The BBC Reported on December 6, 2000, that the European Union (less Britain) is in the process of creating an EU army. “The EU army will be used as a rapid reaction force for military purposes in and around the European continent. The European Union has described the 60,000-member Rapid Defense Force as an enterprise capable of having autonomous capacity to take decisions.”
Many questions remain, however, including the exact relationship between the new force and NATO, the conditions under which the European Union might be able to use NATO military assets, and what role the European nations that are members of NATO but not of the European Union will play.
The new EU army has been a hotly debated subject between Britain and France. President Jacques Chirac of France recently insisted it had to operate in coordination with the alliance, but independently of it. Unfortunately, this wording caused a fierce reaction in Britain, where the conservative opposition has accused Prime Minister Tony Blair of acting to undermine NATO.
Expansion of European Union
Over the next few years up to 12 new nations will be added to the EU: Poland, Romania, Czech Republic, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, Slovenia, Estonia, Cyprus, and Malta are all being considered for membership to the EU.
For us, there are two interesting aspects of the new developments within the EU. Political boundaries are being drawn in a manner consistent with Daniel’s prophecy. Turkey has been left off the list of potential EU members and as such the demarcation line between east and west matches the ancient divisions of the eastern and western Roman empire. Where once east was separated from the west based on religious differences, they are now segregated based on political boundaries. Secondly, the new politically created entity will have armed services at its disposal.
Over the coming years, NATO may well have a reduced role in dealing with strictly European matters. As a result, Turkey (a NATO member) would become further separated from the western world.
U.S. out of Balkans
Further minimizing the role of NATO in Europe is a promise by U.S. President-elect George W. Bush that he will negotiate the removal of American troops from peacekeeping duties in the Balkans. The current peacekeeping duties would be managed by the Europeans without the direct involvement of the Americans or of NATO.
Mr. Bush’s idea comes at a time when Kosovo, which is run by the United Nations but patrolled by NATO-led troops, is facing a difficult period with the fall from power of the Yugoslav president, Slobodan Milosevic. Kosovo Albanians’ desires for independence seem farther from fulfillment than before, yet they trust Washington and American troops more than the Europeans, whom they see as pro-Serb.
Mr. Bush’s candidate for foreign-policy adviser, Condoleezza Rice, unearthed new ground with the idea that the American military should be reserved for war-fighting in the Persian Gulf or the Pacific, while the weaker European forces should concentrate on peacekeeping at home. As the New York Times reported: “Dividing NATO into ‘real soldiers’ and ‘escorts’ who walk children to school is the first way to divide the alliance itself.”
The Bush-Rice proposal is not new, but merely an extension of a doctrine put forth by Gen. Colin L. Powell under the last Republican president, Mr. Bush’s father. It is General Powell’s belief that American troops should essentially be reserved for a real crisis where overwhelming force could be brought to bear to ensure victory and limit casualties.
Currently, these suggestions do not sit well with NATO. As reported in the New York Times, “Lord Robertson, the NATO secretary general, has regularly told visiting American congressmen that the Bush proposal could under mine the whole idea of risk sharing, which is precisely the glue that holds the alliance together.”
Another complication is the role of Russia in the Balkans. The Russians have participated in peacekeeping in both Bosnia and Kosovo under the aegis of the Americans in order to avoid taking orders directly from a NATO general. If and when the Americans leave, who will be left to manage the Russians? Will they be left to manage their own affairs in this region?
One of the more interesting aspects about NATO is that its primary reason for existing after the cold war can be described in two words: The Balkans. The Balkans gave NATO a role: to defeat aggression and stabilize southern Europe. If the Americans pull out of the Balkans, what use is NATO?
The prophecies of both Daniel and Ezekiel dovetail into an alignment of east versus west and north versus south. By having Turkey retain membership in a strong and thriving alliance such as NATO, it would be difficult to see the fulfillment of these prophecies. As we commence a new century, we see that Europe’s reliance on NATO is diminishing greatly. Instead, a new alliance is being formed in Europe, an alliance that does not include Turkey. As a result, it seems that the lines are being redrawn, and new boundaries are being created, which fall into line with boundaries more suitable to fulfilling biblical prophecies.
The new century is bound to introduce change. Will this new year witness the return of our Lord Jesus Christ? Let us pray that it may be so.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One