Sunday, March 26, 2017

7-Year Covenant with Death (2021-2027?)

The blog posts here have been a bit rapid-fire, as I've already written two last week. So if you haven't seen these yet, check out the two most recent posts:

1) EU Parliament insists on EU Military Union "without delay"
2) 666: European Defense Fund

In this post, we will be discussing the Antichrist's 7-year treaty with Israel. We will also be discussing 7-year initiatives the EU has, especially one's that relate to Israel or military security.

7-Year Covenant: What Does the Bible Say?

Daniel 9:27 ESV
"And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.” 
The Covenant

Here's a quick run down of the nature of this covenant:
  • A "week" is indisputably a week of years (7 years), since in the context of the entire prophecy, a week is always 7 years. 
  • Since the entire prophecy is decreed for the Jews and Jerusalem, end time Israel is one of the parties to this covenant. (Other prophecies support this idea). 
  • The creator and/or enforcer of the covenant is of "Roman" descent, since Daniel 9:26 states that he is of the same ethnic group of those who destroyed the temple in 70 A.D.
  • Though not specifically stated in verse 27, many other Old Testament texts support the notion that this covenant will guarantee Israel's security in some way. (Isaiah 28:15-19; Zechariah 11:15-17; Ezekiel 38:8)
This is why many commentators, theologians, and end time movies portray the Antichrist making a 7 year "peace treaty" with Israel. 

The Abomination of Desolation

He then apparently violates it in the middle, ending the temple sacrifices. In this way, he betrays Israel, whom he was supposed to protect. This event seems to coincide with the Antichrist's invasion of Israel (Daniel 11:41; cf. Zechariah 12). 

Most importantly, halfway through this 7 year covenant, "one who makes desolate" comes on the "wing of abominations." This is one of the only three times the abomination of desolation is referenced in the Old Testament, all of which are in the book of Daniel (9:27; 11:31; 12:11). The 11:31 abomination of desolation refers to a prophecy that was fulfilled in 168 B.C., where Antiochus IV Epiphanes invaded Jerusalem and placed an idol of Zeus on the temple altar. This sets the precedent for the meaning of the term abomination of desolation, as an idol placed in the temple. 

Daniel 12:11 refers to an end time abomination of desolation, around the time of the general resurrection of the dead. This leaves Daniel 9:27, where an abomination of desolation event happens halfway through a covenant created by the "Roman" Antichrist, described above. However, 9:27 is unique in that the more literal translations speak of the abomination as if it is a person, and not an object as was the case with the idol of Zeus. Here, it is implied that a person is the idol in the temple, as opposed to a mere object. This is consistent with in the Olivet Discourse in Mark 13, where Jesus describes the abomination of desolation using a masculine pronoun. 
“But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. (Mark 13:14 ESV). 
Paul is more explicit, when he describes the man of lawlessness who sits in God's temple, proclaiming himself as if he is God. This mans arrival is accompanied by counterfeit signs and miracles that deceive the unbelievers. This is consistent with Revelation 13, where everyone is forced to worship a talking image of the Antichrist, whose authority is vetted by the false prophet. The false prophet also performs miraculous signs on the Antichrist's behalf via demonic means.



The Final Sign of Christ's Return

In both Paul and Jesus teaching, this event immediately precedes Christ's second coming. In both Matthew 24 and 2 Thessalonians 2, it is the final singular sign of Christ's return, which happens on an undisclosed day and hour. Nevertheless, Paul and Jesus both emphasize an element of surprise regarding the Second Coming, at least for those who aren't paying attention. This is why I believe the Second Coming/Rapture event is initiated within days, weeks or a few months of the abomination of desolation. (You can see my reasoning for this controversial claim here.)

Regardless, all this is to show that the 7 year covenant in Daniel 9:27 is extremely important in determining the timing of end time events. It is the only prophecy that tells, in advance, when the final singular sign of Christ's return will be. This is very significant, because Jesus describes his return with great immediacy.
“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates." Matthew 24:32-33

What 7-Year Programs Does the EU Have?

