Friday, April 17, 2015

Just WHO Does He Think He Is!?!

Preface: This article is about Javier Solana. To learn why I think he is probably the Antichrist, go to the "Overview" page and see the powerpoint. Two more powerpoints are forthcoming.


I've been begging God for more wisdom. Some piece of...incontrovertible evidence...that Solana is our guy.

Emotions are very bad things to rely on when seeking answers to prayer. Nevertheless, I was getting this feeling (and heard some very wise words from those in the comments) that though we wait, it's on God's timetable and he will bring it all together beautifully, when the time is right. I thank you for those words of insight. In that time, and even still today, those are the words I need to hear.

However, I kept begging God. I kept getting vague feeling that it wasn't my place to be asking for such a thing. After all, as if I am the one to be educating him on when things should be happening? How preposterous. But I also got these subtle inklings, that I should take a look at that Solana report again, like something might be in there.

And what I found in there really shocked me. It was hidden in plain site.  But before I go into that that, I'm going to get off-topic for a minute, so I can make my primary argument. I am going to explain the concept of "vocational self-understanding."

Vocational Self-Understanding 

Liberal historical scholars like to pretend Jesus didn't claim to be God. They cut out all of the obvious sayings and the less obvious examples they explain away. Even if we view the gospels as mere ancient literature, these scholars still use some extremely inconsistent standards when defining "what Jesus really said" or "what Jesus really did." When I see the backflips, twists, and turns they do, it actually enhances my faith.

But a popular thing in apologetics these days is "minimal facts." You take what the atheist historians usually concede, and then work a very strong case from there. One example of this is "vocational Christology." How do we know Jesus believed himself to be God? Well, did he play the part? Did he do God's "job?" Did the human man, Jesus of Nazareth, "try to do and be for Israel, that which only God can do and be for Israel?" (paraphrase of an N.T. Wright quote) The answer of course, is a resounding yes.

The Second Coming (link to source)

I mean if you wanted to know if Obama thinks he's President, asking "if he claimed it" would only be a part of your case. You would ask if he rides in a heavily guarded motorcade, attempts to negotiate international treaties, gives speeches like he's the leader of the U.S., proposes legislation, etc. It would be silly to limit yourself to the times he calls himself "President" in no uncertain terms. An equally (and perhaps more important) question is, does he play the part?

In that same vein, look at Jesus. I mean, who is this guy, who thinks that he can inaugurate God's kingdom with his own arrival? Who is this, that seems to edit and tweak Old Testament laws whenever he wants? Who casts out demons in his own name?!? Who is this guy, who tells stories and proph, where he is the main character who is the judge of all humanity in the end times? Who is this man, who forgives sins and heals paralysis all in one swoop, like its no big deal? How outrageous! Who does he think he is!?!? God or something!?!?


This and related concepts have been termed Christ's "vocational" self-understanding by theologian N.T. Wright.

The comparison I am about to make is somewhat perverse. However, historical Jesus studies is the best way I know to explain the concept of "vocational self-understanding."  But it is somewhat clear from the Solana CEPS Task Force report, on the basis of past events in European history, that Javier Solana has a rather grandiose understanding of himself and the role he plays within European history.

What does Solana think his job is? The evidence may surprise you.

Make an EDU...Just Like the EMU

In that report, hidden in plain site all along, was something I had read twice before but had missed the significance of. It sounds like nothing at all. But in the context of EU history, it is truly astonishing.

