JEWISH KING JESUS IS COMING AT THE RAPTURE FOR US IN THE CLOUDS-DON'T
MISS IT FOR THE WORLD.THE BIBLE TAKEN LITERALLY- WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE
MAKES GOOD SENSE-SEEK NO OTHER SENSE-LEST YOU END UP IN NONSENSE.
And here are the bounderies of the land that Israel will inherit either through war or peace or God in the future. God says its Israels land and only Israels land. They will have every inch God promised them of this land in the future.
Egypt east of the Nile River, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, The southern part of Turkey and the Western Half of Iraq west of the Euphrates. Gen 13:14-15, Psm 105:9,11, Gen 15:18, Exe 23:31, Num 34:1-12, Josh 1:4.ALL THIS LAND ISRAEL WILL DEFINATELY OWN IN THE FUTURE, ITS ISRAELS NOT ISHMAELS LAND.
12 TRIBES INHERIT LAND IN THE FUTURE
DANIEL 9:26-27
26 And after threescore and two weeks(62X7=434 YEARS+7X7=49 YEARS=TOTAL OF 69 WEEKS OR 483 YRS) shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;(ROMAN LEADERS DESTROYED THE 2ND TEMPLE) and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.(THERE HAS TO BE 70 WEEKS OR 490 YRS TO FUFILL THE VISION AND PROPHECY OF DAN 9:24).(THE NEXT VERSE IS THAT 7 YR WEEK OR (70TH FINAL WEEK).
27 And he ( THE ROMAN,EU PRESIDENT) shall confirm the covenant (PEACE TREATY) with many for one week:(1X7=7 YEARS) and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,(3 1/2 yrs in TEMPLE ANIMAL SACRIFICES STOPPED) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
JEREMIAH 6:14
14 They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.
JEREMIAH 8:11
11 For they have healed the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.
1 THESSALONIANS 5:3
3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
ISAIAH 33:8
8 The highways lie waste, the wayfaring man ceaseth: he hath broken the covenant,(7 YR TREATY) he hath despised the cities, he regardeth no man.(THE WORLD LEADER-WAR MONGER CALLS HIMSELF GOD)
JERUSALEM DIVIDED
GENESIS 25:20-26
20 And Isaac was forty years old (A BIBLE GENERATION NUMBER=1967 + 40=2007+) when he took Rebekah to wife, the daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of Padanaram, the sister to Laban the Syrian.
21 And Isaac intreated the LORD for his wife, because she was barren: and the LORD was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived.
22 And the children (2 NATIONS IN HER-ISRAEL-ARABS) struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the LORD.
23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels;(ISRAEL AND THE ARABS) and the one people shall be stronger than the other people;(ISRAEL STRONGER THAN ARABS) and the elder shall serve the younger.(LITERALLY ISRAEL THE YOUNGER RULES (ISSAC)(JACOB-LATER NAME CHANGED TO ISRAEL) OVER THE OLDER ARABS (ISHMAEL)(ESAU)
24 And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb.
25 And the first came out red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau.(THE OLDER AN ARAB)
26 And after that came his brother out, and his hand took hold on Esau's heel; and his name was called Jacob:(THE YOUNGER-ISRAELI) and Isaac was threescore (60) years old when she bare them.(1967 + 60=2027)(COULD BE THE LAST GENERATION WHEN JERUSALEM IS DIVIDED AMOUNG THE 2 TWINS)(THE 2 TWINS WANT JERUSALEM-THE DIVISION OF JERUSALEM TODAY)(AND WHOS IN CONTROL OF JERUSALEM TODAY-THE YOUNGER ISSAC-JACOB-ISRAEL)(AND WHO WANTS JERUSALEM DIVIDED-THE OLDER,ESAU-ISHMAEL (THE ARABS)
ISAIAH 28:14-19 (THIS IS THE 7 YR TREATY COVENANT OF DANIEL 9:27)
14 Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem.
15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
17 Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.
18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
19 From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.
For peace talks, a 10th month of pregnancy?-Negotiations ended this week without a deal, or an intifada, which leaves a situation ripe for secret contacts between the sides-By Avi Issacharoff May 2, 2014, 3:21 pm 5-The Times of Israel
Nine months of talks between the Palestinians and Israel ended Tuesday night with a whimper. No peace agreement or emotional ceremonies, no explosions or intifadas. The talks simply ended.On the Palestinian side, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas gave a special address on Palestinian television, in which he laid out his conditions for a renewal of the talks: the release of the fourth batch of veteran security prisoners; a complete settlement freeze; and negotiations for three months, in which the borders of two states — Israel and Palestine — will be established.Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not give a similar talk.The official end of the negotiations was overshadowed in Israel by reports from the sentencing proceedings for ex-prime minister Ehud Olmert, and a soccer match between Real Madrid and Bayern Munich. Though on the field the game was one-sided (in Madrid’s favor, for anyone who missed it), Ronaldo and company still looked infinitely more interesting than another report about the fruitless peace effort.A senior American official, who was asked four months ago why the US chose a nine-month window for the talks, replied only half-jokingly that, like pregnancy, the negotiations might bear a peace agreement.Taking the analogy forward, then, this pregnancy ended in an abortion.‘What happens after nine months? What is your Plan B?’But one still cannot reach conclusions that are too far reaching, at least not at this stage. Both sides share an interest in maintaining the quiet, in continuing to sit down for talks even If they don’t bring about a dramatic resolution, in order to maintain the appearance of contact between the sides.The same American official was asked during the conversation, “What happens after nine months?” What is your Plan B? He declined to answer, but it seemed as if he’d been asked the question dozens of times before. It is likely that the US administration has a contingency plan for the day after. But it’s hard to say what that plan is.Maybe the US will present both sides with the fabled “Obama outlines” and see which side will dare turn down the American president.Or maybe Washington will let both sides stew in their own juices: Let Israel deal alone with the international criticism and maybe even with an escalation on the ground; and cut aid to the Palestinians.Abbas, himself, dealt with this question when he met with Israeli journalists 10 days ago. This was before the reconciliation deal between Fatah and Hamas was announced, and the talks hadn’t yet blown up.“What will happen the day after April 29?” he was asked. Abbas said that nothing out of the ordinary would occur. He even hinted that talks would go on through unofficial channels. He also emphasized that security cooperation between the sides would continue.It is possible that this will be all the opening that is needed for secret talks.If the security coordination is handled through secret and semi-secret channels, if Central Command chief Nitzan Alon and Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Yoav Mordechai can visit Ramallah openly, is it not possible that representatives of the two sides would meet to discuss what needs to be done in order to reach a breakthrough in negotiations? The candidates for such talks already exist: Yitzhak Molcho, the prime minister’s tireless emissary, and Majid Faraj, head of the Palestinian general intelligence service. The two aren’t inclined to talk much to the press, to say the least, refraining from interviews and declarations and understanding the importance of the political chain of command.But it doesn’t depend on them. In the end, Netanyahu and Abbas know that there will be a price for a political breakthrough and neither seems eager to pay it. Netanyahu is not keen to break apart his coalition, and Abbas doesn’t believe in Netanyahu.After Fatah and Hamas signed their unity deal late last month, Abbas attempted to calm jittery Israelis via a speech to the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Central Council last Saturday.“This is a government with me at the head,” said Abbas about the technocratic government that is scheduled to take power within five weeks. “I recognize Israel and it will recognize Israel. I reject violence and terror and so will it, and recognize the signed agreements and their legitimacy, and the government will as well.”But then he discovered that in Israel in 2014, no one wants to hear or listen to him. A statement went out from Netanyahu’s office after the talk, claiming that “Abbas verified the killing of the peace process.” In the Prime Minister’s Office, it seems, they don’t let facts, or in this case warnings, confuse them.The next day, the PA president published a statement saying that the Holocaust is the gravest crime in human history. And again Netanyahu responded with a fitting Zionist response — in joining up with Hamas, Abbas had reconciled with Holocaust deniers.But despite Israeli and American worries, the Palestinian unity agreement represents for Abbas an important victory against Hamas, albeit a temporary one, and he won’t give it up quickly. Hamas basically agreed to accept all of Abbas’s demands, at least on the big issues.
