The day will come, we are sure and certain, when Rome will come back to Rome's own Tradition and restore it to its rightful place, and we long with all our hearts for that blessed day. For the time being, however, things are not yet at that point, and to foster illusions would be deadly for the SSPX, as we can see, when we follow the turn of events in Campos."

(Superior General's Letter to Friends & Benefactors" # 63 6 January 2003)

I guess either Bp. Fellay caved in, or the day has come that we know for certain that Rome has come back to tradition.

There are no other options.

The Conversion of Rome has always and forever meant the same thing: Rome has to teach the faith-- The Catholic faith, whole and integral!
   We recall the early days of this battle: "Oh-- just send a letter to the pope (Paul VI), he's really on our side, he wants to do what's right, but "they" are keeping him prisoner!" Yeah, right-- how many of us fell for that, and stayed in the pews until they changed our beliefs?
   When the Archbishop stated that he would "never again" allow himself to be put in such a situation (in which he allowed Rome to have all the cards, and he lost all power to protect Catholicism), he very obviously meant that Rome had to return to the faith-- the Catholic faith! That's why he listed the encyclicals to which "Rome" would have to agree; that's why he delineated the minimum of  the papal teachings to which "Rome" would have to specifically agree. Otherwise-- there would be no basis for agreement! There would, therefore, be no further "negotiations". PERIOD.
   Pope Leo XIII spelled out the principle that the Archbishop followed quite clearly:
"We have no need to join your confabs and conferences-- when you want to speak to us of the true One, Holy, Catholic faith, we are available. Right here. We have the true faith." (paraphrased).
   Father Schmidberger, and Bishop Fellay knew this quite well. When Father Schmidberger travelled throughout the districts at the behest of Fellay, his bible in hand, reading passage after passage from the bible trying to convince the faithful that it was our duty to "save" these romans who didn't want salvation, he was trying to mute the memory of the Archbishop and his demand that they convert BACK to Roman Catholicism before we consider reuniting.
   When Bishop Fellay put forth his three "pre-conditions" to discussions with Rome, , he cleverly  twisted the Archbishops demand that Rome convert into the nebulous  "Doctrinal Discussions", ala " Let's all sit around a big table and sing "kumbaya my lord, kumbaya! Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya!"
    There was never any doubt in the Archbishop's mind as to what he meant by "they must come back to the faith" Archbishop Lefebvre knew his Catholic faith-- and he thought that Schmidberger and Fellay knew it also!
  So, when Bishop Fellay was pushing the "doctrinal discussions", he knew very well that the traditional Catholics would interpret that term to mean "Tell Rome what's wrong and get them to convert back to the true faith." There was nobody in the pews in SSPX chapels who would have dreamed that Fellay really meant "We (the SSPX) tell Rome what we believe, Rome refuses to change, but we make an agreement anyway!"
    And how can we say this? Because the entire justification for the training and ordination of priests, for the operating of chapels, for the dispensing of sacraments, etc., etc., etc., was (that) the Catholic Church was in a state of emergency because the Bishops and Cardinals had LOST the Catholic faith, were adopting heretical views and un-catholic worship practices, and we ( the SSPX) had a God-given right to preserve the faith. So, obviously, the purpose of "Doctrinal Discussions" was to help rome CONVERT to the Catholic faith-- not to convert the SSPX faithful to the conciliar religion!
   And to that end, Msgr. Fellay asked that all news of the "discussions" be held back, to allow a "free and uninhibited exchange of thought, learning and ideas.' Of course, Fellay promised, when the discussions were over, a complete report would be available. Instead, the only report we received was a comment by Bp deGalaretta, at the close of the discussions, that "there can be no agreement--they(Rome) does not have the faith."  (There was, also, some write-ups in the Novus Ordo papers  of one of the theologians' opinions as to why there can be no agreements).
    So, the faithful got snookered. Like a true modernist, Msgr Fellay uses words which have a certain, Catholic meaning with the faithful, yet uses them in a way which allows rome to play with them. At his "conclusory" meeting of the "discussions" to which he was summoned, Fellay relates he asked: "But what of the discussions--I thought we were going over them?", to which "Rome" replied: "Oh no, silly, silly boy-- we don't need to go over them. We KNOW where we stand-- we just wanted to know where you stand-- There's no need to go over anything (because we are not changing our unCatholic beliefs!); Now, silly boy, just sign this declaration that you have been promising us since 1997 (through GREC), and we can get on with an accord." (paraphrased).

     So, there is absolutely no doubt what "the conversion of Rome" meant. And , just maybe, this is why the prayers of the SSPX are impotent: If the leaders of the SSPX believe that the "conversion of Rome" means a "deal with the devil", how in the world is Our Lady or Our Lord, or ANY Saint in heaven, EVER going to grant the "conversion of Russia" or the "conversion of sinners" , when those petitioning for the conversions have NO IDEA what conversion means?
    You can be sure, however, that the Archbishop knew what conversion meant. he knew what it meant to get heretics out of their false religions. he knew what Almighty God meant by demanding that the false altars be torn down-- because that is what he did in Africa! He helped bring Christianity to a pagan land by convertying them OUT of their false beliefs-- not by making an agreement that they can stay IN their false faith. And that's why he stated ,"never again will i be put in that position. Now I insist they convert first!"
     It is a sad, sad, lack of faith in Almighty God. That Catholics (or former Catholic) all around you have dropped the faith, but kept all the trappings (or most of them, anyway), and the leadership of the SSPX, instead of confirming their supposed brethren in the true faith, they make a deal so as to join in their false faith!
   

ABL Archbishop Lefebvre:

“supposing that Rome calls for a renewed dialogue, then, I will put conditions. I shall not accept being in the position where I was put during the dialogue. No more.
I will place the discussion at the doctrinal level: “Do you agree with the great encyclicals of all the popes who preceded you? Do you agree with Quanta Cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei and Libertas of Leo XIII, Pascendi Gregis of Pius X, Quas Primas of Pius XI, Humani Generis of Pius XII? Are you in full communion with these Popes and their teachings? Do you still accept the entire Anti-Modernist Oath? Are you in favor of the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ? If you do not accept the doctrine of your predecessors, it is useless to talk! As long as you do not accept the correction of the Council, in consideration of the doctrine of these Popes, your predecessors, no dialogue is possible. It is useless.””

ABL wrote: I shall not accept being in the position where I was put during the dialogue.(leading up to the signing of the Protocol, I presume)
That was ABL's closing position.  He never deviated from it until his death.  It would appear, though, that the present regime has.