Another Anti-U.S. Alliance Is Born

Latin American and Caribbean nations vote to keep the U.S. out of their affairs.
From the April 2010 Trumpet Print Edition

The writing has been on the wall ever since certain populist leaders gained the upper hand in Latino politics.

Long distracted by events in Europe, the Middle East and the Far East, America has ignored the nations that press against its own back door. Now they are clubbing together to form their own regional alliance to replace the Organization of American States (oas). The oas has, to this point, operated as the principle alliance of the Americas, incorporating Canada and the United States. The new alliance is slated to deny Canada and the U.S. a forum at regional summits south of the border.

Washington’s reacted to the news with a ho-hum attitude of seeming disinterest. Such a response to current developments in this strategic southern Atlantic/Pacific region will prove disastrous.

Integrating

As if to carry more force behind this Latin slap across America’s face, it was the leader of America’s closest neighbor, Mexico—source of its largest intake of migrant labor and thus of the flight of billions of dollars to destinations south of the border—to deliver the blow.

On February 23, at the conclusion of a two-day summit in Cancun, Mexican President Felipe Calderon announced to participants from 32 Latin American and the Caribbean nations that this new bloc “must as a priority push for regional integration … and promote the regional agenda in global meetings.” Mexico and Brazil are the driving forces behind the new bloc. The name and structure of the new organization will be determined at a summit in Caracas, Venezuela, next year.

In an early sign of strengthening anti-Anglo-Saxon orientation in the region, this Latin bloc threw its weight behind Argentina’s renewed calls for Britain to hand over the Falkland Islands to that southern Latino nation.

In an early opinion on the new organization, China, already entrenched in the region, said the development could help Beijing increase its cooperation with Caribbean and Latin American countries. China Daily reported that “Trade between China and Latin America reached $111.461 billion in the first three quarters of 2008, with China’s direct non-financial investment in the region involving trade, manufacturing, gas and oil exploration amounting to $960 million at the end of June in 2008” (February 22).

Yet observers are cautious as to the new bloc’s prospects for success given the disunity that presently divides more conservative leaders in countries such as Colombia, Chile and Peru from the leftists leading Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba. Brazil’s President Lula da Silva is quite often the balancing factor in any political feuds between these factions.

Despite the show of bravado in seeking to distance the region from Anglo-Saxon influence, Latin America has no real history of intra-regional cohesion. It is not unlike the unwieldy and fractious European Union in this respect. Yet both these regions have one overarching potentially binding force in common that could, amid crisis, rapidly unify their respective masses: Roman Catholicism.

What Will Bind Latin America Together?

International relations guru Hans J. Morgenthau famously declared that true power is the control over the mind. Few pundits in these post-Cold War days appreciate the power of ideology, once unleashed, to control the masses. Too many commentators raised in post-Cold War secularism consider ideology in international relations as passé.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It is ideological extremism that drives hatred of the Jew and Anglo-Saxon in the minds of Islamist terrorists and that fuels Islamic expansionism. It is the ideology of Rome that—though it has seemingly lain dormant for decades—is destined to spark a roaring flame of zealously militant passion in the time of great crisis that this world, caught in the vortex of financial collapse, is hurtling daily toward.

Bible prophecy declares it will be Rome’s religion that finally binds the unwieldy European Union together to give it the political unity it needs in order to lead globally in the near future. The EU will wield that power over a very Catholic Latin America.

It will be Rome’s religious ideology that exerts the power over the minds of the public as it evangelizes anew all traditionally Catholic nations, drawing them into a global economic, financial and military empire. This control is destined to prevail, believe it or not, over and above any influence that other world powers like China may seek to exert in Latin America and the Caribbean. The effort to establish a regional Latin American and Caribbean alliance, excluding the U.S. and Canada, is moving the nations of that region in that direction.

Herbert Armstrong prophesied that this—not yet fully evident to the public, yet rapidly developing—final resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire would ultimately transport people from North America to South America to a condition of servitude in its workforce. Referring to prophecies of this German-led empire destroying the United States, Mr. Armstrong wrote in an Aug. 14, 1978, letter, “A third of our populations shall die from disease epidemics caused by famine, and another third shall be killed by military action, and the remaining third scattered—as slaves to Europe, and probably some to South America (Ezekiel 5:12).”

Sound unrealistic? Not if you know the astoundingly accurate prophecies for these times in your Bible.

Request a free copy of our revised and expanded booklet He Was Right to prove this developing reality in greater detail.

WorldWatch

From the March 2010 Trumpet Print Edition

Europe

On Dec. 1, 2009, the Lisbon Treaty officially came into force, forever altering Europe. The first EU president is Belgium’s center right Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy. Britain’s Europe Minister Chris Bryant stated that Van Rompuy has “a more federalist agenda than other prime ministers in Europe.”

Economists are worried Greece may be the first EU nation to default on its debt. “We could see our first EU-15 sovereign default since Germany had it in 1948,” warned Willem Buiter, a former Bank of England policy maker, on December 9. Greece’s debt is 110 percent of its annual economic output. If Greece falls, all eurozone countries could suffer. These concerns have led the European Commission to renew its attempt to audit member nations. The Commission has tried to seize this authority before, but EU nations blocked it to protect their own independence. Now that view is changing as more politicians believe the EU needs the muscle to prevent member states from descending into the same situation as Greece.

The Vatican is preparing to rid Europe of secularism by replacing liberal Catholic figures with conservative ones. Known as “the Belgian Ratzinger” because of his conservative views, André-Mutien Léonard was appointed archbishop of Brussels on January 18. Many in Belgium fear he will be more involved in Belgian politics than his more liberal predecessor. Catholic newspaper editor Bert Claerhout said that the choice of Léonard was “clearly conscious choice for a totally different style and approach: for more radical decisiveness rather than quiet diplomacy, for more confrontation with the secular society instead of dialogue …” (KERK&Leven, January 18).

Europe will fall to Islam unless its inhabitants embrace Catholicism, said the outgoing archbishop of Prague, Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, in an interview published January 6.

Several recent developments show the governments and people of Europe becoming more right-wing and anti-immigrant. The Swiss public voted on November 29 to ban the construction of new minarets in their country. A parliamentary committee in France recommended on January 26 that the country ban women from wearing a full veil in public buildings, including schools and hospitals. Over 1,000 African immigrants were evacuated from the southern Italian town of Rosarno on January 9 after three days of clashes that left 53 people injured. An antigovernment newspaper called the removal of the immigrants “ethnic cleansing.”

In Germany, politically and racially motivated crimes by the far right increased to a record high of over 20,000 in 2008, according to figures released by the Federal Criminal Police Office (bka) December 17. “There’s a real danger to people’s lives because far-right attacks tend to be very spontaneous, brutal and violent,” said bka president Jörg Ziercke.

An application containing over 100 speeches by the fascist dictator Benito Mussolini became the number-two download application on the Italian version of iTunes following its release January 21—clearly showing the dictator’s popularity among a younger, Internet-savvy demographic.

The European Union’s Fundamental Rights Agency published a report on December 9, based on a survey of 23,500 people, stating that many minorities in the EU suffer regularly from racial discrimination. All these developments indicate that right-wing extremism is surging into mainstream Europe.

On January 12, two of Germany’s top military manufacturers—Rheinmetall and man Group—announced their intention to merge their military vehicle production. The resulting combine will produce a new national champion and leading supplier for wheeled military vehicles in Europe. According to MarketWatch columnist David Marsh, the German government “has been providing behind-the-scenes assistance to make sure industry goes in the right direction” (January 18). The new combine “meets the long-held German desire to build industrial companies with world scale in the defense field,” he said. Germany’s corporate revival is just the precursor to a much larger, non-peaceable event.

Mideast

Relations between crucial allies Israel and turkey deteriorated in January. Turkey accused Israel of humiliating its ambassador after he was summoned by the Israeli deputy foreign minister. The move, initiated by Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, followed the airing of Turkish television dramas demonizing Israeli soldiers

as murderers of Palestinian children and depicting Israeli diplomats as child abductors.

