Breakup of the EU
By Dr. Steve Elwart
The
“ten-horned beast” is a prophetic image that occurs in Daniel (Dan. 7:7–8, 20, 24) and Revelation (Rev. 12:3; 13:1; 17:3–16). There are some prophecy writers
that believe that the ten-horned beast is a symbol for a European organization,
such as the European Union. Recent events, however, would tend to disprove the
idea of the European Union will be the ten-horned beast written about in the
Bible.
The
intent of the European Union (EU) was to bond European nations so closely
together in such a prosperous enterprise that no nation would have any reason to
break the peace or fear another. After Europe struggled for centuries to
establish their individual national sovereignty and self-determination, they
were not about to sacrifice that sovereignty again. They wanted a system where
the sovereignty of all the countries was to be retained, but constrained in such
a way that no one could take it away.
The
EU was founded for “peace and prosperity.” The thinking was that wars would not
break out between countries involved in trade. If either the peace or prosperity
disappeared, or disappeared in some nations, what would happen to the
organization?
Current
events had shown what would happen and the answer is not pretty.
From
its founding until 2008, the EU flourished. Then in six weeks it
all unraveled. The self-confident certainties of Europe began to come apart.
Peace and prosperity both were broken and Europe suffered a crisis.
The
first event that shook the EU was the Russian invasion of Georgia in August of 2012. The invasion
did two things. First, is shattered the illusion that war between nations in
Europe was impossible. Second, it also ended the period of Russia’s irrelevance.
From the fall of the Soviet Union until the invasion, Russia was written off as
a potential threat. With the collapse of the Soviet empire, new nations were
spawned and old nations were freed. When the Soviet Union fractured, the newly
formed ex-Eastern Europe wanted to join NATO and the EU because they believed that this would
guarantee their security, prosperity.
Russia
thought it had reached an agreement with the West that the newly liberated
nations would not be incorporated into either organization. Russia wanted to
assure a buffer zone from what it considered Western Expansionism. The Georgian
action put the West on notice that Russia was a country not to be trifled with.
It also let the other countries of the Eastern bloc that the same could happen
to them if they got too close to the West. Russia’s recent actions in Crimea and Ukraine are just a continuation of this policy.
The
European Union does not have a defensive component; it assumes that NATO would
fill that role. The thinking was that Germany would bear the brunt of a Russian
attack and France would fight a holding action at the back door until the United
States could gear up and enter the fray. Russia’s limited actions in Eastern
Europe were not in the game plan and NATO’s response was … nothing. There were
protests and sanctions that are hurting the Russian economy, but the Russians or
their proxies are still in place.
That
destroyed the notion of peace for the EU.
Now
the notion of prosperity has now been shattered as well with the multiple debt
crises that have arisen. The PIGS countries (Portugal, Italy, Greece, & Spain) have
been a source of trouble for the EU. Greece is the most immediate problem for
the EU now.
European
Union members want Greece to do more to revamp its debt-burdened economy before
they release another round of loans in the 240-billion-euro ($259 billion)
bailout program. At stake is Greece’s ability to avoid a default and stay in the
19-nation euro area.
The
showdown will figure heavily at a meeting of euro-area finance ministers in
Latvia on April 24. In the shadow of the brinkmanship, Greek government bonds
last week suffered their worst week since Alexis Tsipras was elected as prime
minister in January on a platform promising to undo the tough bailout terms.
Greece’s
so-called red lines are a refusal to cut wages and pensions, introduce new taxes
or sell state assets, Alternate Health and Social Security Minister Dimitris Stratoulis said in an interview with Athens-based
Skai TV.
“The
Syriza-led government will carry out the reforms the Greek
people need, not ones requested by our creditors,” Stratoulis also told Skai TV.
The country won’t be pressured “by euro-exit (Greece being forced from the EU)
threats.”
While
Germany is the focus for pushing austerity on the Greeks, Finland is actually
the unlikely stage in Greece’s Eurozone drama. Leaked documents reveal that
Finland is already making contingency plans for a Greek exit from the EU. This
northern country has turned out to be the most uncompromising of the EU’s
creditor nations.
Having
suffered through three consecutive years of recession, Finland sees its economic
output still 5 percent below its pre-crisis levels. Finland has suffered an
economic downturn of almost Greek proportions. The boon from oil prices and the
launch of Eurozone quantitative easing will still only see the economy expand at
a paltry 0.8 percent this year, the worst performance of any EU country with the
exception of Italy and Cyprus. Stagnating growth also saw Finland stripped of
its much coveted Triple-A sovereign debt rating from Standard & Poor’s last
year.
While
Finland is struggling with its economy almost as much as Greece is, the Finns do
not see the Greeks as being serious about getting their spending under
control.
While
most of the world’s attention is looking toward the Iran negotiations, Athens
will be keeping half an eye on developments in Helsinki, where with 99% of the
votes counted, conservative National Coalition Party had 18.2% of the vote compared to the
opposition Centre Party’s 21.2%. The outcome of the elections and the
government that Finland forms may very well determine Greece’s economic
fate.
The
anti-NATO Centre party has won the most votes in the election; it still needs to
form a coalition. The populist, anti-EU True Finns are predicted to come in
second place and it good contention for forming a coalition cabinet with the
Center party.
Between
the two countries, it seems as if either the defensive or the economic nation of
Europe will change.
To
see what the future of the European Europe will be, look to Finland.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home