The CEPS Task Force aims to provide the incumbents at the helm of the EU institutions, in particular the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy / Vice-President of the Commission (HR/VP), with the narrative and the proposals to strengthen defence cooperation in the EU. Ultimately, the necessary defence integration should amount to a ‘European Defence Union’ (EDU). This report defines the shape of such a
Union as the cornerstone of a comprehensive, civil-military security architecture in Europe. Having examined the current and potential conditions in the relevant sectors, the CEPS Task Force recommends an array of policy actions for further cooperation and integration as the natural steps to join all the dots of the defence debate – strategic,
institutional, capabilities, and resources.
We brand this new framework the ‘European Defence Union’ (EDU). In much the same way as the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and the proposed Energy Union are the end goals of full European integration in their respective fields, the EDU proclaims the finalit√© of EU integration in the area of defence.
In order to move from the blueprint to the launch of the EDU, the European Council, acting upon the proposal of an independent committee appointed by it and supported by the European EEAS and the relevant branches of the European Commission under the authority of the HR/VP, should define a roadmap with practical and realistic steps and implement the plan in stages, similar to the approach to the creation of the EMU.
The European Council should define a roadmap with practical and realistic steps to move, by stages, from the blueprint to the launch of the EDU. To that end, EU leaders should appoint an independent committee, supported by the EEAS and the relevant branches of the European Commission acting under the authority of the HR/VP, to propose such a roadmap, similar to the approach to create the EMU and involving the attainment of harmonisation criteria and mandatory milestones for upgrades in each basket of reform. Although the process of bringing European armies to a more structured cooperation and, where appropriate, closer integration will certainly be a complex one, the numerous crises facing Europe have made change possible. These crises also offer an opportunity to secure a more peaceful and prosperous future for the EU.
The task force repeatedly emphasizes that it wants to build a European Defence Union (EDU) in the same way that the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) was created.

So it behooves us to find out, from European history, how the EMU was created. Because Solana and crew apparently want to build an EDU in the same way that the EMU was built. This is an essential point.

Eurozone (EMU) Members

The Delors Report

The EMU, more or less, was the EU's long term plan to build the Eurozone: monetary and economic integration. So I googled the process associated with EMU. And guess what? The EMU was also launched with a group of experts called the "Delors Report." The Delors Committee was a group of experts, chaired by the European Commission President Delors, who were instructed by the 1988 European Council to come up with a plan for how to build an Economic and Monetary Union. After 9 months of deliberations, they issued their report in April 1989.  The Delors report recommended the EU form an EMU in three stages. At the June 1989 European Council, on the basis of the report, the Council of Central Bank Governors and Monetary Committee were charged with determining the timetables and criteria for forming an EMU. Eventually, this Delors Committee's recommendations were inserted into the Treaty of Maastricht, without many changes. This Delors Report, is what some analysts refer to as the "blueprint" for the EMU. (1) (2)

Analysts have long been puzzled as to how the European nations could come to such a sweeping agreement in a relatively short time frame (1989-1991). The Treaty of Maastricht went into effect in 1993. One article I read emphasizes the special importance that influential groups of experts have on the European policy making process: (1) (2)

I strongly recommend you read a bit of this page on the European Commission website. Read from "The Delors Report Recommended EMU in Three Stages" to "And to Maastricht."

Jacques Delors
(Click link for attribution)

The "Solana" Report

If your read Solana's CEPS Task Force report, it is almost obvious that they intend to be the "Delors Report" for a European Defence Union. They harp on the fact that the EDU is to be built the same way the EMU was, making many recommendations for EDU that are analogous to EMU. The EMU was built off of a report by a group of influential experts, chaired by the European Commission President.  They proposed the blueprint and recommended timetables for implementation, and a committee was later set up at the European Council to set deadlines for implementation. It also recommended that the EU start with those countries that are already interested in the project, and work from there. This is exactly what the CEPS Task Force recommends, except in a European Defence Union (EDU), as opposed to an Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). 

Solana's Task Force is a group of influential experts who spent months deliberating on a report, only to release it in time for the June 2015 European Council. The recommendations of the report are explicitly meant to be enacted at the June 2015 European Council. Furthermore, the CEPS Task Force recommends the creation of an independent committee at the EU level, which would set the concrete timetables for implementation among all the interested parties. This is almost exactly how it happened with the EMU. The Delors Report did not set time frames, but implied stages. Later, an EU level committee was set up who actually set the criteria and negotiated the deadlines. This is exactly what the CEPS Task Force recommends, and they explicitly mention this because this is how the EMU was created. A report was made. And then a committee was set up at the June 1989 European council to recommend the concrete timeline.