The pieces to this covenant are already falling into place in a dramatic way, with a possible launch of the 7-year covenant as early as January 2021. Here is a brief timeline of different 7-year initiatives the EU has had or is proposing:

ENP Member Countries in Dark Green

2004: European Neighborhood Policy Launched
EU sets up its relationship with it's "neighbors" using the European Neighborhood Policy. It was an idea that the then foreign policy chief Javier Solana and the Commission came up with. In this program, the EU essentially paid participant countries for good behavior. The EU would set up an "Action Plan" for each country, that would be tailor made to that nation. For example, some goals in the action plan might be reducing corruption, or having fair elections, etc. Interestingly, a map of the ENP members looks conspicuously similar to a map of the Roman Empire at it's greatest extent.

2007 - ENP Confirmed for 7-Years 
The European Neighborhood Policy was funded through a variety of financial mechanisms. However, they wanted to consolidate it into one finance mechanism that worked on the same time frame as the EU's budget. As a result, they confirmed the ENP for 7-years using the European Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI). Israel was a member country, along with several other Mediterranean and Eastern European nations.
 "It shall apply from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013." Regulation Establishing an ENPI
2011 - First ENP Review
The "Arab Spring" prompts EU officials to review and update the ENP. In this review, they added a "conditionality" component, in which more cooperative nations would receive more funding than those who did not. 
2014 - Confirmed for Another 7 Years
The European Union replaces the 7-year ENPI with the 7-year "European Neighborhood Instrument. It reconfirms the ENP with new funds for the next 7-years.  
"It shall apply from 1 January 2014 until 31 December 2020." - Regulation Establishing an ENI 
2015 - European Neighborhood Policy Reboot 
Many policy thinkers and analysts began to point out the ineffectiveness of the ENP. The Syrian civil war, Russian intervention in Ukraine, and instability in Libya, among other things, contributed to this view. Instead of the ENP causing the EU to have a "ring of friends" around it, instead it now had a "ring of fire." This caused the EU to revise the ENP, focusing more on stabilizing the surrounding neighborhood. This is in contrast to its previously overly idealistic approach where the EU hoped that democracy and human rights would prevail in the neighboring countries.
NOV. 2016 - Proposal for EU Military Union For Next 7-Year Budget
EU Parliament endorses a plan to create a military union, with a view to its establishment for the next 7-year budget. This "European Defence Union" could be used, among other things, to intervene in crisis situations in neighboring countries. 
"encourages the European Council to lead the progressive framing of a common Union defence policy and to provide additional financial resources to ensure its implementation, with a view to its establishment under the next multiannual political and financial framework of the EU (MFF);"
DEC. 2016 - EU Launches 7-Year Military Research Program
In December, the EU proposed a "defence fund" with two parts. The first part is a military research fund, providing up to 500 million euros annually for the 7-year period 2021-2027. The second part (which is financed through other means) proposes giving group discounts to member countries who want to buy military equipment together. 
Visual Summary of Timeline

(Click to Enlarge)


Intensifying Language

One component that has been lacking from the EU's 7-year relationship to Israel is the promise of protection. Though Daniel 9:27 doesn't explicitly mention this, other passages imply it. Nevertheless, voices from EU politicians have been intensifying in this general "protection" direction:
"This vision takes into account calls for a recalibration of EU defence efforts and, consequently, the Union’s resilience and reputation as an autonomous security provider in its neighbourhood and beyond. We brand this new framework the ‘European Defence Union’ (EDU)." -Javier Solana, March 2015
"The Council welcomes the new proposals to strengthen the security dimension of the ENP, and reiterates its calls for greater coherence of the ENP with the security and foreign policy dimensions of the EU's other actions abroad." Council Conclusions on ENP Review, Dec. 2015
– to include, based on those resolutions’ recommendations and orientations, provisions in a future Union treaty that:
– establish the European Armed Forces, capable of deploying combat forces for high intensity conflicts, stabilisation forces which secure cease-fires or peace agreements[...] (EU Parliament, March 16, 2017)
"We need an European defense union to protect our neighborhood" - @GuyVerhofstadt #BrusselsForum March, 2017 (from Twitter)

