“Europe’s leaders may not even fully understand what they’re doing. The rest of the world hasn’t a clue.” The International Herald Tribune thus summed up the incredible rise of the European Union to the position of chief global economic power, in their July 3 edition.
The same article carried other startling statements: “Europe has seized control of much of the global economic agenda…. Europe’s grasp for power will shape the global economy for decades to come.”
Is this true? If it is, how come “the rest of the world hasn’t a clue”? Well, it’s a long story. Believe it or not, it started way back around 31 b.c. That’s the year that the Roman Empire came to power.
Students of biblical history understand that the great image portrayed in Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, as depicted in Daniel 2:31-35, is analogous to the four great Gentile empires that have held sway throughout the past three millennia. This is clearly explained in our booklet Daniel—Unsealed at Last, which you may have, free of charge, by requesting it from one of the addresses shown inside the cover of this magazine.
It is not the purpose of this article to prove the identity of the Roman Empire as revealed in the prophetic scriptures. We have plenty of literature available to our readers which serves that purpose. It is sufficient for our purposes in this article to state that biblical prophecy reveals that, upon the destruction of the Roman Empire in a.d. 476, ten succeeding governments were to grow out of it. Justinian restored the empire in a.d. 554, in the process uprooting the first three governments (three barbarian kingdoms), which disappeared from history at that time. Justinian’s restoration of the empire preceded the subsequent six resurrections of the “Holy” Roman Empire. These are facts of history.
The seventh and last resurrection of that empire is now rapidly congealing into a federation of nation-states in Europe, spreading its tentacles globally via massive investment in, and takeovers of, international business.
“Even the U.S. market is now less of an American market. As a unifying Europe asserts its regulatory muscle, its entrepreneurs are in flight to the United States, where they are less subject to…direction by bureaucrats. The rush is astonishing. According to Mergerstat, a Los Angeles research service, foreign companies in the past three years have taken over 2,779 U.S. companies worth a stunning $766 billion. Three quarters of that money is from Europe” (ibid.).
This is economic blitzkrieg! As we have pointed out in previous articles, much of this investment is coming from Europe’s dominant power, Germany. Norman Davies demonstrates in his masterful study of Europe that the old Holy Roman Empire was “the launch-pad of ‘Germany’” (Europe—A History, p. 317).
Up to the time of World War ii, Germany had spearheaded its dominance of Europe via the instrumentality of war. But those who blindly claim that the German nation has since miraculously transformed itself into a responsible democracy simply fool themselves. As British parliamentarian Sir Richard Body declares, German tactics changed in the mid-20th century. “…German power presented a threat. For a century Germany tried to impose her dominance by military means: now she is able to do so by economic means…. She is not going to agree to any developments that threaten her wealth or reduce her ability to follow her own course” (The Breakdown of Europe, p. 59).
Slowly—painfully slowly—and probably too late, Anglo-American thinkers are starting to wake up to the fact that what Germany failed at—global dominance imposed by war—in the two greatest wars in man’s history, it is on the verge of gaining via global economic investment. Germany has done so under the cloak of avidly working as a “partner” with other European countries, part of a federation of nation-states, ostensibly “Europeanized” away from its traditional Teutonic warmongering tendencies.
Again, Sir Richard Body’s views are incisive and reveal a real feel for both history and human nature: “To believe that Germany will become ‘Europeanized’ in the sense that she will surrender her own national interests to appease the other states of the Union, and that she will allow them to go on indefinitely feeding off the billions of deutsch marks that she provides with no apparent advantage in exchange—that is to dream of a new and very implausible theory of international relations” (ibid.).
To understand the real nature of the European Union, and the threat it poses to Anglo-American civilization, culture, society and economy, one has to dig into history. In fact, one has to go to the source of the modern “science” of geopolitics.
Geopolitics is simply the term coined to describe the study of the relationship between geographic and political factors as they relate to or influence a nation or region. One of the most prominent names associated with geopolitics is that of Karl Haushofer (1869-1946). He was a leading light in German intellectual life in Nazi Germany. Rudolf Hess, Hitler’s close associate, was a student of Haushofer.
