This has set a precedent that Berlin and Brussels are eager to exploit. The UK-France defense pact will now have a domino effect on other European Unionmember nations as EU elites move aggressively to shape a combined European defense structure. They will use the EU-France precedent to push EU member states into a series of similar alliances designed to merge EU nations’ fighting forces into a pan-European defense structure under a single centralized high command.
“Implemented correctly, these treaties could become a hopeful precedent for theentire European Union,” former EU foreign-policy chief Javier Solana recently stated. “By transcending strictly national limits, these treaties chart the future path of European defense” (New Europe, January 3; emphasis mine throughout).
Noting Britain’s former traditional resistance to accepting “a Europe with autonomous military capacity,” Solana sees the Anglo-French defense deal as the signthat Britain has come on board with the rest of Europe in support of a combined European defense force. He then goes on to declare that, “Likewise, the joint expeditionary forces established under the treaties could lead to the eventual creation of a wider structure, as they already contemplate ‘bilateral cooperation with nato, the European Union, the United Nations, or other operations’” (ibid.).This development of a combined European military force as envisaged by Javier Solana is entirely consistent with what the Trumpet has long forecasted—even two years before the enabling effect of the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, right on down to its clarification in the latest Lisbon Treaty/EU constitution of 2009! Not only that, a combined European army was consistently pointed to as a futurefulfillment of Bible prophecy by Herbert Armstrong for 50 years during his lifetime! Now we stand on the cusp of it becoming a reality. The year 2011 is set to see further merging of the European Union’s defense structure along the lines established by the Anglo-French agreement.
Inveterate watchers of the developing Eurobeast know that this process will lead to the loss of sovereign control of thedefense capability of each nation that joins this process—“transcending strictly national limits.” What is of greatest concern, given past history, is that the industrially, economically and politically strongest nation within Europe—Germany—will have the strongest say in the structure and the location of the high command to which the amalgamating European defense structure will report.
It isGermany, in particular that nation’s defense minister, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, that is behind the push to consolidate European defense industries. This is but a precursor to the consolidation of Europe’s defense forces. The whole process has the support of the United States and of nato. But the dangers inherent in such a combined European military force at a time when Guttenberg is rushing toprofessionalize Germany’s own military structure—under a singular high command—are extreme. This is especially so when the likes of Solana observe that (ibid.):
[T]he EU has undertaken 24 missions in Europe, Africa and Asia, differing in nature, scope and aims, and combining military and civilian means.
Today, the EU is being asked to conduct complex missions in adverse circumstances. Indoing so, Europe must draw on the lessons of its past successes. We Europeans need to respond favorably, quickly and effectively. Defense missions must be more adaptable, prompt, multinational and multi-instrumental.
Elsewhere in his article, Solana implies that Europe could well fill the increasing gap in global security being created by a U.S. on the wane.
As he states, “The Franco-British...