The devil is in the details
“A-sitan bi-tfasil.” This is the saying repeated again and again by Fatah officials recently as they talked about the possibility of completing the reconciliation process.“The devil is in the details,” it means. The path to creating a unity government made of technocrats is not an easy one, and the path to general elections for parliament and the presidency is even longer and more complicated.On the former issue, what will happen to the 20,000 members of Hamas’s security forces? They are all armed; some are simple policemen, others are intelligence operatives, and almost 1,000 of them are responsible for preventing rocket fire into Israel. Who will pay their salaries? Will they continue to take orders from Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, or will they listen, from now on, to Abbas’s commands? On Tuesday, Mahmoud a-Zahar, one of the heads of Hamas in Gaza, said in an interview with the Egyptian newspaper al-Youm a-Saba that no armed man in Gaza will be under Abbas’s command. ‘And if this government is established, we still have the minor issue of elections. How exactly will elections be run in the West Bank?’ A-Zahar no longer enjoys the status he had in the past in Hamas, but his statement could still complicate ties with Fatah. If it’s true that “not one armed man” will listen to Abbas’s instructions, it means the reconciliation deal is worthless.A-Zahar wasn’t talking about Hamas’s armed wing, as both sides understand it will not give up its weapons to the PA. Instead, he was referring to “every armed man,” meaning even the civilian police.Another problem is the fate of the clerks in the Hamas government, another 20,000 to 30,000 people who, until now, have received their paycheck from Hamas. Abbas doesn’t have the resources to pay the salaries of another 40,000-50,000 members of the security forces and government clerks, not to mention the 160,000 clerks he already pays.There will also be tensions over laws the Hamas government in Gaza has passed in recent years, especially those with religious overtones: a law against women moving around alone in places like the beach; a ban on Ronaldo-like haircuts for young men; a law forbidding women from riding on motorcycles; and so on. Will the government under Abbas agree to uphold these rules? And if this government is established, we still have the minor issue of elections. How exactly will elections be run in the West Bank? Many Hamas leaders are in Israeli jails, and Israeli security forces are limiting the movements of those outside the prison walls.A more pressing question is where exactly the elections will be held. Abbas and Hamas will demand that they be held in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. But Israel will not allow elections in East Jerusalem in which Hamas takes part.In a case like this, Abbas and Hamas might well cancel the elections. And this might by the thing that lets Abbas slink away from a vote while still saving face. His demand for elections with only the weak and factional Fatah organization behind him was a complex gamble.There is precedent for some of this. In late 2005 and early 2006, Israel — initially under Ariel Sharon and after that under Ehud Olmert — almost agreed to cooperate with the PA’s political elections.But senior Fatah officials feared that the vote would lead to losses against Hamas, and therefore came to understandings with Israel that Jerusalem would announce that it was not ready to hold elections in East Jerusalem.The ruse failed then, and Hamas went on to give Fatah a resounding defeat at the polls. Should Abbas try again, he may pull it off.But with a unity government still not a done deal, these speculations are early at best. It isn’t even certain that Hamas and Fatah will succeed in establishing a unity government.
In Italy, al-Aqsa Mosque imam urges destruction of Israel-Cleric calls on Arab armies, including those of Egypt and Jordan, to ‘liberate’ cities such as Jaffa and Haifa-By Yifa Yaakov May 2, 2014, 5:03 am-The Times of Israel
An imam from Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa Mosque last week called for Israel’s destruction while on a visit to Italy, urging Arab armies — including those of Egypt and Jordan, with whom Israel has signed peace agreements — to “liberate” the land.During an Islamic conference in the city of Milan, the cleric, Raed al-Danna, said Israel would soon “vanish,” enabling the Palestinians to return to Jaffa, Haifa and other cities within the Green Line.“In Gaza, there are great and proud men, whose feet are firmly planted in the ground, who have realized that darkness and the Jewish state would vanish, and that the morning sun will rise on Palestine,” he said in comments filmed by al-Jazeera and translated by media monitoring group MEMRI.“We will return to the sea of Jaffa, to the sands of Haifa, to the palm trees of Beit Shean, and to the hills of Lod and Ramla,” al-Danna predicted.He said the clerics and worshipers at al-Aqsa Mosque, which has recently been the site of clashes between Palestinians and Israeli security forces, were awaiting “the legions of the conquerors” who would take over Israel.“We await the armies from Tunisia, from Jordan, from Egypt, from Iraq, from the Maghreb, and from the Hijaz,” al-Danna said.“We await a Muslim leader, whose voice we yearn to hear, shouting to the liberating armies in the al-Aqsa Mosque courtyard,” he continued.“You must say the afternoon prayer only in Safed, Haifa, or Jaffa. You must say the afternoon prayer only in Lod and Ramla.”A crowd member could then be heard shouting, “Allahu Akbar.”