In order to move from the blueprint to the launch of  the EDU, the European Council, acting upon the proposal of an independent committee appointed by it and supported by the European EEAS and the relevant branches of the European Commission under the authority of the HR/VP, should define a roadmap with practical and realistic steps and implement the plan in stages, similar to the approach to the creation of the EMU.
It even calls itself the "blueprint" of the EDU's creation. The Delors Report, according to one scholarly article, was the "blueprint" for the EMU.
The Delors Report which set out the blueprint for EMU which was incorporated with only minor changes in the Maastricht Treaty (2) 
The similarities surrounding both situations are so obvious that I have to make a table to document them all. The more I read about this "Delors Report" the more it reminds me of what Solana's aims are with the CEPS Task Force Report:

Delors Report (EMU)
CEPS Task Force Report (EDU)
Chair: Eu Commission President
16 members
2 rapporteurs
38 pages
Chair: Former EU High Representative
16 members
2 rapporteurs
35 pages
Delors Report came in response to a specific request from the 1988 European Council
Though not requested by the 2013 European Council, the CEPS Report implied the inadequacies of the 2013 European Council as part of the reason for their own report
Delors Report led to charging the “Monetary Committee” and “Council of European Central Bank Governors” at the June 1989 European Council with implementing an EMU in temporal stages, setting “convergence” criteria for participants
Suggested setting up a committee at June 2015 European Council to recommend creating an EDU in stages, reaching “convergence,” specifically, in a manner “similar to the approach in creating EMU”
Suggested starting off by only working with those states who were ready to move forward, adding others later (i.e. today’s Eurozone).
Suggested starting off by only working with those states who were ready to move forward, adding others later. (i.e. PESCO in defence)
According to one analyst, wrote the “blueprint” for the future EMU
Wrote the “blueprint” for the future EDU
Was an influential group of experts which made the policy proposals for the creation of an EMU
Was an influential group of experts which made the policy proposals for the creation of an EDU
The Delors Report hinted at a timetable, but it wasn’t until June 1989 European Council that the committee was set up who haggled over the criteria and deadlines
Suggests an “independent committee” set up at June 2015 European Council to propose the actual time table, specifically recommending to do this in the same way EMU was created.
Delors Report proposes three stages of integration, with the Monetary Committee setting up the actual time tables and convergence criteria
Solana report proposes “mandatory upgrades” and “milestones” in three “baskets of reform, calling on a future independent committee to build the actual timeline
Report was the result of unanimous agreement of the experts after months of deliberations, in order to present at the June European Council
Report was the result of consensus of agreement of the experts after months of deliberations, in order to present at the June European Council
Other Interesting Facts
Other Interesting Facts
“Aware of this fact, the then president of the Commission Jacques Delors proposed to the German Chancellor Helmut Kohl – then in charge of the EC presidency - to seize the opportunity to push for EMU.” (3)
@javiersolana: "with geopolitical changes around the #EU, the time has come to push, have to find political will to implement" #CEPSDefence.

My First Thesis

First Thesis: The CEPS Task Force Report is deliberately and intentionally supposed to be for the EDU, what the Delors Report was for the EMU. The CEPS Report is deliberately meant to be the "Delors Report" of European Defence. The similarities are obvious and deliberate, and almost explicit.

Likelihood: Extremely probable, almost a "fact." 

This is somewhat easy to prove, probably because the CEPS Task Force sets itself up that way, and almost implicitly admits it.

My Second Thesis

Second Thesis: Javier Solana sees himself as the "Jacques Delors" of European defence integration, and thus the founding father of the future EDU. He purposely plays the part that the EU Commission President played for EU economic integration, except in the corresponding area of EU defence integration.

Likelihood:  Quite likely

The EU Commission President Jacques Delors chaired the Delors Report/ Delors Committee. This makes sense, because the EU Commission is in charge of the EU in all its finance and budget aspects.

