biblestudying.net

Printer Friendly Version

Particulars of Christianity:
314 End Times Prophecy (Eschatology)

Possible Corroboration From
a Prominent Secular Geostrategist

Prophetic Symbols: Several Possible Scenarios (Part 1)
Prophetic Symbols: Several Possible Scenarios (Part 2)
Prophetic Symbols: Several Possible Scenarios (Part 3)
Prophetic Symbols: Corroboration from a Secular Geostrategist

Articles 7-12
Articles 13-18
Articles 19-25
Articles 26-29

In previous articles in this section we have presented a Biblically generated model for the end time symbols. Then we compared these symbols to several modern scenarios. One of the scenarios, which we devoted some time to examining, involved the potential significance of an independent Kurdish nation. We will now take note of some statements made by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book entitled The Grand Chessboard, which bear a striking resemblance to both the Biblical model that we developed, which presented a revival of the Eastern Roman/Byzantine empire in the Middle East, and the speculation that we offered regarding the possible emergence Kurdistan.

Before we take a look at the book itself, let's take some time to get to know the credentials of its author, Zbigniew Brzezinski. The following is CNN's online biography of Brzezinski, which can be found at http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/kbank/profiles/brzezinski/.

"Born on March 28, 1928, in Warsaw, Poland, the future national security adviser to President Carter and son of a Polish diplomat spent part of his youth in France and Germany before moving to Canada. He received a B.A. and M.A. in political science from McGill University, in 1949 and 1950 respectively, and in 1953 earned his doctorate in political science from Harvard. He taught at Harvard before moving to Columbia University in 1961 to head the new Institute on Communist Affairs. In 1958 he became a U.S. citizen. During the 1960s Brzezinski acted as an adviser to Kennedy and Johnson administration officials. Generally taking a hard line on policy toward the Soviet Union, he was also an influential force behind the Johnson administration's "bridge-building" ideas regarding Eastern Europe. During the final years of the Johnson administration, he was a foreign policy adviser to Vice President Hubert Humphrey and his presidential campaign.

In 1973, Brzezinski became the first director of the Trilateral Commission, a group of prominent political and business leaders and academics from the United States, Western Europe and Japan. Its purpose was to strengthen relations among the three regions. Future President Carter was a member, and when he declared his candidacy for the White House in 1974, Brzezinski, a critic of the Nixon-Kissinger foreign policy style, became his adviser on foreign affairs. After his victory in 1976, Carter made Brzezinski national security adviser.

Aiming to replace Kissinger's "acrobatics" in foreign policy-making with a foreign policy "architecture," Brzezinski was as eager for power as his rival. However, his task was complicated by his focus on East-West relations, and in a hawkish way -- in an administration where many cared a great deal about North-South relations and human rights. On the whole, Brzezinski was a team player. He emphasized the further development of the U.S.-China relationship, favored a new arms control agreement with Moscow and shared the president and Secretary of State Cyrus Vance's view that the United States should seek international cooperation in its diplomacy instead of going it alone. In the growing crisis atmosphere of 1979 and 1980 due to the Iranian hostage situation, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and a deepening economic crisis, Brzezinski's anti-Soviet views gained influence but could not end the Carter administration's malaise. Since his time in government, Brzezinski has been active as a writer, teacher and consultant."

As this bio demonstrates Brzezinski has been an important insider in both American politics and international affairs for many decades. His book, from which we will pull some notable excerpts, is subtitled "American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives." The content of the book is largely concerned with maintaining the superiority of the world's only superpower, the United States and the critical importance of Central Asia in this endeavor. The specifics of this commentary will become evident through the quotes themselves so a more detailed summary will not be necessary.

(As you compare similarities between Brzezinski's book and the current Middle East intervention that is taking place under the Republican administration of George W. Bush, that Brzezinski himself has worked in Democratic Administrations, under Kennedy, Johnson, and Carter. And although "Big Oil" interests are usually associated with the Republican party and are currently being advanced under the Republican administration of George W. Bush, please note how much Brzezinski, a man who has exclusively served under Democratic administrations, is focused on protecting and advancing U.S. oil interests as vital to America's much-needed imperialism and one of the main goals of our foreign policy. This phenomenon of a Democratic political figure outlining foreign policy objectives and strategies mobilized four years later by a Republican administration prevents us from labeling this as merely a "left-wing" or "right-wing" agenda. Instead, it implicates both parties.)