Palestinian media bashes Netanyahu’s ‘Jewish state’ law-Iraq fearfully awaits elections results as columnist calls for complete political overhaul-By Elhanan Miller May 2, 2014, 5:09 pm 0-The Times of Israel
As Arab media begins analyzing the result of Iraq’s general elections on Friday, Palestinian newspapers focus on a draft law advanced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to define Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.“Netanyahu strives to draft the racist ‘Jewish state’ law; Livni vows it will not pass,” reads the headline of official Palestinian daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah.“Netanyahu has made the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state a mainstay of any peace agreement, asserting that the basis of the conflict between the peoples is the Arab rejection of the Jewish state and not the occupation of Palestinian land since 1967,” reads the article.With a similar report, official PA daily Al-Ayyam‘s headline reads “Netanyahu tries to draft a basic law in the Knesset enshrining Israel as “the nation state of the Jewish people.”Ma’an, an independent Palestinian news agency, focuses on the controversy the draft law has caused within Netanyahu’s government.“Debate in Israel surrounding the draft ‘Jewish state’ law,” reads the article’s headline. The report focuses on support and opposition to the law among Israeli legislators, choosing for some reason to survey only women MKs: Miri Regev (Likud), Tzipi Livni (Hatnua), Ruth Kalderon (Yesh Atid), and Tamar Zandberg (Meretz).
Iraqi vote exposes divided society
Arab media dedicates much attention to the Iraqi elections held Wednesday; noting that while official results have not yet been made public, no clear winner seams to have emerged.“Iraqi election results exacerbate the conflict, and open the door for dialogue,” reads the headline of London-based daily Al-Hayat, reporting a slight majority in exit polls for President Nouri Al-Malki’s State of Law coalition, followed by the Citizen Bloc led by Shiite cleric Ammar Al-Hakim.“Maliki and Hakim both claim victory, and the prime minister rejects compromise democracy,” reads the headline of Saudi-owned daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat. displaying a photo of an Iraqi citizen handing a flower to a policeman guarding a May Day parade in Baghdad.The daily quotes liberal Iraqi leader Iyad Allawi as claiming irregularities in the Western predominantly Sunni provinces of Anbar and Nineveh, but saying he cannot comment on results before they are announced by the Independent Elections Committee.“Fear of election results controls Iraqis,” reads the headline of an article on Saudi-owned news site Elaph. Mutual threats by the rival parties have caused fear of social collapse, the article reports. One activist is quoted as warning that he will “twist the finger of anyone who steels our votes,” a possible reference to the marking of voters’ fingers with dark ink.Meanwhile, Al-Hayat columnist Randa Taqi A-Din warns that Iraq may fragment into three regions following the elections.“There used to be hope that following Saddam Hussein a democracy would emerge in Iraq which would be a model for Arab regimes. But Maliki’s rule and the expanding corruption are diametrically opposed to what any citizen believing in democracy would wish for. Iraq is a big, rich and important country, but it needs a complete change of leaders.”
Palestinians officially join 5 UN treaties-PA becomes signatory to conventions banning racial discrimination, protecting human rights-By AFP and Times of Israel staff May 2, 2014, 7:04 pm-The Times of Israel
The Palestinians on Friday became a formal party to five global treaties banning torture and racial discrimination, and protecting the rights of women, children and the disabled, the UN said.Rupert Colville, spokesman for the UN human rights office, told reporters that the move followed the Palestinians’ April 2 declaration to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that they were adopting the treaties.In addition, the Palestinians will on May 7 become party to an accord protecting children in conflict zones — which is an optional part of the overall child rights treaty — and on July 2 they will adopt two agreements governing civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.“This accession to seven core human rights treaties and a key protocol is a significant step towards enhancing the promotion and protection of human rights in Palestine,” Colville told reporters.“It is notable in a region with a high number of reservations to human rights treaties, that Palestine is acceding to eight human rights treaties without making a single reservation,” he added.In the face of fierce Israeli opposition, Palestine won observer status at the United Nations in November 2012, opening the way for it to adopt a host of international accords.The Palestinians had pledged to freeze all moves to seek membership in UN organizations and international conventions — a stepping stone to recognition of their hoped-for state — during peace talks in return for Israel’s release of veteran Arab prisoners.But Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas launched a new diplomatic drive in early April, amid blame-trading with Israel over the stalled negotiations. Israeli officials have said the move dealt a critical blow to Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.In addition to the UN treaties, the Palestinians have also signed up formally to the Geneva Conventions, which set down the rules of warfare and humanitarian operations in conflict zones.The Palestinians also submitted requests to the United Nations to adopt accords including the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations, and an anti-corruption agreement.
Lebanese bishop to make historic Jerusalem trip-Maronite patriarch will join Pope Francis when he visits Israel in late May, a first for a man in his position-By AFP May 2, 2014, 10:54 pm 1-The Times of Israel
The patriarch of the Maronite church will travel to Jerusalem next month to greet Pope Francis, the first head of his Lebanon-based denomination to visit since Israel’s creation in 1948, he said Friday.
“The pope is going to the Holy Land and Jerusalem. He is going to the diocese of the patriarch, so it’s normal that the patriarch should welcome him,” Beshara al-Rahi told AFP by telephone from France.Al-Rahi’s visit is diplomatically noteworthy because Lebanon remains technically at war with Israel and bans its citizens from entering the Jewish state.Maronite clergy are able to travel to the Holy Land to minister to the estimated 10,000 faithful, but all other Lebanese are banned.Al-Rahi insisted that the trip will be strictly religious and has no political significance.“It is a religious visit and in no way a political one.”Al-Rahi’s deputy Boulos Sayyah, who will accompany him, said the patriarch would not participate in any political meetings in Israel but will meet with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.He explained that Maronite Christian officials have special permission to visit Israel despite the tensions.“Since the armistice in 1949, there has been an agreement that the Maronite bishop for the Holy Land can travel from Lebanon to Palestine through the crossing at Naqoura,” in southern Lebanon, Sayyeh said.“A tacit agreement exists to allow other Maronite men and women of religion to go on missions to the Holy Land whether via land crossings or through the Tel Aviv airport because there are faithful there and they need to carry out their missions,” he said.Pope Francis is scheduled to make his first trip to the Holy Land from May 24-26.
The Maronite church has its roots in the Fertile Crescent of the early 5th century. It is named after St Maron, a hermit whose holiness and miracles attracted many followers.Following a bloody persecution a century later, the Maronite fled to the mountains of what is now Lebanon to seek refuge.They have their own distinct theology, spirituality, liturgy and code of canon law but are in full communion with Rome.