But who is Jacques Delors? He was the longest officeholder in the EU, overseeing 3 commission colleges. He and his commission are considered by some to be the founding fathers of the Euro. He is considered the "architect of the single currency."  The daily Telegraph states that he is "credited as the architect of the modern EU and the euro."  To this day, when the EU has got euro troubles, newspapers get his opinion. According to Encyclopedia Brittanica:

Delors left government to become the president of the European Commission in 1985. He revitalized the long-stalled EC, pushing through reforms and overseeing the entry into force of both the Single European Act (1987) and the Maastricht Treaty (1993), the latter of which created the EU.

But...The CEPS Report is deliberately meant to be the "Delors Report" of European Defence. Javier Solana chaired this Report, in the same way that Delors chaired the EMU report. Apparently, Javier Solana thinks he has the same role to play in the EDU's creation that EU Commission President Delors did in the EMU's creation. But who does he think he is!?! Leader of EU defence integration or something!?!?

Let's allow the man to speak for himself. Solana gave the keynote of this presentation in Brussels on March 09, 2015. The CEPS Twitter page quotes him as saying this:

"I will put all of the energies that I have left to push forward this process" of European defence integration.

This isn't some random outburst of passion from an academic who likes writing reports about international policy. It reinforces what we already should have assumed, based on the role he is deliberately trying to play on the stage of EU history. If EU history about the EMU's creation was a play, then Solana is clearly acting as if he is the lead part in the sequel.

Solana spent 10 years building the EU's ESDP/CSDP. He developed the EU's civilian-military crisis management structures. It seems he wants to finish the job. He likely wants to leave a legacy, instead of 10 years as a frustrated and worn out EU High Representative.

His "vocational self-understanding," his mission, is to be the founding father of the future EU Defence Union. He is not just an influential helper in the EU defence integration project. He is the one at the front, leading the charge, with everything that is left in him.

My Third Thesis

Third Thesis: Theses 1-2 almost certainly entail EU-level career ambitions for Solana. If Solana puts together an EDU by 2019, whose going to say no to him being High Representative again?!? Delors was a very long-serving Commission President. Is it a stretch to say that Javier Solana, the "Jacques Delors" of European defence, wants political power as well?

Likelihood: More probable than not

These career ambitions will manifest sooner rather than later. If he's going to become High Representative again, one commenter wisely noted that speculation would be useless, because a very short time frame until things started to heat up. I used to be skeptical, but now I somewhat agree. If Solana intends to be in charge of the EU's military, he's not going to do it overnight after writing a bunch of articles and giving speeches about global governance. He's been out of the game for a while, so he needs some kind of stepping for example....working for the HR in a CSDP related capacity.

The Task Force recommends setting up two groups: 

The European Council should appoint an independent committee, supported by the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the relevant branches of the European Commission acting under the authority of the HR/VP, to propose a roadmap of practical and realistic steps for the implementation of these recommendations in stages, involving the attainment of harmonisation criteria and mandatory milestones for upgrades in each basket of reform.
The analogous committee in the EMU's formation is likely the Monetary Committee, who set the actual criteria and was an "independent" group of experts, who were nonetheless connected to politics. They ultimately negotiated the criteria for the EMU's creation at the Treaty of Maastricht. They existed at the time the Delors Report came out, and were not led directly by Delors.

However, the CEPS Task Force Report proposes a committee which does not exist yet. Granted, it kind of does, in the CEPS Task Force. These are a group of politically decorated experts, who aren't technically politicians, but now are more along the lines of "experts."  Perhaps this committee that Mogherini will likely appoint will have continuity with the CEPS Task Force.

