy functions but only rarely pressing any causes on our government.
He has a small staff, but the job is, in any event, made easier by the fact that a good number of Australian bishops seem to see themselves rather more as the representative of Rome in their dioceses than as the representatives of their dioceses to Rome.
The Vatican may be the world's tiniest nation and an anomaly in terms of its government and mission but it is active in international affairs, including ones that Australia takes seriously.
When warned of Vatican reaction to a decision of his, Stalin once famously asked, ''How many divisions has the Pope?'' Yet, 50 years later, many will say, it was the disarming voice of a Pope that played a significant role in the collapse of the empire Stalin had built. This was done not with raw power but moral force, and the Pope's hold on the thinking of millions of adherents, including inside the old Soviet system.
The Church has a long history of active diplomacy, and of having its voice heard in the counsels of the world, not least on issues of peace and human rights. That is in large part because it has about 1.2billion adherents about the world, people who may never doubt their nationality or duty of loyalty to their country, but many of whom will give respectful attention to papal pronouncements on moral issues.
In some senses, perhaps, the Vatican may be no more an influential player than any moderately busy and outgoing non-governmental organisation, in part because on many political matters (not least in dealing with totalitarian regimes) it must tread carefully when speaking up for its adherents, or for human rights generally, amid the risk of actually making lives more difficult.
There are some forums in which many Australians are very critical of the Vatican's role. The obvious example would be in world arguments about population control, and in efforts to control the spread of AIDS. The Church's opposition to contraception, (sometimes also its even more adamant opposition to abortion) and its efforts to frustrate promotion of the condom as a prophylactic against sexually transmitted disease (including AIDS) attract fierce debate, even if, sometimes the effect of its campaigns is overstated, because the Church is not strong in many places where AIDS is most epidemic.
An Australian ambassador has little prospect of influencing church policy on such matters, even if Fischer (as ever with our ambassadors to the Holy See, a Catholic) were minded to. But he may well play some role in keeping Australia informed of developments in Vatican diplomacy on such issues. He is, also, particularly well suited to help Australia by watching and perhaps influencing the interfaith dialogue maintained by the Vatican. Uncommonly among Australian politicians, Fischer has a high reputation in Muslim countries. It is unlikely he could or would much affect the pronounced Australian tilt, in general diplomacy, towards Israel. But his background is such that any efforts he makes, via the Vatican, to promote better understanding of the religious and cultural roots of seemingly intractable problems, particularly in the Middle East, may be greeted with more attention and respect than they would from almost any other Australian.