At Jerusalem wedding, Hezbollah and Hamas flags-Palestinians hold procession through Old City, shout out anti-Israeli mantras, according to media report-By Times of Israel staff May 2, 2014, 7:47 pm 3-The Times of Israel
Participants in a Palestinian wedding procession which took place in Jerusalem’s Old City on Thursday with police authorization displayed the flags of Hezbollah, Hamas and al-Qaeda alongside those of Palestine, Walla news reported.According to the report the crowd also chanted anti-Israeli slogans as it passed through the streets.Local resident Sarit Applebaum told the news website that such incidents were becoming increasingly common.“Every few days there is a procession of some kind, which is usually followed by rock-throwing at our homes,” she said. Applebaum added that such rallies prevented Jewish residents from leaving their homes for long hours due to safety concerns.“Sometimes we simply cannot return home and have to remain outside,” she said.Jerusalem’s Old City has recently become a hotspot of Israeli-Palestinian clashes, with riots often occurring in or around the Temple Mount as Palestinians protest Israelis visiting the compound, which houses the al-Aqsa mosque.Last week Jordan’s foreign ministry summoned Israeli ambassador Daniel Nevo to protest Israel’s actions in the Temple Mount. Jordanian officials protested what they called a “gross breach of international law and of the peace agreement between the two nations.”They accused Israel of allowing extremist Israeli Jews to enter the compound and of attacking Muslim worshipers at the al-Aqsa mosque.
DANIEL 7:23-25
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast (EU,REVIVED ROME) shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth,(7TH WORLD EMPIRE) which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.(TRADING BLOCKS-10 WORLD REGIONS/TRADE BLOCS)
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings(10 NATIONS-10 WORLD DIVISION WORLD GOVERNMENT) that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.(TAKE OVER 3 WORLD REGIONS)
LUKE 2:1-3
1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.
2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
How the EU's 'big bang' enlargement changed foreign policy-01.05.14 @ 09:19-On the German-Polish border 10 years after enlargement-EU-Georgia treaty highlights enlargement fatigue-By Steven Blockmans
BRUSSELS - The European Union’s leap from 15 to 25 (and later to 28) members was supposed to have consigned the Cold War legacy of separate and hostile camps in Eastern and Western Europe to the shelves of history.The fault lines that opened up across Europe in 2003 over the war in Iraq were therefore ominous signs for the development of a cohesive EU foreign policy after the fifth enlargement of the Union envisaged for 2004. All Central and Eastern European candidate countries signed letters supporting the US policy to ‘disarm’ Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.The position of the majority of Western European states, Germany and France in particular, was one of emphatically rejecting the impending war. Divisions were deepened by French President Jacques Chirac, who noted that the countries of Central and Eastern Europe had "lost a good opportunity to keep quiet", calling their support for the US "infantile" and "reckless". There was even an implicit threat that they might have their EU accession blocked by a French referendum.Although the other member states and the European Commission rejected Chirac’s criticism, the incident reinforced US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s evocation of ‘old’ and ‘new’ Europe. The take home message for the EU-15 was that the aspirant members would bring along their own sensitivities and stand for their own interests.For those states not already members of NATO and the EU, the effects of the fall of the Iron Curtain were particularly urgent as they all had to deal with the insecurities of internal transition; some even with disintegration and war. For many Central and Eastern European states, the practical response to these predicaments was first a move toward NATO – thereby affirming the transatlantic link to the hard power of the US – and then toward the EU – the best method to address myriad soft security challenges.The dual enlargement has contributed to the stability of a large swathe of Central and Eastern Europe. Contrary to the prevailing message, though, EU enlargement has in some cases heightened security concerns. By the southeastward push of its external borders, the European Union has imported the frozen conflict over Cyprus, pitching it more sharply against Turkey, and it has been confronted more directly to hard security threats in the (new) neighbourhoods: from tensions over Kosovo’s independence and bursts of violence in the South Caucasus to the slaughter in Syria.The worries in the Baltic states and Poland about the stand-off with Russia over Ukraine also show that the stability of EU territory remains vulnerable at the edges. By the same token, the EU’s ‘big bang’ enlargement has compounded softer security challenges such as illegal immigration, organised crime and the disruption of the flow of energy resources, to name just a few.Within the EU, the last decade has been characterised by a sense of transition and political tension over the failed Constitutional Treaty, the economic and financial crisis, the nature of external border security, the new foreign policy architecture established by the Lisbon Treaty, and differing visions of the EU’s external relations, including the future of EU enlargement. The addition of 10+2+1 new member states has impacted on how the EU perceives and tackles these and other issues, thereby shaping the European Union’s foreign policy role overall.
Leadership and decision-making
Whereas it is now safe to say that the innovations of the Lisbon Treaty have strengthened the EU’s visibility and efficiency of decision-making in the realm of external action, the successive enlargements since 2004 have nevertheless complicated the Union’s political balance. The Big 3 – France, Germany and the UK – continue to play a crucial role in the Union’s foreign and security policy-making, as their efforts to spearhead a resolution of the nuclear dispute with Iran demonstrates.At the next level down, Italy and Spain have been joined by Poland as another ‘large state’ demanding a seat at the top table. In certain domains (e.g. Ukraine), the Weimar Triangle has allowed Poland to steer EU foreign policy alongside France and Germany. Together with Sweden, Poland also tabled the plan for an Eastern dimension to the European Neighbourhood Policy, presenting it as a path toward EU membership – thereby truly envisaging the stated aim of the ENP, i.e. the eradication of new dividing lines on the continent after the 2004 enlargement.While the initiative for an Eastern Partnership immediately drew criticism from Bulgaria and Romania, that did not want to see the Union’s Black Sea Synergy undermined, the Commission and the Czech Republic threw their weight behind the plan, which led to the inaugural summit of the Eastern Partnership in Prague in May 2009, during the Czech rotating Presidency of the Council.Dominated by bans on foodstuff, plans on a missile shield and energy shortages, the political climate in EU-Russia relations has seen a dramatic drop in temperature since 2004. This was to a considerable extent the result of a more assertive attitude adopted by the EU under the influence of some new member states from Central and Eastern Europe.Gradually, older member states have hardened their positions as well. Yet, dealing with Putin’s Russia remains emblematic for the division among member states, even among the new ones. Countries like Slovakia and Bulgaria have different cultural, economic and political sensitivities from those exercised by the Baltic States and Poland. Geographical proximity and cross-border trade or minority issues condition the approaches to Russia in several and diverse ways. This goes to show that there is no Central and Eastern European ‘bloc’ within the EU. At best, there are changing coalitions around the ‘Visegrad 4’ (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia).As the majority of new member states can be classified as ‘small states’, their interests and sensitivities within foreign policy decision-making have been uploaded to the EU level, especially during the rotating Presidencies. Cases in point are Slovenia and Hungary’s focus on the Western Balkans, Cyprus’s attention to the Mediterranean and the Middle East, and Lithuania’s ambition to turn Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Armenia away from Russia, into the arms of the EU.Given their shared history under the Soviet yoke, the new member states of Central and Eastern Europe have more reason than most to be wary of Moscow’s intentions and actions.This has translated in their markedly western orientation, which has tipped the internal balance of the CFSP/CSDP in a Atlanticist direction. New member states have been increasingly engaged in civilian and military crisis management operations under EU flag. As a rule they have done so as modular components of bigger multinational units and under foreign command. Much as their contributions have been limited in time, scope and numbers, the new member states have proved their willingness and ability to participate and perform in CSDP operations, especially in the Western Balkans and the eastern neighbourhood, but also further afield.