A Steering Board of Defence Ministers of participating member states in this Permanent Structured Cooperation will be established. Much like the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), defence ministers will elect among peers a permanent chairman to co-preside the Steering Board together with the High Representative.
establish a permanent forum for consultation and decisionmaking between defence ministers of member states committed to the creation of the EDU (a ‘Defence Group’), gradually leading to the formation of a dedicated Council of Defence Ministers;
File:Jeroen Dijsselbloem 2012 (highres).jpg
President of the Eurogroup
Jeroen Dijsselbloem

 It is no surprise that the informal meeting of Defence Ministers in Riga has a lot of ideas that are easily cross-referenced to the CEPS Task Force report.

This "Defence Group" proposed by Solana and crew is analogous to the "Euro Group" that is the set of ministers that runs the eurozone. It has a permanent chairperson from one of its members, just like this report recommends.

Photo: EU2015.LV
Statement by EU Defence Ministers in Riga

And states this:
Strengthen institutional coherence and consistency by better integrating the CSDP bodies in the EEAS structures by, inter alia, i) linking them up to the geographical divisions; ii) facilitating the flow of information (at headquarters and between Brussels and the field); iii) and assigning full-time responsibility for CSDP to a Deputy Secretary General.
Mogherini, at her Parliament hearing, has already said she wants to integrate and streamline the crisis management stuff into EEAS. It is no surprise Solana advocates this kind of power consolidation into the relatively independent EEAS. Furthermore, it recommends a Deputy Secretary General of the High Representative have full time charge of CSDP. Well, the entire CEPS Task Force is about CSDP, and Solana admittedly has a passion for it.

Here is the org chart for the EEAS. There are two Deputy Secretary Generals, one of which oversees CSDP. Evidently, one does not do this "full time" so they are going to need a third deputy secretary general to do that.

It is speculation that Solana wants these jobs. But I don't think it's at all irrational speculatioin, given what he has said and the role he is playing in the CEPS Task Force. The idea that he has some kind of career ambitions in the EU isn't implausible at all.

This is Insane...

If Solana sees himself as the leader of EU defence integration, then the implications are radical. This Task Force Report is insane, especially if these are the personal ambitions of Javier Solana!*  Give it a read.

1) Proposes that a European Empire militarily occupy the countries around it, in the Mediterreanean and East. Where have we seen this before? Oh yeah. Rome (in the Mediterranean). The picture from the Bible is of a Roman ruler (Daniel 9:26: Daniel 7) who rides out in conquest (Revelation 6:1-2) The fact that Solana and team propose to "project security" in the Mediterranean and middle East using rapid response military force is a stark picture of what that could look like.. And its every easy to see how this could start somewhat peaceful, but ultimately start a war. 

2) The report proposes linking military rapid response with the ENP itself, which is confirmed for seven years. The ability to conduct military operations in the Mediterranean and Middle East should be part of the "ENP toolbox." The report recommends giving the ENP an "upgrade" in this way. Maybe those who thought the 7 year treaty would be a covenant of military protection for Israel weren't so wrong after all. The CEPS Task Force sees the EU as a "security provider" in the neighborhood, fostering stability there with a wide variety of military mechanisms.

3) Report proposes massive increases in defence spending, even beyond NATO levels. In Daniel 11, the Antichrist financially serves the "god of fortresses." He is very keen on military and defence spending, which this report strongly emphasizes, hoping that member states go even farther than the 2% GDP commitment to NATO, which they aren't meeting.

4) A military command HQ in Brussels. In Daniel 11, the Antichrist is defined by the fact that he is a military leader. In Revelation 13, people are in awe, and ask "Who is like the beast? Who can wage war against it?" Furthermore, when the ten nation WEU gave its power to the EU, and formed a "common purpose" (i.e. common security and defence policy), that was an act of defence integration that was a long time in the making, and pushed by Solana himself. (see Revelation 17). The ten kings have a military common purpose, by which they ultimately destroy end times "Babylon." The fact that Solana wants to push the military common purpose (CSDP) forward, with all the energy left in him, has the potential to be very prophetically significant.

In Summary 

1) The CEPS Task Force on European Defence, chaired by Javier Solana, is meant to be the equivalent of the "Delors Report" except for European defence integration. It is for the "EDU" what the Delors report was for the "EMU" back in 1989.