Convergence of Themes

With everything above, we see here a convergence of themes. We do not yet have the "covenant with death" for 7 years. However, all of the pieces and parts are falling into place, which will ultimately converge into that. We have:

  • 7-year contract between EU & Israel
  • 7-year military research and development fund for the EU
  • Proposal to set up an EU military union over the next 7 year period
  • Increasing desire (by some) to use the new EU military union to stabilize and "protect" neighboring regions
It's easy to see how all of this could ultimately converge in a future ENP* (or other) agreement, in which Israel is guaranteed protection in exchange for a final status agreement with the Palestinians. Europe has an incentive to stabilize and even "protect" it's neighborhood, so as to stem irregular migration flows and deter terrorist attacks from unstable regions. 

In view of the converging themes, a logical step could be to make the next 7-year budget/ENP a covenant of protection for Israel. This would inaugurate the final 7 years prior to Christ's establishment of his kingdom. This would place the abomination of desolation, and the revealing of the Antichrist, in summer of 2024. 


(Click to Enlarge)


That's all for now. As always, I enjoy hearing from you all and the insights that you have. One thing is for sure, this prophecy road is an adventure. What makes this adventure so cool is that God is driving. I remember in 2014-2015 I was racking my brain, trying to make the theory "fit." You all wisely stated that God would be the one to put it all together. And indeed, that has turned out to be the case. We did not make any theory "better." But God, in his wisdom, continues to surprise us with new prophecy news every few months, to his glory.

Come Lord Jesus!






*Weirdly enough, leading Antichrist candidate, Javier Solana, was quoted on Twitter as saying that the ENP is "over." However, Solana obviously does not think the "Union for the Mediterranean" program is dead, since he was recently video taped at a UfM event discussing the importance of such a program. This is a sub-program of the 7-year ENP, and is financed by it. The UfM is important because it is tied to the 7-year ENP and is very "Romanesque," in that all the member countries (+Israel) look like a map of the old Roman Empire. One can easily see that Solana doesn't want to abolish the EU's relationship to Israel, considering he endorses the UfM. In addition, he is one of the main proponents of stabilizing the neighborhood using military force. Though this is speculative, perhaps he disagrees with the current ENP framework, where neighbors are paid for good behavior. 

Saturday, March 25, 2017

666: European Defense Fund



Today, I'd like to talk about a really big 666 connection. But before I do that, I would like to provide a brief update on the EU's Rome Declaration, celebrating its 60th birthday today. The main takeaway from the Rome Declaration is that it formalized the intent of the member states to move at "multiple speeds." This means if all 27 don't want to integrate at a certain pace, smaller groups of at least 9 can go ahead, as long as it doesn't overstep what the Treaties already allowed.

PESCO, cooperation in defense, does not require 9, and is a common instance where scholars say the EU can move at multiple speeds. I go into more detail on a recent Parliament resolution on the last blog post, with some interesting implications PESCO might have in the prophecy arena.


But now, on to the 666. Apparently, the European Defense Fund is more significant than I thought....



Triple Authenticated 666

https://cesi-italia.org/articoli/666/european-defence-fund-origine-sfide-e-prospettive
Found the top one on accident. "European Defence Fund" are the only words in English. The rest are in Italian. I translated the article, and didn't find any significant new information. Although I thought of writing a blog post about European Defence Fund, it didn't seem terribly significant at the time.

PE595.666v01-00: Paragraph 6, Draft Opinion 6, Amendment 6

...then I googled "European Defence Fund 666" and found this. This amendment has "PE595.666.v01-00" on the footer of every single page. Furthermore, if you look at the amendments for "Paragraph 6, you see three sixes for every proposed alteration to the recommendation. The "paragraph 6, draft 6, amendment 6" shows up about 5 times. (see pages 22-26).

(Click to enlarge)


(Of course, these roughly followed prayers for wisdom. The past few weeks I would occasionally pray for wisdom on prophecy.)