Impact
In size, scope and character the ‘big bang’ enlargement of 2004 was nothing like the previous accession waves and it is unlikely to be anything similar of those in the future. The (by now not so) new member states have brought their own preferences and interests to bear, thereby complicating in some cases the already fractured foreign and security policies of the EU.Despite the nuances which persist among the latest entrants, the enlargement rounds of the last decade have introduced an undisputedly new eastern dimension to the EU’s foreign policy, a more encompassing and at the same time more assertive Ostpolitik than the one sought after by Willy Brandt in the 1970s.Today’s blurring distinctions between internal and external policies and between hard and soft security demands a more holistic and inclusive approach in tackling challenges and seizing opportunities if the EU is to make good on its foreign policy objectives. In this respect, the experience and expertise of the newer member states has been and will continue to be indispensable for the European Union.The writer is Senior Research Fellow & Head of the EU Foreign Policy Unit at the Centre for European Policy Studies
And here are the bounderies of the land that Israel will inherit either through war or peace or God in the future. God says its Israels land and only Israels land. They will have every inch God promised them of this land in the future.
Egypt east of the Nile River, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, The southern part of Turkey and the Western Half of Iraq west of the Euphrates. Gen 13:14-15, Psm 105:9,11, Gen 15:18, Exe 23:31, Num 34:1-12, Josh 1:4.ALL THIS LAND ISRAEL WILL DEFINATELY OWN IN THE FUTURE, ITS ISRAELS NOT ISHMAELS LAND.
12 TRIBES INHERIT LAND IN THE FUTURE
DANIEL 9:26-27
26 And after threescore and two weeks(62X7=434 YEARS+7X7=49 YEARS=TOTAL OF 69 WEEKS OR 483 YRS) shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;(ROMAN LEADERS DESTROYED THE 2ND TEMPLE) and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.(THERE HAS TO BE 70 WEEKS OR 490 YRS TO FUFILL THE VISION AND PROPHECY OF DAN 9:24).(THE NEXT VERSE IS THAT 7 YR WEEK OR (70TH FINAL WEEK).
27 And he ( THE ROMAN,EU PRESIDENT) shall confirm the covenant (PEACE TREATY) with many for one week:(1X7=7 YEARS) and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,(3 1/2 yrs in TEMPLE ANIMAL SACRIFICES STOPPED) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
JEREMIAH 6:14
14 They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.
JEREMIAH 8:11
11 For they have healed the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.
1 THESSALONIANS 5:3
3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
ISAIAH 33:8
8 The highways lie waste, the wayfaring man ceaseth: he hath broken the covenant,(7 YR TREATY) he hath despised the cities, he regardeth no man.(THE WORLD LEADER-WAR MONGER CALLS HIMSELF GOD)
JERUSALEM DIVIDED
GENESIS 25:20-26
20 And Isaac was forty years old (A BIBLE GENERATION NUMBER=1967 + 40=2007+) when he took Rebekah to wife, the daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of Padanaram, the sister to Laban the Syrian.
21 And Isaac intreated the LORD for his wife, because she was barren: and the LORD was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived.
22 And the children (2 NATIONS IN HER-ISRAEL-ARABS) struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the LORD.
23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels;(ISRAEL AND THE ARABS) and the one people shall be stronger than the other people;(ISRAEL STRONGER THAN ARABS) and the elder shall serve the younger.(LITERALLY ISRAEL THE YOUNGER RULES (ISSAC)(JACOB-LATER NAME CHANGED TO ISRAEL) OVER THE OLDER ARABS (ISHMAEL)(ESAU)
24 And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb.
25 And the first came out red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau.(THE OLDER AN ARAB)
26 And after that came his brother out, and his hand took hold on Esau's heel; and his name was called Jacob:(THE YOUNGER-ISRAELI) and Isaac was threescore (60) years old when she bare them.(1967 + 60=2027)(COULD BE THE LAST GENERATION WHEN JERUSALEM IS DIVIDED AMOUNG THE 2 TWINS)(THE 2 TWINS WANT JERUSALEM-THE DIVISION OF JERUSALEM TODAY)(AND WHOS IN CONTROL OF JERUSALEM TODAY-THE YOUNGER ISSAC-JACOB-ISRAEL)(AND WHO WANTS JERUSALEM DIVIDED-THE OLDER,ESAU-ISHMAEL (THE ARABS)
ISAIAH 28:14-19 (THIS IS THE 7 YR TREATY COVENANT OF DANIEL 9:27)
14 Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem.
15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
17 Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.