Israel’s attempt at tough diplomacy, however, backfired; Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon was forced to back down and give a full apology. It was a dramatic display of the crushing limits of Israel’s “toughness.”

Eight people were killed December 27 at anti-regime demonstrations in Iran during the Shiite ritual of Ashura. These were the largest clashes since the protests immediately following the Iranian elections in June. In an attempt to quell the unrest, Iranian authorities arrested several aides to the country’s top two opposition leaders.

Iran has been making headway in securing political influence in Iraq ahead of March 7 parliamentary elections. In January, the head of an obscure Iraqi commission banned more than 500 Sunni candidates from running in the election, allegedly because of their ties to Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party. While an appeals panel in February decided to lift the ban, any successful candidates will not be able to assume office until a final ruling is made. Also in January, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s State of Law coalition announced it will ally with the Iraqi National Coalition (inc), which was formed last August by Iran’s allies in Baghdad in order to cement Iranian political influence in Iraq. Maliki had refused to join the inc when it was first formed. In December, Iranian troops occupied an Iraqi oil well in what appeared to be an attempt by Tehran to put pressure on Maliki to align with the inc. It seems Maliki has caved to Iran. The announcement that his State of the Law will ally with the inc after the elections came shortly after Iran’s foreign minister visited Iraq and met with Maliki and Iraq’s highest-ranking Shiite cleric, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

The shaky political situation in Iraq is contributing to an upsurge in violence that could complicate U.S. withdrawal efforts. In December, five car bombs killed more than 100 people and injured hundreds more in Baghdad.

Iran and Egypt have bolstered ties in their first round of high-level talks since 1979. On December 20, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak received a two-hour visit from Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani. Immediately afterward, Mubarak, who rarely travels because of his failing health, flew to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates to discuss Arab-Iranian relations. Cairo’s efforts to coexist with a nuclear Iran indicate a substantial loss of American influence within Egypt and the region at large. Based on Bible prophecy, Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry has said for over 15 years that Iran would ally itself with Egypt.

Iran’s Mehr news agency reported January 16 that the foreign ministers of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan signed an agreement at a summit in Kabul banning the use of each other’s country to harm each other. The foreign ministers also voiced support for a regional solution for Afghanistan.

The Iranian Navy has deployed commandos and warships to the Gulf of Aden, Iran’s naval chief said November 14. In addition to protecting Iranian cargo ships and oil tankers from Somali pirates, a primary reason for the dispatch appears to be to protect Iran’s weapons supply lines to Houthi rebels in Yemen. The Shiite rebels, supported by Iran, have been battling Yemeni and Saudi Arabian forces in the border area of the two countries for several months. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has also been sending Hezbollah fighters into Yemen to assist the Houthi insurgency. Iran, in effect, is fighting a proxy battle against Saudi Arabia. The split between Islamist Iran and more moderate Arab countries, prophesied in the Bible for the end time, is becoming more apparent.

Asia

China and Japan announced plans on November 27 to hold their first joint military exercises. They also agreed to future talks on joint training in disaster relief projects and humanitarian operations. A week earlier, during a visit to Japan by the Chinese foreign minister, Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama said, “I want to build win-win relationships based on a spirit of fraternity and expand them from between Japan and China to the Asian region and the world. Doing so, I believe, will lead to the building of an East Asian community.”

Still, Hatoyama is urging China to increase the openness of the Communist giant’s ballooning military spending. For the last two years, China has announced defense budget increases of more than 17 percent. Hatoyama’s concerns suggest that, beyond the substantial military buildup that China makes known, additional increases are happening behind the scenes. If Tokyo is concerned, the West should really be worried.

China successfully tested its first land-based missile defense system on January 11 with the goal, in part, of deterring the U.S. from defending Taiwan. By destroying one in-flight missile with another, Beijing flexed its growing military muscle and showed its disapproval of the recent sale of 200 U.S. Patriot interceptor missiles to Taiwan.

A few days later, on January 16, Taiwan and China entered into a new phase of economic partnership when three policies went into effect, liberalizing financial ties across the Taiwan Strait. Clearly Beijing wants to increase its influence over Taiwan through economic dependence. It is committed to bringing Taiwan under its wing—though so far, U.S. support of Taiwan has deterred China from using force. Instead Chinese leaders are trying to win Taiwan over gradually through political and economic methods.

Several recent acts of defiance by China provide a glimpse into the mutual antipathy building between it and the West. At December’s Copenhagen climate conference, China resisted pressure to submit to international emissions monitoring and led other nations in refusing the proposals. Many European leaders laid the blame for the conference’s failure at China’s feet. On December 25, China issued an 11-year prison sentence to Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo for “subversion.” Balking at calls for leniency, Chinese courts imposed this unusually severe punishment in response to Mr. Liu’s authorship of articles calling for greater political freedoms. Then, on December 30, Chinese officials executed British national Akmal Shaikh, who was convicted for drug smuggling, despite repeated appeals for clemency by Western governments. The execution provoked a firestorm of anger in Britain and elsewhere.

On January 1, Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan entered a common customs union. The move cemented Russia’s control over the two former Soviet satellites. Beginning a customs union is a starting point for a revival of something similar to the ussr, with Russia once again at the head.

Russia emerged as the only clear-cut winner from the January 17 national election in Ukraine. Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich won with 35 percent of the vote, and Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko came second, with 25 percent, with a runoff election being held February 7. Stratfor pointed out that “Whichever of these candidates wins, Ukraine will return to the Russian fold …” (January 15).

Latin America/Africa

Russia plans to construct factories in Venezuela to produce ak-103 assault rifles and cartridges. When operational, the proposed facilities will employ over 1,500 people. Venezuela has spent more than $4 billion on Russian weapons in recent years. Critics say Caracas is fueling a Latin American arms race. An emboldened Russia has been fomenting anti-Americanism throughout the Latin American region for several years now.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad enjoyed a warm welcome in Brazil on November 23. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said the world needed to engage Iran, that Iran had the right to develop nuclear power, and that the two nations were renewing “century-long ties.” Ahmadinejad also visited Venezuela on the same trip. Before the trip, he called for an expansion of ties between the two countries, saying, “Collaboration between revolutionary nations like Iran and Venezuela is necessary during this period of time.” Watch for Latin American nations to align themselves with America’s enemies.

Militants attacked a bus transporting Togo’s soccer team African Cup of Nations on January 8, killing three people. The attack raised questions of whether similar attacks could take place in South Africa when it hosts the World Cup this summer. Sports teams are increasingly becoming a target for militants, and the World Cup could be a way for them to push at Western nations.

Zimbabwe’s Joint Operations Command has ordered members of the Zimbabwe National Army to deploy to farms, reportedly a push to remove the few hundred remaining white farmers in the country. This is the final blow in a story the Trumpet has followed for a decade: the Zimbabwe landgrabs. The Plain Truth warned of President Robert Mugabe’s intentions back in May 1980, saying that despite his vows not to interfere with private property, he “has not, down deep, disavowed his Marxist principles.” Now Mugabe’s government has fully applied the “Marxist principles” that the Plain Truth wrote about almost 30 years ago.

aids Free World, a humanitarian group in Zimbabwe, says Mugabe’s zanu-pf party systematically raped opposition supporters during the 2008 elections. Seventy women across 10 provinces reported the atrocities, describing gang rapes and beatings. Some were infected with hiv. Three hundred and eighty rapes were documented according to the 64-page report, surely only a fraction of the true number.

The EU agreed January 25 to help train Somali government forces in Uganda. Spain will lead the mission, which will involve around 100 troops, to help Somalia fight its Islamic insurgency. Watch Europe’s smaller incursions into Africa; they follow a greater plan to secure Africa’s resources.

Anglo-America

On December 10, news outlets reported that five Muslim men from the greater Washington, d.c., area were arrested in Pakistan and accused of trying to become terrorists. One of the men has family links to the Virginia mosque once attended by Nidal Hasan, the u.s. Army major who killed 14 people and shot 43 more at Fort Hood, Texas. The Virginia mosque is becoming notorious, since two of the September 11 hijackers also worshipped there. The arrests and the Fort Hood terrorist attack came as doubly bad news for the Army, which is trying to recruit more Arab-American troops with language and cultural skills and more understanding of theaters of combat like Iraq and Afghanistan.