2) Solana sees himself as the "Jacques Delors" of European Defence integration. He purposely plays the part that the EU Commission President played for EU economic integration, except in the corresponding area of EU defence integration. His statement that he will pour all his remaining energy into EU defence integration is further proof of this. He believes himself to be the founding father and architect of the future European Defence Union

3) Solana aims to be the founding father of the EU's defence project, and perhaps ultimately lead this project. 

Action Items

Several important action items:

  1. Watch the June 2015 European Council on Defence issues. The CEPS Task Force report makes all its recommendations for the June European Council.
  2. As one commenter wisely noted, prepare and disseminate materials surrounding this theory in the event Solana makes a sudden or imminent return to leadership. 
  3. "People get ready because Jesus is coming." So we should pursue our sanctification more intensely, and step up evangelistic efforts where appropriate. 

We did not...I repeat...did not realize the full implications of that report Javier Solana chaired. Solana was not just bored making homework for himself. In context of European history, chairing that report was a flagrant act of vocational self-understanding, that Javier is to lead the new European Defence Union.

Who does he think he is? The leader of EU military integration or something!?!?

I think we already know the answer.

We've been waiting for a Solana "comeback." I may be exagerrating, but I'm seriously wondering if we have just witnessed the very beginning of said "comeback."


5) (free to download, hardcopy costs money)
7) CEPS Twitter page

*I generally attribute the ideas of this report to Solana, since he gave the keynote and chaired it, and knowing some about his background. The report reached a relative consensus, though the report states the report can only be attributed to the rapporteurs.


  1. it would be denial to say there is nothing here in all this material (and solana's huge part in it) to watch. who else is making such decisive leadership moves working through all these channels to implement the european machine toward a global end? while other european programs are in disrepair (clay and iron mixed) he seems to be steadily making sure of a backdoor entry for this one of his that is still in the workshop for now. he is now, as he has been from the beginning, part and parcel-nuts and bolts-building a solid global mechanism for world dominance-funded and fueled with everything needed to move at will. i think it will be soon that this strong arm endeavor will be presented. just in time to bolster flagging european aims and goals. he will be lauded and credited highly as before as the most awarded man in eu history. and just like article and recommendation 666 he has a place built in for someone (such as himself) to run it. he is an interesting person for sure. his age brings him respect because he is seasoned and mature in approach-very measured in his ways to not say too much and to deflect from himself to give credit to others----but it is him that has everyone listening to him and turning thier heads his direction when he speaks---i suspect like when e f hutton speaks haha! i smell a rat. probably the ultimate rat in mr solana. this is still a wait and see-----but--with not a long wait to know one way or the other. the times are ripe for what he has been working tirelessly to bring forward to the world stage.

    1. Very good insights Andre'. My apologies for taking so long to reply. Indeed it is still a wait and see. I have trouble trusting God sometimes, and get impatient with the events. But it seems they are determined to discuss EU military integration at the June 2015 summit. I am very anxious to see what they have going on there. Groupthink is sweeping the EU committees like its no one's business. They all want the same types of things. Indeed, if they have their way, it will as you say, become a global military machine. That's what Solana wants and thats what Mogherini wants as well.

    2. a global military machine that may be ready in time to surround jerusalem? (luke 21 v 15 {comparing all of luke 21 to whole ch matt 24} scenario?) time will surely tell. the eu has not been bashful to push israel around politically so with an army (comprised of multiple people to form one unit---an army of armies? and/or united with un "peace keeping" forces?)----moving militarily against them also in the near future?

      also the eu economy as with the american one headed into ruin quite soon actually it may be needed to assist in transfer to global monetary policies? it sure appears that big operations are being prepared against our own citizens here and there too? not far fetched in my way of thinking. this fall the wheels may be coming off of america's economy. i think everything is about to shift into very high gear on these fronts.

      much to watch.....(let the reader understand our Lord said).......but our eyes must stay fixed upon Jesus.