18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
19 From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.
For peace talks, a 10th month of pregnancy?-Negotiations ended this week without a deal, or an intifada, which leaves a situation ripe for secret contacts between the sides-By Avi Issacharoff May 2, 2014, 3:21 pm 5-The Times of Israel
Nine months of talks between the Palestinians and Israel ended Tuesday night with a whimper. No peace agreement or emotional ceremonies, no explosions or intifadas. The talks simply ended.On the Palestinian side, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas gave a special address on Palestinian television, in which he laid out his conditions for a renewal of the talks: the release of the fourth batch of veteran security prisoners; a complete settlement freeze; and negotiations for three months, in which the borders of two states — Israel and Palestine — will be established.Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not give a similar talk.The official end of the negotiations was overshadowed in Israel by reports from the sentencing proceedings for ex-prime minister Ehud Olmert, and a soccer match between Real Madrid and Bayern Munich. Though on the field the game was one-sided (in Madrid’s favor, for anyone who missed it), Ronaldo and company still looked infinitely more interesting than another report about the fruitless peace effort.A senior American official, who was asked four months ago why the US chose a nine-month window for the talks, replied only half-jokingly that, like pregnancy, the negotiations might bear a peace agreement.Taking the analogy forward, then, this pregnancy ended in an abortion.‘What happens after nine months? What is your Plan B?’But one still cannot reach conclusions that are too far reaching, at least not at this stage. Both sides share an interest in maintaining the quiet, in continuing to sit down for talks even If they don’t bring about a dramatic resolution, in order to maintain the appearance of contact between the sides.The same American official was asked during the conversation, “What happens after nine months?” What is your Plan B? He declined to answer, but it seemed as if he’d been asked the question dozens of times before. It is likely that the US administration has a contingency plan for the day after. But it’s hard to say what that plan is.Maybe the US will present both sides with the fabled “Obama outlines” and see which side will dare turn down the American president.Or maybe Washington will let both sides stew in their own juices: Let Israel deal alone with the international criticism and maybe even with an escalation on the ground; and cut aid to the Palestinians.Abbas, himself, dealt with this question when he met with Israeli journalists 10 days ago. This was before the reconciliation deal between Fatah and Hamas was announced, and the talks hadn’t yet blown up.“What will happen the day after April 29?” he was asked. Abbas said that nothing out of the ordinary would occur. He even hinted that talks would go on through unofficial channels. He also emphasized that security cooperation between the sides would continue.It is possible that this will be all the opening that is needed for secret talks.If the security coordination is handled through secret and semi-secret channels, if Central Command chief Nitzan Alon and Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Yoav Mordechai can visit Ramallah openly, is it not possible that representatives of the two sides would meet to discuss what needs to be done in order to reach a breakthrough in negotiations? The candidates for such talks already exist: Yitzhak Molcho, the prime minister’s tireless emissary, and Majid Faraj, head of the Palestinian general intelligence service. The two aren’t inclined to talk much to the press, to say the least, refraining from interviews and declarations and understanding the importance of the political chain of command.But it doesn’t depend on them. In the end, Netanyahu and Abbas know that there will be a price for a political breakthrough and neither seems eager to pay it. Netanyahu is not keen to break apart his coalition, and Abbas doesn’t believe in Netanyahu.After Fatah and Hamas signed their unity deal late last month, Abbas attempted to calm jittery Israelis via a speech to the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Central Council last Saturday.“This is a government with me at the head,” said Abbas about the technocratic government that is scheduled to take power within five weeks. “I recognize Israel and it will recognize Israel. I reject violence and terror and so will it, and recognize the signed agreements and their legitimacy, and the government will as well.”But then he discovered that in Israel in 2014, no one wants to hear or listen to him. A statement went out from Netanyahu’s office after the talk, claiming that “Abbas verified the killing of the peace process.” In the Prime Minister’s Office, it seems, they don’t let facts, or in this case warnings, confuse them.The next day, the PA president published a statement saying that the Holocaust is the gravest crime in human history. And again Netanyahu responded with a fitting Zionist response — in joining up with Hamas, Abbas had reconciled with Holocaust deniers.But despite Israeli and American worries, the Palestinian unity agreement represents for Abbas an important victory against Hamas, albeit a temporary one, and he won’t give it up quickly. Hamas basically agreed to accept all of Abbas’s demands, at least on the big issues.
The devil is in the details
“A-sitan bi-tfasil.” This is the saying repeated again and again by Fatah officials recently as they talked about the possibility of completing the reconciliation process.“The devil is in the details,” it means. The path to creating a unity government made of technocrats is not an easy one, and the path to general elections for parliament and the presidency is even longer and more complicated.On the former issue, what will happen to the 20,000 members of Hamas’s security forces? They are all armed; some are simple policemen, others are intelligence operatives, and almost 1,000 of them are responsible for preventing rocket fire into Israel. Who will pay their salaries? Will they continue to take orders from Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, or will they listen, from now on, to Abbas’s commands? On Tuesday, Mahmoud a-Zahar, one of the heads of Hamas in Gaza, said in an interview with the Egyptian newspaper al-Youm a-Saba that no armed man in Gaza will be under Abbas’s command. ‘And if this government is established, we still have the minor issue of elections. How exactly will elections be run in the West Bank?’ A-Zahar no longer enjoys the status he had in the past in Hamas, but his statement could still complicate ties with Fatah. If it’s true that “not one armed man” will listen to Abbas’s instructions, it means the reconciliation deal is worthless.A-Zahar wasn’t talking about Hamas’s armed wing, as both sides understand it will not give up its weapons to the PA. Instead, he was referring to “every armed man,” meaning even the civilian police.Another problem is the fate of the clerks in the Hamas government, another 20,000 to 30,000 people who, until now, have received their paycheck from Hamas. Abbas doesn’t have the resources to pay the salaries of another 40,000-50,000 members of the security forces and government clerks, not to mention the 160,000 clerks he already pays.There will also be tensions over laws the Hamas government in Gaza has passed in recent years, especially those with religious overtones: a law against women moving around alone in places like the beach; a ban on Ronaldo-like haircuts for young men; a law forbidding women from riding on motorcycles; and so on. Will the government under Abbas agree to uphold these rules? And if this government is established, we still have the minor issue of elections. How exactly will elections be run in the West Bank? Many Hamas leaders are in Israeli jails, and Israeli security forces are limiting the movements of those outside the prison walls.A more pressing question is where exactly the elections will be held. Abbas and Hamas will demand that they be held in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. But Israel will not allow elections in East Jerusalem in which Hamas takes part.In a case like this, Abbas and Hamas might well cancel the elections. And this might by the thing that lets Abbas slink away from a vote while still saving face. His demand for elections with only the weak and factional Fatah organization behind him was a complex gamble.There is precedent for some of this. In late 2005 and early 2006, Israel — initially under Ariel Sharon and after that under Ehud Olmert — almost agreed to cooperate with the PA’s political elections.But senior Fatah officials feared that the vote would lead to losses against Hamas, and therefore came to understandings with Israel that Jerusalem would announce that it was not ready to hold elections in East Jerusalem.The ruse failed then, and Hamas went on to give Fatah a resounding defeat at the polls. Should Abbas try again, he may pull it off.But with a unity government still not a done deal, these speculations are early at best. It isn’t even certain that Hamas and Fatah will succeed in establishing a unity government.