At the heart of Haushofer’s geopolitical ideology was a conviction that Europe’s history of conflict could be overcome by an amalgamation of the nations of Europe and the sacrifice of their individual sovereignty to a single “common European idea and meaning.” The idea of the German Reich had its genesis in this particular geopolitical concept. Author John Laughland explains it thus: “The geopoliticians, indeed, ascribed precisely to the Reich the role of the bearer and realizer of European unity…. They thought that…the nation was too small for the modern interdependent world and economy” (The Tainted Source, p. 111).
Herein lies the connection between the Third Reich of Nazi Germany and the European Union of today. “Their Reich theories, which accorded a greater role to the non-political factor of space than to the political arrangements which nations had in fact chosen, were explicitly predicated on the idea that the notion of sovereignty itself should be abandoned in favor of the higher interests of the ‘community’” (ibid.; emphasis mine here and throughout).
It is a fact of recent history that no country close to Germany welcomed its unification. It scared France to death. In fact in a pathetic, last ditch stance, then French President Francois Mitterand paid a state visit to East Germany on December 20-21, 1989 (after the Berlin Wall had been breached), to reassure that shattering regime of France’s support for the continuing existence of East Germany as an independent state. Only when unification was inevitable did the turncoat French leader sign a joint letter with German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, in April 1990, to initiate the process which was to evolve as the Maastricht Treaty on European unity 18 months later.
Ever since, the French have played a subservient role to a united Germany in the bullying process of roping European nations into a federation under German leadership. John Laughland portrays this scenario in startling terms: “Germany knows what potential the axis with France offers her. Without France at her side, then the creation of a monetary union including only the D-Mark zone countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, perhaps some Eastern Europe states) would appear, very simply, as what it would, in fact, be: a new German Reich. With France in the picture, by contrast, German hegemony is disguised…. European integration was an escalator [France] was too frightened to get off” (ibid., p. 126).
Encircling the Globe
Germany’s chief negotiator of the Maastricht Treaty, Horst Köhler, stated in 1996, “There is no alternative to European integration. Any other choice could cause the other countries of the continent, one day, to unite against us” (Le Monde, Feb. 6, 1996). This is mind-boggling rhetoric, considering that it was Germany who started the last three major wars in Europe!
Of all nations in Europe, it is Germany that has a European policy crystallized with dogged political will and single-minded purpose. The present-day policy of Germany for Europe is in fact a policy for domination. Few, indeed, can see it. Yet it was articulated, immediately prior to German unification, by two of Chancellor Kohl’s senior advisers in July 1989. The document setting out Germany’s post-unification blueprint for their new empire was, in fact, written immediately following the visit by Mikhail Gorbachev, the Russian president at the time, to Bonn to inform Chancellor Kohl that he would not oppose German unification.
One month after this visit, as reported by Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, July 17, 1989, the two advisers drew up the German “concentric circles” model for global domination. The authors of this paper maintained that German political integration should become the model for European integration. But it was not to stop with Europe! The paper showed a German-inspired “federal nucleus” of Europe to be the “focal point and center of gravity for an ever-expanding community.”
How far is this community to expand? “This model can be seen as a system of concentric circles,” the paper said.
Describing the German plan outlined in the paper, Mr. Laughland wrote, “Such a Europe [was] to replace the current ‘confusing diversity’ of Europe’s overlapping structures…with ‘a singular consistent structure.’ That structure was to consist of a ‘European federal state,’ the ‘United States of Europe’ as its ‘centerpiece.’ …The second circle would be ‘the European Community’ including the ‘United States of Europe’ and the other seven EC states. The third concentric circle would be comprised of an ‘Association of European States’…open to the Eastern European states, the Scandinavian countries and Switzerland. The final concentric circle was ‘the common European home’ itself…that is, all of Europe plus the Soviet Union, Canada and the USA” (The Tainted Source, p. 123).