We have grouped the following quotes according the nature of the tie in that they have with the issues that we have discussed in this study. Along with each section of quotes we have provided some commentary of our own in order to explain the significance of quote in relation to our topic. The reason for our display of Brzezinski's book is to make the reader as aware as possible of the real potential for convergence that exists between the speculative events that we have described previously, the Biblically generated prophetic model, and the geopolitical landscape that is even now evolving in the world (as described by Brzezinski).

That said, here are the categories that we will use to present Brzezinski's quotes followed by the quotes themselves and our commentary. (Each quote is accompanied by the page number, from which the quote is taken. The book is copyrighted by Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1997 and was published by Basic Books, a member of the Perseus Books Group.)

1. America and the West as a superpower and the last superpower.
2. A Eurasian challenger emerging in the region.
3. Need for an external threat to mobilize U.S. imperialism.
4. Reasons that Eurasia is valuable.

1. America and the West as a superpower and the last superpower.

Brzezinski's presentation of the American/Western Superpower bears a strong resemblance to the Biblical depiction of the final head of the succession of seven empires symbolized by the seven-headed beast of Revelation as discussed elsewhere in this series of articles.

"The last decade of the twentieth century has witnessed a tectonic shift in world affairs. For the first time ever, a non-Eurasian power has emerged not only as the key arbiter of Eurasian power relations but also as the world's paramount power. The defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union was the final step in the rapid ascendance of a Western Hemisphere power, the United States, as the sole and, indeed, the first truly global power." (p. xiii)

"For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia. For half a millennium, world affairs were dominated by Eurasian powers and peoples who fought with one another for regional domination and reached out for global power. Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent in Eurasia-and America's global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained." (p. 30)

"The time has come for the United States to formulate and prosecute an integrated, comprehensive, and long-term geostrategy for all of Eurasia. This need arises out of the interaction between two fundamental realities: America is now the only global superpower, and Eurasia is the globe's central arena. Hence, what happens to the distribution of power on the Eurasian continent will be of decisive importance to America's global primacy and to America's historical legacy." (p. 194)

"The disruptive consequences of population explosion, poverty-driven migration, radicalizing urbanization, ethnic and religious hostilities, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction would become unmanageable if the existing and underlying nation-state-based framework of even rudimentary geopolitical stability were itself to fragment. Without sustained and direct American involvement, before long the forces of global disorder could come to dominate the world scene." (p. 195)

"In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the first, as well as the only, truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last." (p. 209)

2. A Eurasian challenger emerging in the region.

This section of quotes is particularly significant since it will present the idea of the emergence of a coalition of states in central Asia. The scenario that Brzezinski lays out here has much correspondence to the Biblical description of the revival of the Eastern Roman/Byzantine empire from the unification of ten kings, which we have seen is connected in the scripture to the Middle East through, among other things, the Seleucid empire.

"The ultimate objective of American policy should be benign and visionary: to shape a truly cooperative global community, in keeping with long-range trends and with the fundamental interests of humankind. But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus also of challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book." (p. xiv)

"The sudden emergence of the first and only global power has created a situation in which an equally quick end to its supremacy-either because of America's withdrawal from the world or because of the sudden emergence of a successful rival-would produce massive international instability. In effect, it would prompt global anarchy." (p. 30)

"Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them; and to pinpoint the geopolitically critical Eurasian states whose location and/or existence have catalytic effects either on the more active geostrategic players or on regional conditions; second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above, so as to preserve and promote vital U.S. interests, and to conceptualize a more comprehensive geostrategy that establishes on a global scale the interconnection between the more specific U.S. policies." (p. 39-40)

"To put it in terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p. 40)

"Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America's status as a global power. However, whether any such coalitions do or do not arise to challenge American primacy will in fact depend to a very large degree on how effectively the United States responds to the major dilemmas identified here." (p. 55)

"In fact, an Islamic revival-already abetted from the outside not only by Iran but also by Saudi Arabia-is likely to become the mobilization impulse for the increasingly pervasive new nationalisms, determined to oppose any reintegration under Russian-and hence infidel-control." (p. 133)

"It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it. Geopolitical pluralism will become an enduring reality only when a network of pipeline and transportation routes links the region directly to the major centers of global economic activity via the Mediterranean and Arabian Seas, as well as overland." (p. 148)

"In the short run, it is in America's interest to consolidate and perpetuate the prevailing geopolitical pluralism on the map of Eurasia. That puts a premium on maneuver and manipulation in order to prevent the emergence of a hostile coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America's primacy, not to mention the remote possibility of any one particular state seeking to do so." (p. 198)

3. Need for an external threat to mobilize U.S. imperialism.

This third section of quotes will demonstrate how the challenge of gaining support for foreign war is met by allowing or instigating a devastating attack on the home country. This scenario connects with the Biblical portrayal that the great city of the empire of the False Prophet, Mystery Babylon, will be destroyed by the ten kings of the Antichrist's empire. Earlier we speculated that this event may serve as a means to deceive the peoples of the earth to deploy for battle in the valley of Megiddo.

"The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor." (p. 24-25)

"It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization." (p. 35-36)

"Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat. Such a consensus generally existed throughout World War II and even during the Cold War...In the absence of a comparable external challenge, American society may find it much more difficult to reach agreement regarding foreign policies that cannot be directly related to central beliefs and widely shared cultural-ethnic sympathies and that still require an enduring and sometimes costly imperial engagement." (p. 211)

4. Reasons that Eurasia is valuable.

The following quotes from The Grand Chessboard will confirm the Biblical model's emphasis on the Middle East and Central Asian countries in the imperial struggle at the end of the age. These quotes will also explain why and how the Antichrist will be able to achieve such vast political power from the Middle East.

"In that context, how America Ômanages' Eurasia is critical. Eurasia is the globe's largest continent and is geopolitically axial. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 percent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about 60 percent of the world's GNP and about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p. 31)

"The Eurasian Balkans, astride the inevitably emerging transportation network meant to link more directly Eurasia's richest and most industrious western and eastern extremities, are also geopolitically significant. Moreover, they are of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors, namely, Russia, Turkey, and Iran, with China also signaling an increasingly political interest in the region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold." (p. 124)

"The world's energy consumption is bound to vastly increase over the next two or three decades. Estimates by the U.S. Department of Energy anticipate that the world demand will rise by more than 50 percent between 1993 and 2015, with the most significant increase in consumption occurring in the Far East. The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy, and the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p. 125)

"Once pipelines to the area have been developed, Turkmenistan's truly vast natural gas reserves augur a prosperous future for the country's people." (p. 132)

"For Pakistan, the primary interest is to gain geostrategic depth through political influence in Afghanistan-and Tajikistan-and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction linking Central Asia with the Arabian Sea." (p. 139)

"Turkmenistan, for much the same reason, has been actively exploring the construction of a new pipeline through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea..." (p. 145)

"It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it. Geopolitical pluralism will become an enduring reality only when a network of pipeline and transportation routes links the region directly to the major centers of global economic activity via the Mediterranean and Arabian Seas, as well as overland." (p. 148)

Closing Commentary

Once again the purpose of this article is to serve as an addendum to the articles, which preceded it in this section. Its purpose is to emphasize to the reader that the Biblical model that we have outlined, as well as some of the speculations that we have made, are not relegated merely to the realm of eschatology or theological fiction and guesswork, but may be becoming more and more visible in current events and modern geopolitical developments.

Now that we have completed this section and this series of articles we hope that the reader will agree with us that now as ever Christians should remain diligent and watchful for our salvation MAY soon draw near and the events which precede the coming of the Messianic kingdom of Jesus Christ are from any point of view closer than at any time previously.