In Italy, al-Aqsa Mosque imam urges destruction of Israel-Cleric calls on Arab armies, including those of Egypt and Jordan, to ‘liberate’ cities such as Jaffa and Haifa-By Yifa Yaakov May 2, 2014, 5:03 am-The Times of Israel
An imam from Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa Mosque last week called for Israel’s destruction while on a visit to Italy, urging Arab armies — including those of Egypt and Jordan, with whom Israel has signed peace agreements — to “liberate” the land.During an Islamic conference in the city of Milan, the cleric, Raed al-Danna, said Israel would soon “vanish,” enabling the Palestinians to return to Jaffa, Haifa and other cities within the Green Line.“In Gaza, there are great and proud men, whose feet are firmly planted in the ground, who have realized that darkness and the Jewish state would vanish, and that the morning sun will rise on Palestine,” he said in comments filmed by al-Jazeera and translated by media monitoring group MEMRI.“We will return to the sea of Jaffa, to the sands of Haifa, to the palm trees of Beit Shean, and to the hills of Lod and Ramla,” al-Danna predicted.He said the clerics and worshipers at al-Aqsa Mosque, which has recently been the site of clashes between Palestinians and Israeli security forces, were awaiting “the legions of the conquerors” who would take over Israel.“We await the armies from Tunisia, from Jordan, from Egypt, from Iraq, from the Maghreb, and from the Hijaz,” al-Danna said.“We await a Muslim leader, whose voice we yearn to hear, shouting to the liberating armies in the al-Aqsa Mosque courtyard,” he continued.“You must say the afternoon prayer only in Safed, Haifa, or Jaffa. You must say the afternoon prayer only in Lod and Ramla.”A crowd member could then be heard shouting, “Allahu Akbar.”
Palestinian media bashes Netanyahu’s ‘Jewish state’ law-Iraq fearfully awaits elections results as columnist calls for complete political overhaul-By Elhanan Miller May 2, 2014, 5:09 pm 0-The Times of Israel
As Arab media begins analyzing the result of Iraq’s general elections on Friday, Palestinian newspapers focus on a draft law advanced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to define Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.“Netanyahu strives to draft the racist ‘Jewish state’ law; Livni vows it will not pass,” reads the headline of official Palestinian daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah.“Netanyahu has made the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state a mainstay of any peace agreement, asserting that the basis of the conflict between the peoples is the Arab rejection of the Jewish state and not the occupation of Palestinian land since 1967,” reads the article.With a similar report, official PA daily Al-Ayyam‘s headline reads “Netanyahu tries to draft a basic law in the Knesset enshrining Israel as “the nation state of the Jewish people.”Ma’an, an independent Palestinian news agency, focuses on the controversy the draft law has caused within Netanyahu’s government.“Debate in Israel surrounding the draft ‘Jewish state’ law,” reads the article’s headline. The report focuses on support and opposition to the law among Israeli legislators, choosing for some reason to survey only women MKs: Miri Regev (Likud), Tzipi Livni (Hatnua), Ruth Kalderon (Yesh Atid), and Tamar Zandberg (Meretz).
Iraqi vote exposes divided society
Arab media dedicates much attention to the Iraqi elections held Wednesday; noting that while official results have not yet been made public, no clear winner seams to have emerged.“Iraqi election results exacerbate the conflict, and open the door for dialogue,” reads the headline of London-based daily Al-Hayat, reporting a slight majority in exit polls for President Nouri Al-Malki’s State of Law coalition, followed by the Citizen Bloc led by Shiite cleric Ammar Al-Hakim.“Maliki and Hakim both claim victory, and the prime minister rejects compromise democracy,” reads the headline of Saudi-owned daily A-Sharq Al-Awsat. displaying a photo of an Iraqi citizen handing a flower to a policeman guarding a May Day parade in Baghdad.The daily quotes liberal Iraqi leader Iyad Allawi as claiming irregularities in the Western predominantly Sunni provinces of Anbar and Nineveh, but saying he cannot comment on results before they are announced by the Independent Elections Committee.“Fear of election results controls Iraqis,” reads the headline of an article on Saudi-owned news site Elaph. Mutual threats by the rival parties have caused fear of social collapse, the article reports. One activist is quoted as warning that he will “twist the finger of anyone who steels our votes,” a possible reference to the marking of voters’ fingers with dark ink.Meanwhile, Al-Hayat columnist Randa Taqi A-Din warns that Iraq may fragment into three regions following the elections.“There used to be hope that following Saddam Hussein a democracy would emerge in Iraq which would be a model for Arab regimes. But Maliki’s rule and the expanding corruption are diametrically opposed to what any citizen believing in democracy would wish for. Iraq is a big, rich and important country, but it needs a complete change of leaders.”
Palestinians officially join 5 UN treaties-PA becomes signatory to conventions banning racial discrimination, protecting human rights-By AFP and Times of Israel staff May 2, 2014, 7:04 pm-The Times of Israel
The Palestinians on Friday became a formal party to five global treaties banning torture and racial discrimination, and protecting the rights of women, children and the disabled, the UN said.Rupert Colville, spokesman for the UN human rights office, told reporters that the move followed the Palestinians’ April 2 declaration to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that they were adopting the treaties.In addition, the Palestinians will on May 7 become party to an accord protecting children in conflict zones — which is an optional part of the overall child rights treaty — and on July 2 they will adopt two agreements governing civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.“This accession to seven core human rights treaties and a key protocol is a significant step towards enhancing the promotion and protection of human rights in Palestine,” Colville told reporters.“It is notable in a region with a high number of reservations to human rights treaties, that Palestine is acceding to eight human rights treaties without making a single reservation,” he added.In the face of fierce Israeli opposition, Palestine won observer status at the United Nations in November 2012, opening the way for it to adopt a host of international accords.The Palestinians had pledged to freeze all moves to seek membership in UN organizations and international conventions — a stepping stone to recognition of their hoped-for state — during peace talks in return for Israel’s release of veteran Arab prisoners.But Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas launched a new diplomatic drive in early April, amid blame-trading with Israel over the stalled negotiations. Israeli officials have said the move dealt a critical blow to Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.In addition to the UN treaties, the Palestinians have also signed up formally to the Geneva Conventions, which set down the rules of warfare and humanitarian operations in conflict zones.The Palestinians also submitted requests to the United Nations to adopt accords including the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations, and an anti-corruption agreement.