As Laughland states, the authors of this grand design for global German dominion “never understated the breadth of their vision”!
That vision ought to send chills up your spine. Why aren’t you hearing warnings about it in the press? Why no great international outcry? Simply because the EU, via its various unaccountable and unelected instrumentalities, has elected, by sleight of hand, deceit and outright lying, to hide the truth from the world.
While addressing a farmers’ meeting in Britain on September 22, 1998, Bernard Connolly, author of the book The Rotten Heart of Europe, declared, “Cheating is what Europe is all about. Lying is what Europe is all about. Humiliating and subjugating Britain is what Europe is all about.”
That humiliation of Britain extends to the EU using Britain to legitimize what the Franco-German axis is doing in Europe and around the globe to give it “credibility” in the eyes of the world. Britain’s faltering, more-cautious approach to full EU integration has led Romano Prodi, president of the Commission of European Communities, to state snidely, “In practice, if you don’t fully participate in the family, your voice will be less heard. To be different makes you less important in the total decision-making process” (Guardian, London, Feb. 16).
In what amounted to a statement bordering on blackmail, Prodi also told political journalists that the UK would have “less strength” in the European Union’s decision-making process outside the euro zone. “How can you control your economy being surrounded by the euro and not having your man inside the European Central Bank?” he said (ibid.).
As to Bernard Connolly’s allegations of EU lying and cheating, one only has to remember that the collapse of the European Commission in 1999 was due to fraud of hugely embarrassing proportions being publicized by a lone Dutch auditor. The same Dutchman was hounded from office and declared persona non grata for his efforts. In a face-saving exercise, the EU replaced 20 of its commissioners and created a new anti-fraud office. A year ago, a report from the EU itself admitted that it had made no inroads into stemming the flow of fraudulently siphoned-off EU funds, nor checked any of the EU’s rampant corruption!
“The new anti-fraud office created by the European Union to root out corruption in Brussels is no better than its predecessor and has failed to break free from political control, according to an internal EU report. A year and a half after the collapse of the Santer Commission amid allegations of fraud, nepotism, and dirty tricks by the Commission’s security service, little seems to have changed” (Daily Telegraph, London, Aug. 30, 2000).
As of May this year, the utter failure of the EU to deal with the depth of fraud within its own ranks was once more highlighted in one of its own reports!
According to the Europe Information Service, on May 15 the European Commission reviewed its protection of EU financial interests and the fight against fraud in the 2000 EU budget. The member states and the Anti-Fraud Office (olaf) handled 6,955 new cases last year with an overall budgetary impact (real or estimated) of over 2 trillion euros—$1.77 trillion! “This represents a record level of fraud and irregularities according to the report” (European Report, May 16).
It is difficult to conceive of a more inefficient, bureaucratic, undemocratic, unaccountable and corrupt institution than this European Union. Yet, if we only had eyes to see, we would not wonder at the extent of the dark deeds of the Eurocombine, for we would recognize its source.
The aging Apostle John, viewing from afar across the breadth of time, saw in his mind’s eye, via his inspired vision documented in the book of Revelation, the true nature of this Euro-beast and the source of its corrupt and corrupting power. Speaking of those nations which are drawn into this great politico-religious-economic combine, John stated, “These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast” (Rev. 17:13).
But from where does this beastly Eurofederation, destined to shortly dominate the globe, gain its power? It is very clearly revealed in John’s great apocalyptic vision: “the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority” (Rev. 13:2).
In the months ahead, the fractious nature of this final resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire will become increasingly evident. Great strains will be felt within the EU as it struggles to float its euro currency and prepares to absorb up to 13 more member nations. Watch for socio-economic disruption in Europe as its feet of clay appear (Dan. 2:41-43). Then watch for a powerful leader to rise up through flatteries (Dan. 11:21) to take on the overall leadership of the EU and ultimately steer it on a course of deathly confrontation with the Anglo-American peoples.