Here is the final text of paragraph 6 of that recommendation the European Parliament Committee on Budgets was giving:
"Believes that, in the long term, the EU should explore the possibilities of, and aim at, a common budget, including the command structure, joint operations and equipment, as well as a proper EU programme for CSDP research, taking into account the specificities of the defence sector; looks forward to the presentation of the Commission’s proposal for a European Defence Fund;"
From the previous version, document PE595.666v01-00 drops the "EU integrated military forces" from the language, instead focusing on the budget/European Defence Fund aspects. So here, it looks like we have a triple-validated 666 connection with the European Defence Fund.

 What is the European Defence Fund?

The European Defence Fund is part of the newly announced "European Defence Action Plan" that just came out. The fund has two components: military research & development, and military capability development. Below, you will find the infographic provided by the European Commission Twitter page:



The EDF has two sections. The first section is a military research and development program. From now until the start of the next 7 year period, it will be financed with 90 million euros. Starting 2021-2027, it will be financed with 500 million euros annually.

The second section is intended to "turbo-boost" defense spending. It gives bulk discounts to member countries who want to buy the same equipment together. As much money as they spend on the group projects, they get that much written off from the EU's budget requirements.

So basically, the first section is a 7-year component that pays for military research and innovation. The second section just convinces member states to buy a bunch of army equipment and get bulk discounts on weapons and vehicles.


What Makes it Interesting?

Since it is framed around the EU's budget, the first section will be a 7-year program. Other than that, the European Defence Fund isn't more interesting than any other EU defence program as far as prophecy is concerned.

...or is it?

I don't know if I've found anything so "authenticated" in a 666 connection before. It seems God uses this number as kind of a bread-crumb trail, or a highlighter to look at events that he knows are important. (Otherwise, why would we pay particular attention to the EDF)? In the past, major 666 connections have been attached to fulfillments of prophecy relating to Javier Solana, or just to Solana himself. Since this is "triple authenticated" I think it behooves us to inquire of God what it means, and do our best to search it out.

What does Solana think of the European Defence Fund? He has a surprisingly critical attitude towards it, saying it's not good enough. He has an entire article written with Steven Blockmans, stating that it's no "game-changer" and its not good enough to build the "military-industrial complex" that is desired.



The "God of Fortresses"

If he is the Antichrist, this is entirely expected, because of this passage.
37 He shall pay no attention to the gods of his fathers, or to the one beloved by women. He shall not pay attention to any other god, for he shall magnify himself above all. 38 He shall honor the god of fortresses instead of these. A god whom his fathers did not know he shall honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and costly gifts. (Daniel 11:37-38 ESV)
Many theologians see the "god of fortresses" as a metaphor for military might. This makes sense, since immediately prior, it emphasizes that he doesn't honor any god besides himself. How does he honor this god? With "precious stones and costly gifts," which is essentially money.

Now let's think about this. The Antichrist serves the "god of fortresses" with money. Fortresses are much better at defending things than attacking them. To tie it all together, he serves a metaphoric god of defense using money. Basically, the Antichrist is preoccupied with defense spending. The financial component has always been a big part of the "European Defence Union" Solana has been proposing. Solana is pre-occupied with building a "military-industrial complex" for Europe.

"This is hardly the big bang the EU needs to create a military-industrial complex." - Solana
"They should be even more specific and demanding of its reporting requirements, for instance by asking for costed plans to achieve these ambitions within strict timeframes. That would truly be a qualitative leap towards a European Defence Union". - Solana

Who's In Charge?

As the European Parliament pointed out in their final resolution, the EU needs to clear up how the European Defence Fund will be governed and financed. 
45. Welcomes the European Defence Action Plan put forward by the Commission in November 2016; calls in this regard on the Commission and the Member States to clarify thoroughly the governance, financing and objectives of the possible European Defence Fund, notably the capability and research ‘windows’; considers that the effective implementation of that plan requires strong support and political commitment from the Member States and the EU institutions; regrets in this regard that the Commission, the EDA and the Member States have not yet delivered on all the tasks resulting from the European Council meetings on defence of 2013 and 2015;
The European Defence Fund will be led by a coordination board of the High Representative, member states, industry members, among others. This org structure has not been entirely defined as of yet, so it's possible Solana could play a role, but that is speculative at this point.