On December 25, a Nigerian agent of al Qaeda ignited a bomb hidden in his undergarments and tried to explode a jetliner over Detroit. The device failed, but Umark Farouk Abdulmutallab’s attempted mass murder exposed what U.S. President Barack Obama called a “systemic failure” of the nation’s security system.

On December 30, the cia suffered its worst loss of life since 1983 when a Jordanian man the agency was trying to cultivate as an informant entered Forward Operating Base Chapman in southeastern Afghanistan and detonated a bomb vest in the facility’s gymnasium. Eight Americans (seven agents) were killed in the attack and six more were wounded. Total American war deaths for 2009 hit 304, up from 151 in 2008. Total war deaths, including coalition allies, were 502, up from 286 the previous year.

On January 27, President Obama delivered his first state of the union address. His speech reflected the fact that the U.S. is consumed by its own domestic affairs; only about one sixteenth of the speech addressed international affairs. In contrast to Chancellor Merkel’s bold statement about sanctions the previous day, President Obama barely mentioned Iran in his message. He cited only “growing consequences” for the regime in a passing reference. A January Pew Research study found that terrorism was a concern for the American public, but it ranked third on the priority list after the economy and jobs. Social security, education, Medicare and other domestic issues rounded out the top 13 categories of concern for Americans.

President Obama has also pushed to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law barring admitted homosexuals from joining the military. The Pentagon has begun implementing the directive, with the defense secretary and joint chiefs of staff chairman testifying on “progress” toward open homosexuality in the U.S. military. This came soon after it was published that the president had appointed the first ever transgender individual to a senior government post.

On January 15, it emerged that Britain’s armed forces would be slashed by a fifth in coming years. The number of trained personnel is set to drop from 175,000 to fewer than 142,000 by 2016. The Ministry of Defense budget is likely to fall by 11 percent in that time.

Meanwhile, the Royal Navy has been accommodating pirates. The Daily Mail reported January 16 that the Navy captured 66 suspects last year. None were taken into custody. Suspected Somali pirates were given fuel, food and water and released. In three cases, this happened even though hostages had been found on their boats.

The Rising Might of Germany

Last year’s federal election was a historic and prophetic turning point. You need to watch this nation now more than ever!
From the April 2010 Trumpet Print Edition

The Trumpet’s editor in chief made an electrifying statement in our May-June 2009 edition. “This is the biggest news event in the world right now,” he explained. “But it is almost totally overlooked by the world’s news media.” A year later, most of the world’s media are still overlooking this blockbuster story.

What is that story?

“European nations fear economic collapse,” that article said. “Now they are looking to Germany as their financial savior. But they are going to get a lot more than a financial savior!” (emphasis mine throughout).

Then came the statement that we would do well to remember: “You need to watch the September 27 election this year in Germany,” Gerald Flurry wrote. “It could very well produce the political leader of the Holy Roman Empire.”

Mr. Flurry reiterated this remarkable prediction in our October issue: “As I write this article, Germany is just weeks from electing a new chancellor. That election and events to unfold from it are going to bring devastating consequences to this world.”

What a whirlwind of activity we have witnessed since those words were penned!

After that election and the subsequent ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by all 27 EU member states, Mr. Flurry referred back to the statement he’d published six months before, writing in our February edition, “I believe we may have witnessed a fulfillment of that prediction.”

A close look at just what has happened in Germany and the European Union since that election powerfully validates that impression!

Political Crisis

If one word could describe the state of German politics since last September’s elections, it is crisis.

Almost immediately, reports emerged indicating a widening split in the ruling coalition between Chancellor Merkel’s cdu/csu bloc and Vice Chancellor Guido Westerwelle’s Federal Democrats. “Only two months after being sworn in, partners in Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition government are finding it increasingly difficult to paint over differences on issues ranging from tax cuts to anti-terror measures,” Deutsche Welle reported on January 3. The discord continues to be fueled by the very different political profiles of Germany’s chancellor, vice chancellor and defense minister.

Though she is still able to command headlines when she appears on a public platform, Angela Merkel has given the impression of being often absent from the scene when trouble boils over between the various conflicting personalities in her coalition. Some have viewed the chancellor as becoming weary of the fray. Whereas it seemed by pure chance she had the golden political touch during much of her first stint as Germany’s leader, things have seemed to be quite the reverse since this latest election. Though she still rates high with the public, polls consistently indicate that her defense minister, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, rates higher by far as Germany’s most popular politician. Meanwhile, Vice Chancellor Westerwelle’s popularity rating plunged to single digits in February.

Deep divisions in both economic and defense policy separate Westerwelle and Guttenberg, divisions Merkel has been unable to resolve. Mrs. Merkel’s efforts at political progress are weak at a time when Germany needs strong leadership; recession is biting and the people are getting restless. In fact, Germany’s coalition government could founder on either of two issues: economic and taxation reform, or defense-related matters.

Germany is ripening for political change.

All this as the whole of Europe is looking to Germany—creator of the idea of European union, its main driving force and Europe’s most powerful economy by far—for solutions to the accelerating fiscal crisis, the collapsing economies in Eastern and southern Europe, and the rising tide of social unrest this is causing. Yet Germany dithers. The state that leads the Union appears reluctant to take that lead.

The impression of general dither amid crisis is being emphasized by the fact that two nobodies were given the two top posts in the European Union hierarchy created under the Lisbon Treaty—President Herman Van Rompuy and Foreign Minister Catherine Ashton. The result has been mass confusion within the EU hierarchy.

To put it simply, both Germany and the European Union are suffering from a great leadership vacuum.

History indicates it is in times of crisis that Germany requires the closest scrutiny—for that is when it is most dangerous!

Model of Democracy?

Many German nationals will tell you they are a model democratic nation. They abhor war and just want to live peacefully, enjoying the good life that the strongest and richest economy in Europe has given them. Germans today generally appear to think they are the very model of peaceful democracy. Yet is that impression really correct?

The best analyses of the German character come from Germans themselves.

Gerhard Marx, who worked for many years as a supporter of Herbert Armstrong, said of his own people, “Even though Germany is presently based on a democratic government, it is wrong to look upon it as a real democracy …. [W]hat Germany has today is more of a bureaucratic democracy. And, of course, as long as the average German finds sufficient food on the table, has a reasonably secure job, is able to save some money for his annual vacation; as long as things are going well, he is in no hurry to throw off this form of democracy.

But come a time of crisis—and in German history there have been many—will democracy withstand the acid test?” (A Two-Thousand-Year Analysis of the German Character).

Many authors have analyzed the German national character. Some have described it like Proteus, the creature of mythology that could change shape at a moment’s notice. Twenty-five years ago, when it was clear that West Germany had long become the engine of a uniting Europe, journalist Luigi Barzini wrote, “It is therefore once again essential for everybody … to keep an eye across the Rhine and the Alps and the Elbe in order to figure out, as our fathers, grandfathers, the ancient Romans, and remote ancestors had to do, who the Germans are, who they think they are, what they are doing, and where they will go next, wittingly or unwittingly” (The Europeans).

Within seven years of Barzini writing those words, the political face of Germany had changed. It was no longer divided at the Berlin Wall. East Germany had come in from the cold. Within a short time, the debris of Communist rule was being cleared away in Potsdamer Platz in a newly united city of Berlin, which emerged as the busiest construction site in Europe. Structures reflecting a renewed German pride—the pride of a united German nation—began to rise out of the ground. Then, a decade after the wall came down, statues of Germany’s warrior heroes, having gathered dust in storage since Germany’s defeat in World War ii, began to be preened, polished and placed on pedestals in public places. German national pride was undergoing a revival.

Last November, Germany partied as it celebrated 20 years of national unity.