  2. and also i want to thank you for this post and for this site. i feel it important to watch what you are compelled to watch also and have for years been unable to shake what all has been shown thus far in watching this man and his global policy making. but however and whatever and (whoever) is going on--this or perhaps something else that we do not see just yet---it is goin' by the Book as i like to say.......and we will know based on God's word what He has laid it out before us in these end times.

    1. Thanks for your kind words. I am glad that people are taking a notice of what is happening. And you are right, when it happens it happens by the book and I am often amazed at how prophecy often has "flawless execution" fulfilling it in a way that no one expected and covering all of the interpretive bases. We shall wait and see. I really can't wait to see what will come of this. Maranatha.

  3. Your points are all well stated. There is really no doubt that Solana desires to be a big player in setting up the EU defense integration. I think however that it unnecessary to define the whole process. All he needs to be is where he already is located. If war were to break out now or soon he might very well be forced and allowed to lead. In the end he can get what he wants only if he is able to prove a genius in warfare. It was genius and daring that allowed Alexander the Great to attack and defeat the Persians with an army of 40 to 60 thousand versus an army of 700,000 to one and a half million.

    1. Remember what the EU spokesman in Washington said in 2010 when the Michigan militia said he might be the AC.

    2. If Solana were to make a sudden return, the EU and US press officer's comments would be turned on its head. Indeed, events are moving towards the unthinkable, the potential return of Solana to politics. God is wise and sees the future, even things that seem unlikely now.

    3. Indeed the Antichrist will be a genius in warfare, and people will praise him because no one can fight against him. I just hope we receive some additional clarity in the future. It is his passion, EU defence. But how that passion plays out I will be very interested to see. Come Lord Jesus

  4. My friend..

    I am as always impressed with both your research as this article, witch I am sure will give all of us enough reason to keep an close eye on JS ...again.

    You give me..again...a lot of translation work. I am still so amazed that only a handfull of people have noticed this man and that most of the christians still wait for some 33year old charismatic man who will come out of the shadows to solve world problems..

    I think if the right crisis comes up solana will have no difficulty to replace the HR because she cannot handle it..

    1. Thank you for yoru kind words Mathieu!!

      I appreciate you taking the time to translate some of my articles. I am trying to make my articles more concise, and not so long as this one, so that I am more to the point in them.

      It seems he could easily find himself in a place where he could have the stepping stone back to power. I just wish I knew how soon it would be.

  5. The EMU took nearly fifteen years to bring about. In wartime however the military can be united very quickly. First year sleeping, second year creeping, and third year leaping. I suspect suggest putting Europes military together is less difficult than one might expect. The US paid for the nuts and bolts of the integration when it financed the NATO integration after 1997. The pamphlet calls for a graded integration so as not to scare the readers. Given that the character in question is somewhat aged if this is to be then it must and will happen soon under the duress of war. This is quite scary for anyone who actually thinks it possible as I do.

    1. Indeed, as you know, EU military integration has already been in progress to some extent, with the WEU - EU integration. Nevertheless, full blown implementation will take years. But I agree with you, it won't take as long as the EMU, because the moment the EU is attacked, they have a mutual assistance clause and the PSC and all kinds of military apparatus that would awaken in a moment. However, due to the security threats in the neighborhood, it seems they will be able to push forward this plan for EDU in the near future without needing a military attack. An attack would seal the deal for sure, unifying the already integrated armies in a moment. British elections are in a few days, and the tide is slightly tipping towards Ed Milliband. Of course he promises there won't be a european army. But that's the thing. Technically, Solana's plan is not an EU army, and his members clarified this. But it is so close to one that the difference is almost semantical in nature. It is my understanding that the Labour government does not want to hold an EU referendum and could potentially accept more defence cooperation. Those are the fears of the critics at least.

      Indeed, Solana is no longer a young man and he will want to establish his legacy soon. However, it may be as we fear that his legacy will not turn out to be a good remembering at all.