I have another blog post to write immediately after this one. (Ideally, also will be written today or tomorrow). While I debated making it part of this one, I think it warrants a separate post. That can be viewed as a stand-alone "Part 2" to this blog post.

That's all for now folks. Thanks for watching and would love to hear from you all as always!

Peace to you all. Come Lord Jesus.

Update: 07/05/17

Another one! 


http://www.janes.com/article/72063/commission-s-defence-fund-plan-takes-hits-from-left-and-right-wing-meps

Photo credits:

1) http://www.euintheus.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/P033116000302-445054-612x336.jpg
2) http://europa.eu/rapid/attachment/STATEMENT-17-767/en/Rome%20declaration%20factsheet_enhance%20cooperation.pdf
3) https://twitter.com/eu_commission/status/803934887510245376
4) http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/664517/EU-Army-will-happen-weaken-British-defences-retired-colonel

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

EU Parliament Insists on EU Military Union "without delay"

This post represents a recent development in end time prophecy as it relates to the EU. This article will make more sense if you check out the overview page as well.



Common Defense for the European Union

Very major European Parliament resolution proposing:
  • A new EU military institution (PESCO) to be the basis of a common EU defense 
  • Common military force funded by the EU budget
  • Calls for more "global governance"
  • Proposes amending the decision created by Recommendation 666
You can check out the much shorter press release here.


Why does this matter for prophecy?

As the revived Roman Empire, the European Union needs to have the military ability to wage war in the end times. It also needs to have the capability and authority to be an effective guarantor of Israel's military security  during the Antichrist's 7 year treaty (Daniel 9:27 cf. Isaiah 28:15-19; Zechariah 11:17). Finally, the ten kings of the beast must have a common purpose, and finally give their "kingdom" to the beast. This must especially be in the domain of the military, since this handing over of sovereignty takes place in the context of the violent destruction of the end time city named "Babylon." Though the European Union has some ability to act militarily through consensus, the member nations as of yet have not fully handed over their sovereignty ("kingdom") to the EU in that regard.


Unpacking the Resolution 

1) New EU Military Institution
The 2009 Treaty of Lisbon allows for a group of EU member countries to voluntarily and permanently deepen their cooperation on military matters (PESCO). This is kind of like how the Eurozone works, where only some countries are on the Euro, while others who aren't ready don't have to come along. The Treaty is vague about what PESCO would mean. However, it would have membership requirements, allowing anyone who meets said requirements (such as defense spending) to join. 
The Parliament wants to use PESCO as the basis for a truly common defense for the EU. What is so unique about this Parliament resolution is it proposes that PESCO be an "institution" financed by the EU budget. So PESCO is not only just a group of countries cooperating together, but an organization with its own administrative costs as well. This is the most "explosive" aspect of the resolution, according to one parliamentarian in the debate. Another stated it has the potential to create another "bureaucratic monster." The resolution proposes putting EU battlegroups, Eurocorps, a military headquarters, all under the PESCO umbrella.
PESCO and the European Defence Agency (the latter of which already exists), would be "sui generis" institutions, financed by a section in the EU budget. This means that on an EU org chart, they would be off to the side, one-of-a-kind organizations, doing their own thing. This is much like the EU's foreign office (EEAS). Despite repeated reassurances in the resolution to the contrary, some fear that these two organizations would potentially lack oversight from Parliament. 
2) Common Military Force funded by the EU budget
The proposal calls for a new "European Integrated Force" that can be deployed to implement the EU's common policy on defense. Furthermore, it calls for existing military entities, such as the EU Battle groups, Eurocorps and future military headquarters, to be placed under PESCO. The beast needs power to wage war, and this is a step in that direction. 
3) Calls for more "global governance."
This is not new, but it remains particularly ominous in light of the other proposals above. The European Parliament would like to improve global governance by reforming the UN Security Council, making it more decisive and less focused on only military aspects. 
4) Proposes amending the decision created by Recommendation 666
For those of us familiar with Herb Peters book, Recommendation 666, this resolution has fascinating implications. Recommendation 666 "recommended" that Javier Solana be given the ability to preside over the Political and Security Committee in an emergency. This recommendation eventually turned into council decision 2001/78/CFSP, which ratified those recommendations. 
The European Parliament would like to amend this decision, to make sure that the Political and Security Committee has less power. They want to interpret it's mandate more narrowly, and give the lion's share of the military decision making to the PESCO and reformed EDA. (More on this later, but for now, on to other topics.)