Is it not high time that we ask, once again, as Germany reflects renewed pride in its nationality standing head and shoulders above its compatriots in Europe, just who the Germans are today, who they think they are, what they are doing, and where they will go next?

Just What Is Germany Up To?

As Mr. Flurry mentioned in that May 2009 article, Germany has returned to a status where all Europe is now looking to it as its financial savior. Surely then, given that nation’s history when it wields such influence—and combined with the volatile nature of that nation in time of crisis such as the present—we ought to be asking just what the Germans are doing today.

The answer is, quite a lot.

The Germans are busy shoring up their capability as the greatest export nation in the world, despite China’s recent claim to have taken over that role.

They are busy bidding for the world’s top banking job, that of European Central Bank president.

They have worked within the shadows of the EU to establish a regulatory body to control the global economy, the Financial Stability Board.

They are calling the tune on just how the EU will deal with indebted EU member nations such as Greece, nations that are losing pace against the winds of accelerating economic crisis.

The Germans are also, quietly, without a lot of fuss, expanding and strengthening the deployment of their military forces around the world. And the Germans are becoming busy retooling their heavy industry to produce greater amounts of armaments, military machines, ships, submarines and aircraft to prepare for building up a combined European military force. They are steadily exhibiting a greater will to use that force than their appeasing Anglo-Saxon counterparts.

Most Anglo-Saxons are oblivious to all this. In fact, most are totally blind to the reality that what Germany is up to today poses the greatest of risks to international security.

Meanwhile, much publicity is given to the misguided pronouncements on Europe by “experts” across the Atlantic. The Obama administration actually says Europe’s leaders endanger peace with their pacifism. “In a withering attack on what Washington sees as European complacency in the face of new security threats,” the Guardian reported, “Robert Gates, the U.S. defense secretary, demanded root-and-branch reform of the transatlantic alliance, voiced exasperation with nato bureaucracy and said it was becoming increasingly difficult for the U.S. and Europe ‘to operate and fight together’” (February 24).

Just how real is this vision of a “pacifist Europe”? Dig below the surface of the journalese of the day and we find another story emerging.

Germany’s Power Within the EU

The Germans have a history of embracing authoritarian rule. As the German philosopher Hegel said, “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest” (Ralf Dahrendorf, Society and Democracy in Germany).

Look at how this tendency has manifested itself within today’s Europe. The Lisbon Treaty—which in reality is the constitution for a revived European empire—defines those powers that the EU state holds over its members. Greece is but an early example of a country being brought to book by the EU centralized state. It will not be the last. (Even so, Greece has exposed deep divisions within the EU camp as its members have considered how to deal with it. Germany itself has been split over how to treat the issue. This again reflects the inherent weakness of current EU and German leadership.)

The member nations of the German-created EU imperial state have handed over their individual national sovereignty to the EU institutions. Constitutionally, the EU now wields tremendous power over its member states—with one singular exception: Germany. On the eve of the full ratification by all member states of the EU constitution, the German Constitutional Court rushed through a judgment that recognizes German law as trumping EU law. Thus Germany stands alone as not only the most dominant member of the European Union, but also as the only one that retains the power of its own sovereignty. While ensuring the loss of the very definition of the nationality of all other EU members, reducing them to vassal states of the European empire, the German elites have been careful to protect their own nationhood.

Now Germany possesses a legal, political and economic power within Europe of an extent it never gained through past military aggression.

Meanwhile, those icons of past German heritage—the statues and memorials of pre-world war imperial glory brought back to the public gaze some years ago—remind the average German of an imperial national heritage. The nation possesses a latent national spirit that history proves only lacks at this moment the spark to light the fires of a revived nationalism.

Four Things That Stir German Nationalism

Kurt P. Tauber, in his analysis of the German national character called Beyond Eagle and Swastika, analyzed and recorded the potency of the energy suddenly released from within Germany by the appeal of National Socialism in the 1920s and ’30s. He also noted the latent nationalism bubbling under the surface in postwar Germany. In his conclusion, he mused, “We have analyzed the myriad difficulties and disappointments of postwar nationalism, but we strongly doubt that we have written its epitaph.”

What have been the main stimulants to the rise of German nationalism in the past? Four things: an ideology that appeals to the innate desires of German imperialism, the power of a charismatic personality, utilizing a compliant cabal of industrialists, and a powerful cadre of military officers to propel the nation to dominance in Europe.

In the 1930s, these stimulants were manifest through the ideology of National Socialism (Nazism), the personality of an Austrian by the name of Adolf Schicklegruber, the dynasties of German industrialists that produced his military machinery, and the powerful Prussian aristocratic military High Command that supported their führer’s imperial vision.

Today, Nazism and Hitler are the whipping boys of German politicians and commentators who squarely blame the horrors of German extremism in World War ii on both of them. This is a convenient way of absolving the German nation per se of any collective guilt.

Only two of those aforementioned stimulants to German nationalism are obviously extant today: those same dynasties of German industrialists (article, page 13), and a cadre of military officers modeled on the old German military High Command revived under the name Joint Operations Command.

That leaves us to wonder whether there exists a personality and a latent ideology that would have mass appeal to the German population such that it could unleash the dormant fires of German nationalism in a time of crisis as has been the habit of the German nation in the past.

We believe the answer to that is a clear and resounding YES!

Let us consider personality first.

Two Bavarians to Watch

The Trumpet has noted two Bavarians who have the potential to powerfully influence Germany in times of crisis such as it has now entered.

Edmund Stoiber, mentored by the powerful postwar Bavarian politician Franz Josef Strauss, was the political leader who appeared likeliest to replace Gerhard Schröder as chancellor in Germany’s 2002 federal election. But on the eve of the election, Schröder managed to swing the vote in his favor. Stoiber was narrowly defeated.

Then in 2005, it seemed Stoiber would gain the coveted foreign minister’s job and hence the vice chancellorship in Chancellor Merkel’s cabinet. But Merkel offered Stoiber the poisoned chalice of the economics portfolio. He declined and withdrew from the coalition—then became an eminent EU technocrat charged with slicing through the wasteful billions of euros of red tape in the EU bureaucracy.

Edmund Stoiber remains a powerful, if presently latent figure in German politics. He first garnered political strength from the years he spent as personal aide to Franz Josef Strauss. Then, as prime minister of Bavaria, he became renowned for running the most economically successful state in Germany. He is now in an interesting situation. Having presented his conclusions to the EU on methods to cut billions of euros of wastage out of the cumbersome and deeply corrupted EU bureaucracy, he is in a prime position to be invited to consider a senior advisory post in the German government.

Stoiber has proven himself in the field of economics at the state level in Germany. But the plum job he sought in Germany’s coalition government was the foreign policy portfolio. That is a ministerial post under great pressure for change as Vice Chancellor Westerwelle flounders. Stoiber, with his statesmanlike bearing, vast political experience and papal favor, would seem to be an ideal candidate for the foreign policy portfolio, if not a position as a chief adviser in this area.

Yet there is another Bavarian—mentored by Stoiber, even as Stoiber was previously by Strauss—who previously, though briefly, successfully filled the economics post in the Merkel government. He now heads up the defense portfolio in the Merkel coalition: Baron Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg.

This man’s meteoric rise within German politics came about as a direct result of last September’s elections. And the subsequent instability in the nation’s ruling coalition has only bolstered his political profile all the more! Thus we track his progress with growing interest in light of Mr. Flurry’s prediction regarding that election.

There is something almost dynastic about the Strauss-Stoiber-Guttenberg connection. Strauss penned the vision that all three hold of the future of Germany leading a united Europe in his visionary book The Grand Design.

In the conclusion to that book, Strauss admitted that Germany used the cloak of a postwar uniting Europe to hide behind while undergoing its revival as a national power. He wrote, “[I]t was going to be much easier for Germany to make a comeback as a member of an international family, as a member of a European Federation, than as a German Reich, a single national state. Therefore we should not insist too much on what good Europeans we are; we must understand that our European attitude was the only escape hatch we had, the only approach that made a comeback possible.”

Well, now Germany can play it both ways. It is a member—in fact the leading member—of a “European federation,” the EU, having cleverly also retained its status as “a single nation state,” the only nation to have done so within the entire 27-member union!

If we accept that Germany has two powerfully charismatic personalities that it can call upon in time of crisis to rally the nation, there is only one of the four previously mentioned elements that is lacking in the formula that has historically sparked the German people’s innate nationalistic fervor: an overarching ideology preached by a revered icon.

Enter yet a third Bavarian.

The Vatican Connection

Franz Josef Strauss, Edmund Stoiber and Baron zu Guttenberg all exhibit one thing in common: dedication to Roman Catholicism. Bavaria is the heartland of Rome’s religion in Germany. Coincidentally or otherwise, Bavaria’s capital, Munich, was also the birthplace of the National Socialist movement in German politics back in the 1920s and ’30s. It was in Munich that Hitler and Ludendorf initiated the famous Beer Hall Putsch in 1923.

Of all German states, Bavaria was the least denazified. It is said that from the mid-1940s through to the 1970s, Bavaria’s government agencies and professions retained many of the same personalities in office as during the Nazi era. As they reached retirement age by the 1970s, they handed over to a generation they had taught and trained. Thus the National Socialist spirit remained alive, though cleverly masked under the veil of “democracy.”

Amid that process there arose a third Bavarian who had lived through both those generations, a man now greatly revered in Germany: Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict xvi.

Bavarian by birth, Benedict xvi’s first visit back to his beloved Fatherland after he was elected pope was to the University of Regensburg in Bavaria where he had taught as a young priest. On that occasion, in a now infamous speech, he laid down the gauntlet to both the anti-church secularists and the entire Muslim community.

Over the five years of his papacy, Pope Benedict has proven himself the most articulate of modern popes, publishing a vast array of homilies, treatises and books. He is the archetypal conservative, right-wing and German to the core. He is backed by a strong rightist curia, the legacy of both his and his predecessor John Paul ii’s efforts to swing the church hierarchy away from its 20th-century liberal bent toward a more traditional “Holy Roman” orientation.

Benedict has a dogged determination to see his religion returned to its previous status as the force that binds the whole culture of Europe together. His vision is to see Europe, newly federalized under the Lisbon Treaty, return en masse to the religion that has bound imperial Europe together as the Holy Roman Empire in six previous resurrections since Justinian’s restoration. Benedict knows that his home nation is the only power on Earth that can bring that about. He is, after all, an avid student of history.

James Bryce, in his work titled The Holy Roman Empire, notes that it is recorded in the Speculum Saxonicum, the great North German law book written in a.d. 1240, that “The Empire is held [by] God alone …. Emperor and pope are supreme each in what has been entrusted to him: the pope in what concerns the soul; the emperor in all that belongs to the body and the knighthood.” This was at the time of Frederick ii, imperial ruler of the Holy Roman Empire.

The German Eike von Repgow, contemporary of Frederick ii, stated in his treatise The Saxon Mirror that “God has successfully created four empires and the present one is the continuation of the old Roman Empire. Caesar had conquered Germany, and the [German] Franks had then inherited the empire from the Romans” (Frederick Hertz, The Development of the German Public Mind). The statement “God has successfully created four empires” is a reference to the four empires prophesied in Daniel 2:36-40, with the fourth kingdom being the iron kingdom that was to crush all others.

Of the later Habsburg dynasty, historian A.J.P. Taylor noted that the Holy Roman Empire of the time was “In the eyes of its rulers … a supranational organization, ordained by God, and ruled over by God’s nominee” (The Habsburg Monarchy).

Otto von Habsburg, of that same dynasty, referred to the symbol that Europe possesses which “belongs to all nations equally. This is the crown of the Holy Roman Empire, which embodies the tradition of Charlemagne …. [T]he crown represents not merely the sovereignty of the monarch, but also the ties between authority and the people” (The Social Order of Tomorrow). That crown represents the only power that has succeeded in binding Europe together in unity throughout history as a union of church and state: the Church of Rome and the German sovereign state! The crown of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation!

The EU has its ideology, even more potent than the now discredited National Socialism. It is a religion that has, over many centuries in the past, enlivened the whole nation with a religious zeal to crusade for the dominance of the Holy Reich over the whole world. It’s a religion that inspired German soldiers with a crusading zeal in battle with the words “Gott mit uns”God with us—embedded in their belt buckles as they fought in the trenches and in the desert in World War i.

Gearing for Battle

The Balkans provided the test case for public acceptance of the German military deploying in combat outside of the nation’s borders when the Luftwaffe was drafted over Kosovo in 1999. Ten years later, the Bundeswehr operates in over a dozen countries around the world.

Even the Greens in Germany endorsed the Luftwaffe mission in the Balkans. Now, Afghanistan is providing the pressure point for German elites to begin conditioning the public’s mind to accept an even wider and a stronger role for Germany in theaters of active or potential combat.

Since taking office last October after that pivotal election, Defense Minister Guttenberg has overseen certain changes in the government’s stand on Germany’s military force. He is spearheading changes to the Bundeswehr’s rules of engagement in Afghanistan. Even months before that, Guttenberg had made it known that the public must be enticed to change its collective negative view of German troop deployment in Afghanistan so as to demonstrate public support of the nation’s troops involved in active combat roles.

Guttenberg is determined to change the Bundeswehr’s image into that of a legitimate combat force with broad public acceptance. At the February Munich Security Conference, he laid his cards on the table. He “spoke about the need to take action. What was important, the minister pointed out, was that progress be made regarding the long-overdue reforms of the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (nato). ‘We talk too much and act too little,’” he said (Munich Security Conference, February 6).

This was an effort to apply pressure to nato to revamp its charter by the end of the year, implicitly integrating German imperial goals with nato objectives. Guttenberg is particularly interested in eliminating overlap between the developing imperial European military force and nato. Ultimately, German military elites will be eyeing either a merger with, or takeover of, the nuclear-armed nato. This vision is helped by the fact that the majority of nato members are overwhelmingly EU member nations. The EU is empowered under the Lisbon Treaty to develop a continental military force. That this force will have nuclear potential is quietly taken as a given by certain German military and political elites.

Germany has come a long way since the Luftwaffe was the first Bundeswehr force to return to active combat outside of the nation’s borders in the skies over Kosovo in 1999. Each step—from bombing runs over Kosovo to combat on the ground in Afghanistan; from arresting pirates in the Gulf to deployment in Sudan, Libya and Gabon, or securing the Mediterranean Sea and engaging in naval exercises off the coast of South Africa; from tank training in Canada and Luftwaffe training in the U.S.—is helping to fine-tune the Bundeswehr and make the public comfortable with its expeditionary roles.

It is important now to watch for the new nato charter, which should be tabled by the end of this year. An appeasing Washington is being juggled out of the European sphere of influence. Europe’s future security won’t depend on an alliance with the U.S. Rather, it will be a forthcoming alliance between a German-led European Union and—believe it or not—America’s nemesis, Russia.

Where Is It All Leading?

The outcome of Germany’s return to global power status is bound to amaze many in the near future. Mr. Flurry’s prediction of “devastating consequences” to emerge from the last election and events unfolding from it was based on sure biblical prophecies describing Germany’s role in events just ahead of us. We have since witnessed an unmistakable ripening of the conditions—in several specific areas—that will lead directly to the fulfillment of those prophecies.

Amid the present crisis and confusion, watch Germany closely. The German mind delights in creating order out of confusion. The trouble is that in the past it has often been guilty of creating the chaos out of which it then finds opportunity to impose its own solution. The Balkan wars of the 1990s were triggered by Germany unilaterally—speedily supported by the Vatican—recognizing Croatia and Slovenia as separate nation-states to the Yugoslav federation. The intent was to solve the resulting crisis by imposing German-led rule over the Balkan Peninsula. This plan is now well advanced.

The classic crisis of all that German and Vatican elites would dearly love to grab on to and then impose their own solution on is the Middle East peace process. That is what Bible prophecy forecasts will actually happen. The result will be the surrounding of Jerusalem by an international “peacekeeping” force, which will prepare the way for the pope to move his headquarters to the city that Rome has lusted to possess ever since the failure of its last crusade.