Implications of the Resolution

Solana's Brainchild
The implications of turning PESCO into an organization are profound. Javier Solana (among others) proposed in his 2015 Report and his 2016 research study that PESCO be the main instrument by which the EU forms a military union. Ever since he used this term, it has been widely used in discussions of EU military integration. The Parliament resolution, mentioned above, insists on the creation of a European Defence Union "without delay." A reading of the proposal shows the tremendous influence Javier Solana has had on the European Parliament in these respects, even as far as very specific proposals are concerned. As I argue elsewhere, Javier Solana is the best Antichrist candidate in the history of the entire world. 


7-Year Covenant with Israel
This is also a step towards the infamous 7-year covenant the Antichrist makes with Israel (and perhaps many others) guaranteeing their military security. The new "European Defence Fund" (666) will be established for the EU's next 7-year budget. Another European Parliament resolution backing Solana's plan calls for a European Defence Union to be established along the next 7 year period. One of the reasons these politicians cite the need for an EU military union is to "stabilize" the Mediterranean and act as a "security provider" in it's wider neighborhood.  
Interestingly, the EU already has a contract with Israel that is established on a 7-year basis, called the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP). This has been widely regarded as somewhat unsuccessful policy which has undergone many revisions. The desire for the EU to act as a security provider, the 7-year component of the proposal, and the existing EU's 7-year ENP agreement with Israel, may all eventually converge into the Antichrist's final 7-year treaty,


Unanimous Transfer of Sovereignty by Consensus
Finally, what makes PESCO interesting is that participation is voluntary and decision-making is unanimous. This sounds eerily familiar, when hearing this Bible passage about the ten horns and the beast: 
For God has put it in their hearts to execute His purpose by having a common purpose, and by giving their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be fulfilled. (Revelation 17:17 NASB)
Here, the ten kings unanimously transfer their sovereignty to the Antichrist on a voluntary basis, because they have a "common purpose." This is in context of Babylon's military destruction, so this transfer of sovereignty must at least include the domain of the military. This is what makes PESCO so fascinating. It would be a major transfer of sovereignty in the area of defense. Furthermore, with PESCO, military decisions are made unanimously. In addition, participation in PESCO is completely voluntary, with no nation forced to participate. Finally, the EU wants to use PESCO to form its "common policy" (read: "common purpose") in defense. PESCO is rife with prophetic implications. 
PESCO on the EU Org Chart

PESCO has been an available option within the EU's existing treaty for quite some time, but has not been utilized yet. Recall, Solana began the push for a European Defence Union back in March 2015, suggesting that PESCO be the instrument by which it is accomplished. Since both Solana and PESCO appear to be so prophetically significant, this comes as no surprise that Solana would strongly endorse PESCO as the means for EU to have a common defense. 

However, the European Parliament resolution has called for PESCO to not just be a mechanism, but an "institution" as well, like the EU's foreign office. This institution will kind of hover off in no-man's-land on an EU org chart, without much parliamentary oversight. Yet, if it is an organization, it does need oversight from someone, even if that someone is not the European Parliament.

If you've gotten this far in the blog post, I commend your endurance with all of the euro-jargon, which I have tried (perhaps in vain) to simplify to some degree. Nevertheless, the time has come to speculate on a future role for Solana, if he is indeed the Antichrist. That being the case, we have to burrow down into the institutional nitty-gritty of what the Parliament has proposed, what Solana has proposed, what other's propose, etc.