But the good news is, it doesn’t end there.

The surrounding of Jerusalem by armies is the most potent sign of the imminence of intervention by a military power of incredible force to impose the greatest era of peace on this Earth that can ever be imagined (Luke 21:20).

Eike von Repgow understood that the biblically prophesied fourth kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar’s great vision was the Teutonic iron empire, which later became known the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. But did he foresee the fifth kingdom? In Daniel 2:44 we read: “And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms and it shall stand forever.”

Leaders of the German people have sought throughout history, in association with the Vatican, to set up a thousand-year Reich. It has always failed, despite six determined efforts to resurrect it. The seventh and final effort to resurrect that old Holy Roman Empire—the Fourth Reich—became an operating entity, despite its apparent sputtering start, on Jan. 1, 2010. Though it is destined to rain terrible destruction on old Persia and the Anglo-Saxon nations in particular, it will be the shortest-lived resurrection of that old empire in history.

Believe it or not, an actual thousand-year rule of a great imperial government is about to consume all the nations on Earth and take them under its wing. This government will teach all nations how to finally live in peace and harmony with each other. That is the very same kingdom that a small and loyal group was set up by its King to publicize way back in a.d. 31. This they did for 40 years until forced to disperse and flee persecution and martyrdom under the old iron rule of Rome.

Just over 80 years ago, a man named Herbert Armstrong was ordained by God to begin publicizing that same message. During the latter half of the 20th century, he fulfilled Christ’s prophecy of Matthew 24:14, reaching all nations on Earth. Mr. Armstrong even took that message personally to many world leaders at the time.

Then, just as prophesied in your Bible, powerful forces destroyed that organized work.

But God had prophesied that the group He set up to publicize the message of His coming Kingdom would never die out.

And it never did. It exists today, still small, yet powerful in its potential to prophesy that same message of the coming of the Kingdom of God one final time around this globe. You hold that message in your hands: a message prophesying the great clash of civilizations that is the forerunner to the return of the Savior of mankind to enforce global peace under His government over the whole Earth! That is a message no man can shut down.

It is that reign—that kingdom—which needs our attention today, even as we see Germany rising one more time to global prominence to lead that final resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire for its brief yet powerful moment in history immediately before the establishment of the fifth kingdom of Daniel’s prophecy!

To find out more about the final resurrection of that fourth kingdom, request our free booklets Germany and the Holy Roman Empire and The Rising Beast.

To really understand the prophesied all-powerful fifth kingdom and what to do about preparing for its coming, request our booklet The Wonderful World Tomorrow—What It Will Be Like. It explains in detail the same message of hope that the ruler of that coming kingdom personally broadcast when He trod this Earth 2,000 years ago. It’s a message that prophesies of two nations that have been the traditional enemies of Israel from ancient times actually reconciling and living in harmony as an example to all peoples. That kind of peace on Earth is only possible under the direct rule of the Creator of humankind Himself!

“In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrian shall come into Egypt, and the Egyptian into Assyria, and the Egyptians shall serve with the Assyrians. In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land: Whom the Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, blessed be Egypt, my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance” (Isaiah 20:23-25).

Is There Hope in an Earthquake?

Yes, there is—more than you could ever imagine.
From the March 2010 Trumpet Print Edition

Intense tragedy often comes with a beautiful yet fleeting byproduct: humility. In the days after the earthquake, hundreds of thousands of blood-spattered Haitians were hurt, dazed and vulnerable.

While God took no pleasure in witnessing the earthquake and its aftermath, He loves the state of mind that such disaster often produces. In Isaiah 66:2, God says, “[T]o this man will I look, even to him that is poor [needy, humble] and of a contrite spirit ….” Surely the tragedy in Haiti created a comparatively humble attitude and a “contrite spirit” in many Haitians, and even some onlookers.

Overwhelming crises have a tendency to remind us of how small, how vulnerable, how insignificant we truly are. Sadly, such meekness is often short-lived. Nevertheless, God Himself looks to the person with such an attitude. He considers true humility gained through catastrophe a primer for greater understanding.

And He gives that understanding in abundance. Through the pages of the Bible, God explains in detail why such catastrophes happen. The causes are spelled out from Genesis through Revelation for those with humble and open minds (article, page 6).

For some perspective, consider the Haiti quake in the context of a prophecy in Matthew 24.

The Second Coming of Jesus Christ is discussed in both the Old and New Testaments. In Matthew 24, Christ’s disciples asked what specific signs would precede His Second Coming. “And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars … For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in [different] places” (verses 6-7). Notice, in addition to the “wars and rumors of wars”—surely an apt description of the current state of international relations—Jesus told His disciples that His return would be preceded by an uptick in natural disasters.

In fact, Christ stated specifically that before His return there would be earthquakes in different places!

Notice also, Jesus told His disciples that famine—a shortage of food and water—and then pestilences, or disease epidemics, would accompany these natural disasters.

Can you begin to see the hope in the tragic earthquake in Haiti? This earthquake points to this prophecy from nearly 2,000 years ago, and is a sign that Jesus Christ is about to return!

Perhaps that sounds preposterous—a callous attempt to spiritualize away the pain and anguish suffered by millions. Sadly, many people, including “Christians,” will discard Christ’s warning in Matthew 24. Many, especially the scholarly, will mock.

But that is exactly what Jesus Himself prophesied. When we understand and believe the Bible, natural disasters like we witnessed in Haiti take on added significance. While our eyes well and our hearts ache for the victims of earthquakes, the tragedy stirs a renewed hope and confidence in the Second Coming.

Remember the instruction from Christ’s own mouth: Natural disasters are a sign that this present evil world is about to end. In Haiti’s rubble lies invigorating hope. Emotionally, the Haiti earthquake is gut wrenching. Prophetically, it’s a sign that the most exciting event ever to occur in the age of man is imminent! Jesus Christ is about to return!

America’s Next Iraq

From the March 2010 Trumpet Print Edition

The timing of the Haiti tragedy was of particular interest to us at the Trumpet because of its proximity to an anniversary we often draw attention to.

In August 1990, after Saddam Hussein invaded the little nation of Kuwait, the United States began mobilizing its military across the Middle East. On Jan. 12, 1991, the U.S. Congress authorized the use of military force against Iraq to drive it out of Kuwait. Four days later, on January 16, Operation Desert Storm officially began.

A year earlier, we had asked our readers if “some dramatic event in the world” might happen Jan. 16, 1991, because that happened to be the anniversary of Herbert W. Armstrong’s death.

Soon after the Gulf War started, our editor in chief, Gerald Flurry, highlighted the repercussions the war would have on the Middle East and the United States. “The truth is we won a battle in Kuwait,” he wrote in May 1991. “[But] we did not win a war. The job was left unfinished.”

To this day, Iraq hangs as a millstone around the neck of the United States. In fact, removing Saddam Hussein from power in 2003 only cleared the way for Iran to emerge as the king of the entire region, which fulfills another Bible prophecy we have highlighted for over 15 years.

What about the timing of the Haiti quake? In the Trumpet’s last issue, we again noted the significance of January 16. Four days before that date, Haiti was ravaged in the earthquake. On January 14, President Obama pledged $100 million to support the relief effort. The next day, the USS Carl Vinson reached Haiti, and the president promised that much more help was on the way.

On Saturday, January 16, Hillary Clinton became the first White House cabinet member to arrive on the scene. That same day, in Washington, President Obama met with former presidents Clinton and Bush to discuss how to enlist the support of the American people in rebuilding Haiti.

After their meeting, President Obama announced that he was “moving forward with one of the largest relief efforts” in U.S. history. It will be a long-term effort, he said, that will not be measured in days or weeks, but in months and even years.

Will this nation-building endeavor, which effectively began on Jan. 16, 2010, become another millstone that ends up sinking America?

The Greek Crisis Was Planned!

As an EU member state implodes, look who stands to benefit.
From the April 2010 Trumpet Print Edition

Europe is at a crossroads!

Greece is on the verge of collapse. This Mediterranean nation cannot pay its debts without massive restructuring.

Both French and German ministers have announced that they will not bail out their Club Med neighbor. Instead, EU monetary authorities are pushing Greece to massively slash its budget. But if Greece were to implement the severe spending cuts needed to get its deficit under control, it could easily plunge into an even deeper recession. Also, loss of government handouts has already created mass strikes and social unrest—a trend certain to get worse as the cuts become more steep.

Yet if Germany and France allow Greece to continue defying its monetary agreements, there will be little to stop other deeply indebted countries like Spain, Portugal and Ireland from also reneging on their monetary commitments. The credibility of the euro would be thrown into doubt.

All eyes are on Europe. Can the euro survive if Greece leaves or is kicked out of the monetary union? If a bailout comes, who will fund it, and at what cost?

There are no good choices. All of them will be very costly. Greece’s massive debt problems threaten the very viability of the European Union.

The disparate nations of Europe are desperately seeking a savior.

The truly remarkable thing is, this crisis was no accident. Not only was it eminently foreseeable long ago, but evidence suggests that it was deliberately planned. And its outcome promises to unfold just as its authors hoped.

What is happening in the European superstate is a mystery to most of the world. Yet while stock markets gyrate and bond investors panic, Trumpet readers know the ultimate result.

“The crisis in Greece is a forerunner of a whole rash of similar crises set to soon break out across Europe,” editor in chief Gerald Flurry wrote in the February 2009 Trumpet. “They will provide the catalyst for the EU’s leading nation,Germany, to rise to the fore with solutions of its own making.”

For more than a decade, the Trumpet has warned about the rotten heart of Europe. We have specifically noted the flawed currency exchange rate mechanism and how the structure of the EU was a Trojan horse for stealthy German ambitions.

“Who will get control of this great superstate?” asked Mr. Flurry in June 2000. The battle comes down to two nations—France and Germany, he said. But it will be the nation that controls the money—Germany—that will ultimately reign supreme.

Today, events unfolding in Europe are proving that forecast uncannily accurate.

Created to Fail?

From the beginning, the euro was destined—maybe even designed—to fail. At least that is the conclusion of some analysts.

Back in 1992, the power elites in Europe enticed the hapless member nations of the EU at that time into signing up to the Maastricht Treaty on European Union. The treaty contained a vital clause creating the foundation for an economic and monetary union—emu. This has become synonymous with the subsequent European Monetary Union, also called the emu.

The emu was glued together by a single currency. The euro was introduced in 1999, with notes and coins entering circulation in 2002. To date 16 EU member nations have joined the emu, sacrificing their individual national sovereign means of exchange—and in the process setting themselves on a course that would lead to the total sacrifice of their national sovereignty on the altar of the imperialist project of the European Union.

After the EU single currency system was implemented, certain voices predicted the failure of the euro. A handful theorized that the euro may well even have been deliberately created to fail by certain German elites. The theory was that Germany would bide its time and allow the unworkable monetary union to prevail till it reached a point of collapse and then, having wrested control of the European Central Bank (ecb) out of any competitor’s hands (read France, in particular), move in quickly and take direct control of emu administration. Germany could then ensure that a preferred core of EU member nations would receive ecb favor, with the disfavored reduced to vassal status or worse.

Why, if the theory is correct, would Germany deliberately create an economic and monetary union that was destined, from all the tests applied by the clearest thinking observers at the time, to fail?

Unification Through Stealth

When the eurozone’s founders began working toward pan-European unity, they knew it would be virtually impossible to unite the Continent. Jean Monnet, one of the forefathers of the European Union, was well aware of the difficulty of convincing voters to willingly relinquish their national sovereignty. Monnet felt that the only way to achieve unification, without war, was through stealth. The people must not know that sovereignty has been surrendered until it is gone.

English conservative and author Adrian Hilton described Monnet’s intentions for Europe this way: “Europe’s nations should be guided towards a superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation” (The Principality and Power of Europe; emphasis ours throughout).

As Monnet said on April 30, 1952, “The fusion [of economic functions] would compel nations to fuse their sovereignty into that of a single European state.”

Peter Thorneycroft, former chancellor of the Exchequer of the United Kingdom and Europhile, described the Monnet unification method in a 1957 Foreign Affairs article: “The idea of a united Europe is not new. It has exercised the minds of the soldiers and sometimes of the statesmen of Europe for many centuries. … Torn by war and conquest, weakened by internecine strife, Europeans have yet found the time and the capacity to leave an incomparable legacy ….

“Yet men do not live easily within the same institutional arrangements. National patriotisms are strong ….”

In an earlier booklet, Design for Europe (1947), Thorneycroft wrote: “No government dependent upon a democratic vote could possibly agree in advance to the sacrifice which any adequate plan must involve. The people must be led slowly and unconsciously into the abandonment of their traditional economic defenses, not asked, in advance ….”

Economic integration, once initiated, would become self-sustaining, it was hoped. Monnet theorized that economic interdependence would drive integration until eventually, Europe would end up with de facto political centralization and unification.

Today, Europe may be at a tipping point where economic integration finally meets political unification.

“The European experiment with a trans-sovereign currency is facing its first acid test,” wrote Euro Pacific Capital’s John Browne. “In essence, the euro was created as a lever to encourage a complete European political union rather than as a currency representing … an already unified economy” (February 10).

According to Browne, who is a former British member of Parliament and close associate of then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, the euro has largely succeeded in creating the will for a federal Europe among the political classes even though European citizens have voted again and again to maintain their individual country’s sovereignty.

“Whoever controls the currency controls the government,” said economics guru Maynard Keynes. To him, that was not just a law of economics; it was a law that underwrote power politics.

Anticipated Crisis

When the euro was created, a chain of events was set in motion. For nations like Greece, a future debt crisis was almost inevitable.

By joining the eurozone, Greece traded its inflation-prone drachma for the stability of the euro. It also gained the economic borrowing clout of a superstar, even though it had the economy of a small supporting actor.

Initially, these two advantages vastly improved the standard of living for the people of Greece. They allowed corporations, individuals and government to borrow money at the low rates typical within large developed countries like Germany. The new low interest rates were more than Greece could resist. All levels of society binged on seemingly cheap money. The government, for its part, embraced a massive welfare state, also made possible by easily obtained low-interest loans.

But as lenders to Greece are beginning to remember, there was a good reason Greece paid far higher interest rates to borrow money when it was not a member of the Union. Greece has a history of borrowing too much. According to analyst John Mauldin, Greece has been in default in one way or another for 105 out of the past 200 years.

Even as luxury swiftly came to Greece, so now have the first whiffs of poverty.

With a projected budget deficit of 12.7 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, Greece is far out of compliance with the eurozone’s mandated 3 percent maximum. With the world in recession, investors are wondering how Greece will pay its bills.

Typically when a country takes on too much debt, it contracts Argentine-disease. Known also as “quantitative easing,” countries devalue their currency by turning on the money printing presses and simply creating the currency to pay the bills. This of course upsets creditors, but at least the bills get paid. The economy also gets a short-term kick-start because a devalued currency makes exported goods less expensive; thus foreigners buy more domestic products.

Greece, however, does not have this option. Since it is locked into the euro, it does not control the printing presses. Germany does.

Analysts worry that Greece may be reaching the point where a debt spiral could bankrupt the government. What will Europe do?

It’s true that the Greece crisis will necessitate some difficult and costly decisions. But in some respects, as far as the European political class is concerned, it matters not whether Greece stays or goes. Greece is a peripheral country, immaterial to the desire for a federalist Europe. What is material is that the current crisis be exploited to its maximum—and that means that it be used to foster further integration of core Europe.

Will the Eurozone Be Pared Down?

The Telegraph’s Ambrose Evans-Pritchard wrote on January 31 that the solution to the crisis could involve a paring down of the eurozone. He noted the possibility of a bloc of nations centered on Germany leaving the eurozone and creating a new currency: the Deutsch mark 2. The rest of the eurozone countries would then be free to devalue the euro (turn on the printing presses) to pay down debts.