Since Solana is so significant, wouldn't it be nice if he provided us with an org chart on how he thinks EU defense structures ought to work? Thankfully, he already has. Below, you will see a screenshot of how Solana proposes the EU's common defense policy should be set up. This is from page 66 of the giant research paper he wrote for the European Parliament on the topic. 




Notice how the legend states that both PESCO and the EU operational headquarters are "proposed new institutions." So here, Parliament is actually following Solana's recommendations when they propose that PESCO be not just a mechanism, but a one-of-a-kind "institution."

Also, note the hierarchical relationships on the org chart. The High Representative is over several institutions, but the PESCO member states organization is above the High Representative and the civilian/military headquarters. This arrangement would seem to confirm suspicions that some MEP's have, in that the PESCO might lack accountability.



A New Chair for Solana?

In his dealings with the EU, Solana is, for the most part, very defense-focused. His former job of High Representative has since been expanded under the Treaty of Lisbon. Even despite Solana's high energy level and frequent travels, the High Representative position seems very physically demanding for anyone in their mid-70's. One basically functions as the Foreign Minister of the EU (Secretary of State in U.S. terms), but without the title. Furthermore, it covers a great many areas, only one of which is defense. Some view the role as over-extended, proposing that the defense responsibilities be allocated elsewhere to ease the burden.

All this to say that the EU High Representative position is a very demanding job. It is possible Solana would re-take the role. HoweverI think it is much more likely that a Solana comeback would not be based on EU "musical chairs" but on creating an entirely new chair. This would likely come through leadership of PESCO. Nevertheless, it is clear that PESCO will need some kind of leadership since it is going to be an institution. What is less clear is what shape that leadership would take.

PESCO as a Eurogroup of Defence

In Solana's 2015 pamphlet on European Defence Union, he proposes that the PESCO nations form a "Defence Group" much like there is a "Eurogroup" for the Eurozone countries. The whole report rotates around the theme that defense at the EU level should be structured in the same way the Eurozone is. It also proposes a co-chair person for the Defence Group, along with the EU High Representative. 

The Eurogroup is an informal decision making body, containing the finance ministers of each Eurozone member state. While all 28 meet at the economic and financial affairs council, only the Eurozone ministers meet in the Eurogroup, where major decisions are made. The Eurogroup also has an elected President. 

In the same way, Solana and European Parliament think that the EU High Representative should chair a Council of Defence ministers of all 28 states. This is similar to how all 28 sit on the economic and financial affairs council. Nevertheless, under the PESCO institution, only the participating members would meet. This would most likely take place through the EDA Steering Board, either via the High Representative as chair, or as Solana proposed, through a co-chair with the High Representative.  In this way, PESCO would be similar to a "eurogroup for defence."

How this actually will play out (if at all), remains to be seen. However, it would not be surprising if PESCO chose a "Defence Group" President, just like the Eurogroup President is chosen. One major European Defence Union advocate has pressed for an EU Defence Commissioner, to ease the burden on the High Representative. Another MEP in the debate stated the need for a "European Defense Minister." Interestingly, some in the past have pushed for a "Eurozone Finance Minister" over the whole eurozone, who could veto member states budgets. 

Imagine an EU with an European Defense Minister and a Eurozone Finance Minister. In this speculative scenario, we would have an eerie situation in which the EU has two pillars of power: one military and one monetary. This sounds a lot like Revelation 13, with the beast (who has the power to wage war) and the false prophet (who controls the money). 


Rome Declaration and Prague Summit

Next Saturday, EU leaders are coming together for the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome. That treaty founded the European Economic Community, which eventually formed the basis of what the EU is today. The Treaty of Rome is of prophetic significance (see the overview page, year 1957). At the Rome Summit on March 25th, EU leaders are expected to make a declaration on the future of the European Union. EU Commission President Juncker has prepared a document with 5 choices that the EU can take for its future. Most of the influential countries favor option #3, which is a multi-speed Europe. This again is a European Union based on voluntary consensus, reminiscent of Revelation 17:17.