Although Evans-Pritchard noted that Germany is currently happy with its advantageous position within the euro, he also said there would be certain benefits to a newly created German-led bloc.

Events in Greece bear close watching, especially in light of the advent of the seventh revival of the Holy Roman Empire in Europe, which officially began on January 1 with the onset of the Lisbon Treaty.

The first major reason to watch this issue is that the Bible indicates that this final Roman imperial resurrection will be composed of 10 nations or groups of nations (as indicated in Daniel 2). Whether or not the current 27 EU nations get regrouped into new political regions remains to be seen, but the economic crisis in Greece may well provoke a vast restructuring or paring down of the European Union.

Far from heralding the end of the European unification project, the current crisis in Greece may actually signal a new beginning.

Forcing the Pace of Political Union

Back when the euro was first created, the European Commission’s top economists warned politicians that the new currency might not survive a serious crisis. They knew that because the eurozone had “no EU treasury or debt union to back it up” and a “one-size-fits-all regime of interest rates [that] caters badly to the different needs of Club Med and the German bloc,” the day would come that economic crisis would threaten the EU (Telegraph, Oct. 1, 2008).

The fathers of the euro did not dispute this. They knew European economic union was risky, but they saw it as an acceptable risk—even desirable—as a last-ditch option to force the pace of political union. As the Telegraph said, “They welcomed the idea of a ‘beneficial crisis.’” And as “ex-Commission chief Romano Prodi remarked, it would allow Brussels to break taboos and accelerate the move to a full-fledged EU economic government” (ibid.).

Mr. Flurry’s words from that February 2009 article ring out: “Berlin has been planning for this crisis before it even adopted the euro. European elites knew it would eventually come. And they will soon present a solution.”

Sure enough, in the midst of the Greek crisis, an increasing ensemble is crying for a federalized European economic government—one with not just a common currency, but one with a common debt union and power structure—kind of like a United States of America in Europe.

It is “Time for the Eurozone to Grow Up,” headlined the Wall Street Journal on February 8. There is a way out of this dilemma, it wrote. “It would require a European federal government with substantial taxing and spending power, with the ability to redistribute resources and impose fiscal discipline across the continent. In short, it would require a far greater degree of political union …. Yet the choice is now clear and inescapable.”

That is exactly the kind of talk that political elites are looking for. It is also a sentiment echoed in Europe.

“The crisis has revealed our weaknesses,” said European Union President Herman Van Rompuy in February. “Recent developments in the euro area highlight the urgent need to strengthen our economic governance.” Europe needs a powerful “economic government,” he said.

The EU’s foreign affairs chief, Catherine Ashton, agrees. More political union is needed, she said on February 6 at the Munich Security Conference. “We must mobilize all our levers of influence—political, economic, plus civil and military crisis management tools—in support of a single political strategy.”

“The days when a common EU foreign policy was regarded as mere talk are numbered,” Ashton said.

Yes, the days when the free nations of Europe charted their own destiny are indeed numbered.

Victory for Berlin

Consider the success of the euro project in the grand scheme of things. By gearing a whole continental economy to a single currency—imposing rules for membership of monetary union that it was clear no member nation could reliably and consistently fulfill—the German elites crafted a scheme designed to create a continental crisis. If they come to control the ecb (and judging by the top candidates for the presidency, which is due to change hands next year, this looks to be a done deal), they will be positioned to respond to that crisis by enacting, at their will, a totally reconstituted European monetary union.

Such a union will vest financial and economic power in the hands of a select group of nations. These core nations will act in consortium under Berlin and Rome’s direction to propel the Holy Roman imperial vision to reality. They will no longer be frustrated by having to seek a majority vote from 28 fractious, disparate EU member nations. The weaker nations will simply become slaves to the beck and call of the ecb, beholden to it and its governing authority for their economic survival—a literal fulfillment of the prophecies of Revelation 13.

Whether or not the euro fails under its present stress doesn’t change this reality: Given the likely imminent placing of a German in charge of the ecb, Germany is about to directly control the bullion hoard stashed in the vaults of the ecb and beyond. The ecb is headquartered in Frankfurt; the importance of the German elites ensuring the bank lies in Germany’s heartland will prove a vital key in securing the bank’s wealth in times of crisis. When financial crisis arises, Germany will control the EU’s singular currency and hence imperial power over the whole of the EU. It will be a case of game, set and match to Germany.

Some have even mused that, as the day of monetary crisis approaches, the German elites, having positioned themselves to seize control of the ecb, would use an appropriate global institution under EU dominance as a regulator to both control and regulate global trade in the EU’s favor.

As regular Trumpet readers know, the Bible indicates that a king will soon arise in Europe who will deceitfully gain power and force his authority on Europe. The machinations for this pan-European federalist hijacking are falling into place.

Dictating Europe’s Destiny

The second reason the Greek crisis bears close watch is that the Bible indicates that this European superpower will be dominated by Germany. If this crisis in Europe has shown anything, it is that, at least economically, Germany holds ultimate power in Europe.

Bailout or no bailout: Either way, Germany wins. If Germany and Europe bail out Greece, what will be the cost? If Germany has to ask its citizens to reduce their standard of living to subsidize Greeks, what will it ask Greece for in return? The price is sure to be steep. Conversely, if Germany were to work to remove Greece from the EU, the result would be a slimmer, economically healthier, core Europe with one less voice to dilute German political clout.

Sixty-five years after World War ii, Germany is again dictating the destiny of Europe. This should startle the world.

As Britain’s Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, warned in 1993, “You have not anchored Germany to Europe. You have anchored Europe to a newly dominant, unified Germany. In the end, my friends, you’ll find it will not work.” It is Germany’s national character to dominate, she said.

Germany has hijacked Europe. Greece knows it. Portugal and Ireland will find out next. And probably Britain soon thereafter.

But remember: You read it here first.

Prophecy Fulfilled!

The true portent of all that is happening in Europe will only be obvious to those who understand the reality of the prophetic words of that once “ambassador for world peace without portfolio,” Herbert W. Armstrong.

Relying on the Bible for his vision of the future—and on a deep understanding of world events, coupled with his high-profile discourse with the upper echelons of international leadership—Herbert Armstrong powerfully proclaimed these events that have occurred in Europe, especially since the unification of Germany, itself one of his most oft-repeated prophecies. Fully five years before World War ii, Herbert Armstrong prophesied these events. He continued to air those same prophecies while Germany lay in abject defeat, then on throughout the wirtschaftswunder—the German economic miracle of postwar revival—clear on up to his death four years before the fall of the Berlin Wall and the resultant reunification of Germany.

Ten years before the wall fell—13 years prior to the signing of the Maastricht Treaty which created the European Monetary Union—Herbert Armstrong declared, “I have been proclaiming and writing, ever since 1935, that the final one of the seven eras of the Holy Roman Empire is coming in our generation—a ‘United States of Europe,’ combining 10 nations or groups of nations in Europe—with a union of church and state!

“The nations of Europe have been striving to become reunited. They desire a common currency, a single combined military force, a single united GOVERNMENT. They have made a start in the Common Market. They are now working toward a common currency. Yet, on a purely political basis, they have been totally unable to unite. …

“This new united Europe will be, militarily and economically, as strong, or even more powerful, than either the United States or the ussr. It will be a third gigantic world power! But it will be exceedingly short-lived (Revelation 17:10, 12)—as iron and miry clay are not adhesive, and will not stick together (Daniel 2:42-43)” (Plain Truth, January 1979).

In our February edition, our editor in chief proclaimed that, as of Jan. 1, 2010, “The Holy Roman Empire Is Back!” That ought to be a call to action to those who once heard and believed Mr. Armstrong’s words. If those words ring in your ears today, then you ought to realize the time for delay in your returning to the only way of life that guarantees true freedom, safety and protection from this seventh and final resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire is up! The words we publish are a powerful warning to you in particular!

The ball is in your court. The door is before you. Christ said all you have to do is knock, and He will open unto you!