Defence cooperation is a topic that may be discussed at the Rome summit. In fact, the European Parliament resolution that this blog post is discussing was presented in anticipation of that summit. So it is possible they could come out with another prophetically significant declaration at the Rome Summit. Nevertheless, it's wise not to get one's hopes up too high about summits, since the Council struggles to form any meaningful consensus. Nevertheless, they are expected to revisit the issue of defense on June 9, 2017, in Prague.


God is Sovereign

I don't know what will happen Saturday, or the coming months for that matter. I am learning that God is not surprised by any twists or turns in the prophetic road. We do not have to "fix" anything for him. (as you all have wisely learned long before I have). The future is inevitable. What God has ordained (or not ordained) cannot be stopped. It is not a matter of "if" but "when.
What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. (Revelation 3:7b NIV)
Peace be to you all. Come Lord Jesus!




APPENDIX: A Note About Recommendation 666

I would like to comment on how all of this relates to Recommendation 666, which features very prominently in the prophetic timeline on this website, and originally discovered by author Herbert L. Peters. 

In Solana's big research paper for Parliament, he mentions EU defense history and the events surrounding Recommendation 666. He puts it quite explicitly, stating that "In other words, the EU took over the WEU functions." This is why Recommendation 666 is so important, in that the ten kings gave their "power and authority" to the EU beast, under Solana's leadership.  This proposal was eventually implemented with Council Decision 2001/78/CFSPa key portion of which European Parliament recently suggests be changed.

But how, exactly, did the 10 transfer their authority to Solana? A new committee was created, called the "Political and Security Committee" (PSC). The Western European Union had the ability to perform various military operations. Nevertheless, they transferred this function to the European Union, under the newly created PSC. The same 10 delegates that sat on the WEU Permanent Council sat on the newly founded PSC, in addition to the other member states. As High Representative, Solana was given the ability to chair the PSC in an emergency (while in non-emergencies, a deputy of his led the PSC).

The PSC is supposed to exert the "political control and strategic direction" of EU civilian or military operations. This seems to be the precise area that Parliament (and perhaps Solana) want to curtail its power. The EU Parliament wants to amend the document creating the PSC, and desires to interpret its functions more narrowly. When considering his two org charts, it seems Solana may agree with this move.

Wouldn't it be nice if Solana provided us with two org charts? What if one org chart contained his proposals, and the other contained how things actually are? Well, again, thankfully he already has. The org chart below is from Solana's giant research paper and lays out how the EU currently works with its defense structures. (The other one up top contains his proposals.)

Notice how the PSC is mentioned in this org chart, but is not mentioned in the other. Although this org chart is more detailed than the proposed org chart (see above), it could be a hint that Solana too sees a diminished role for the PSC in the future. It would seem he would place the decision-making authority in the hands of the EU headquarters and PESCO.

All this to say that Recommendation 666 hasn't lost its significance in prophecy. Recommendation 666 and the decision setting up the PSC as a result, were the means by which the ten WEU nations handed over their authority to the EU beast (Rev. 17:12-13). The ten eventually dissolved into the EU. However, as of yet these ten have not given their "kingdom" to the beast (Rev 17:17), as still defense remains largely intergovernmental. This second half of the prophecy may relate to PESCO, while the first relates to the transfer of the WEU functions to the EU, which happened to take place through the PSC.



Photo Credits:

1) http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/664517/EU-Army-will-happen-weaken-British-defences-retired-colonel
2) http://www.esade.edu/homepage/esp/newsroom/press-releases/viewelement/322632/2321/javier-solana-(esadegeo)-presenta-el-estudio-on-the-way-towards-a-european-defence-union:-white-book-as-a-first-step-en-el-parlamento-europeo
3) http://ec.europa.eu/avservices/photo/photoByReportage.cfm?sitelang=&ref=033927
4) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/535011/EXPO_STU(2016)535011_EN.pdf