Lebanese bishop to make historic Jerusalem trip-Maronite patriarch will join Pope Francis when he visits Israel in late May, a first for a man in his position-By AFP May 2, 2014, 10:54 pm 1-The Times of Israel
The patriarch of the Maronite church will travel to Jerusalem next month to greet Pope Francis, the first head of his Lebanon-based denomination to visit since Israel’s creation in 1948, he said Friday.
“The pope is going to the Holy Land and Jerusalem. He is going to the diocese of the patriarch, so it’s normal that the patriarch should welcome him,” Beshara al-Rahi told AFP by telephone from France.Al-Rahi’s visit is diplomatically noteworthy because Lebanon remains technically at war with Israel and bans its citizens from entering the Jewish state.Maronite clergy are able to travel to the Holy Land to minister to the estimated 10,000 faithful, but all other Lebanese are banned.Al-Rahi insisted that the trip will be strictly religious and has no political significance.“It is a religious visit and in no way a political one.”Al-Rahi’s deputy Boulos Sayyah, who will accompany him, said the patriarch would not participate in any political meetings in Israel but will meet with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.He explained that Maronite Christian officials have special permission to visit Israel despite the tensions.“Since the armistice in 1949, there has been an agreement that the Maronite bishop for the Holy Land can travel from Lebanon to Palestine through the crossing at Naqoura,” in southern Lebanon, Sayyeh said.“A tacit agreement exists to allow other Maronite men and women of religion to go on missions to the Holy Land whether via land crossings or through the Tel Aviv airport because there are faithful there and they need to carry out their missions,” he said.Pope Francis is scheduled to make his first trip to the Holy Land from May 24-26.
The Maronite church has its roots in the Fertile Crescent of the early 5th century. It is named after St Maron, a hermit whose holiness and miracles attracted many followers.Following a bloody persecution a century later, the Maronite fled to the mountains of what is now Lebanon to seek refuge.They have their own distinct theology, spirituality, liturgy and code of canon law but are in full communion with Rome.
At Jerusalem wedding, Hezbollah and Hamas flags-Palestinians hold procession through Old City, shout out anti-Israeli mantras, according to media report-By Times of Israel staff May 2, 2014, 7:47 pm 3-The Times of Israel
Participants in a Palestinian wedding procession which took place in Jerusalem’s Old City on Thursday with police authorization displayed the flags of Hezbollah, Hamas and al-Qaeda alongside those of Palestine, Walla news reported.According to the report the crowd also chanted anti-Israeli slogans as it passed through the streets.Local resident Sarit Applebaum told the news website that such incidents were becoming increasingly common.“Every few days there is a procession of some kind, which is usually followed by rock-throwing at our homes,” she said. Applebaum added that such rallies prevented Jewish residents from leaving their homes for long hours due to safety concerns.“Sometimes we simply cannot return home and have to remain outside,” she said.Jerusalem’s Old City has recently become a hotspot of Israeli-Palestinian clashes, with riots often occurring in or around the Temple Mount as Palestinians protest Israelis visiting the compound, which houses the al-Aqsa mosque.Last week Jordan’s foreign ministry summoned Israeli ambassador Daniel Nevo to protest Israel’s actions in the Temple Mount. Jordanian officials protested what they called a “gross breach of international law and of the peace agreement between the two nations.”They accused Israel of allowing extremist Israeli Jews to enter the compound and of attacking Muslim worshipers at the al-Aqsa mosque.
DANIEL 7:23-25
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast (EU,REVIVED ROME) shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth,(7TH WORLD EMPIRE) which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.(TRADING BLOCKS-10 WORLD REGIONS/TRADE BLOCS)
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings(10 NATIONS-10 WORLD DIVISION WORLD GOVERNMENT) that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.(TAKE OVER 3 WORLD REGIONS)
LUKE 2:1-3
1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.
2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
How the EU's 'big bang' enlargement changed foreign policy-01.05.14 @ 09:19-On the German-Polish border 10 years after enlargement-EU-Georgia treaty highlights enlargement fatigue-By Steven Blockmans
BRUSSELS - The European Union’s leap from 15 to 25 (and later to 28) members was supposed to have consigned the Cold War legacy of separate and hostile camps in Eastern and Western Europe to the shelves of history.The fault lines that opened up across Europe in 2003 over the war in Iraq were therefore ominous signs for the development of a cohesive EU foreign policy after the fifth enlargement of the Union envisaged for 2004. All Central and Eastern European candidate countries signed letters supporting the US policy to ‘disarm’ Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.The position of the majority of Western European states, Germany and France in particular, was one of emphatically rejecting the impending war. Divisions were deepened by French President Jacques Chirac, who noted that the countries of Central and Eastern Europe had "lost a good opportunity to keep quiet", calling their support for the US "infantile" and "reckless". There was even an implicit threat that they might have their EU accession blocked by a French referendum.Although the other member states and the European Commission rejected Chirac’s criticism, the incident reinforced US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s evocation of ‘old’ and ‘new’ Europe. The take home message for the EU-15 was that the aspirant members would bring along their own sensitivities and stand for their own interests.For those states not already members of NATO and the EU, the effects of the fall of the Iron Curtain were particularly urgent as they all had to deal with the insecurities of internal transition; some even with disintegration and war. For many Central and Eastern European states, the practical response to these predicaments was first a move toward NATO – thereby affirming the transatlantic link to the hard power of the US – and then toward the EU – the best method to address myriad soft security challenges.The dual enlargement has contributed to the stability of a large swathe of Central and Eastern Europe. Contrary to the prevailing message, though, EU enlargement has in some cases heightened security concerns. By the southeastward push of its external borders, the European Union has imported the frozen conflict over Cyprus, pitching it more sharply against Turkey, and it has been confronted more directly to hard security threats in the (new) neighbourhoods: from tensions over Kosovo’s independence and bursts of violence in the South Caucasus to the slaughter in Syria.The worries in the Baltic states and Poland about the stand-off with Russia over Ukraine also show that the stability of EU territory remains vulnerable at the edges. By the same token, the EU’s ‘big bang’ enlargement has compounded softer security challenges such as illegal immigration, organised crime and the disruption of the flow of energy resources, to name just a few.Within the EU, the last decade has been characterised by a sense of transition and political tension over the failed Constitutional Treaty, the economic and financial crisis, the nature of external border security, the new foreign policy architecture established by the Lisbon Treaty, and differing visions of the EU’s external relations, including the future of EU enlargement. The addition of 10+2+1 new member states has impacted on how the EU perceives and tackles these and other issues, thereby shaping the European Union’s foreign policy role overall.
Leadership and decision-making
Whereas it is now safe to say that the innovations of the Lisbon Treaty have strengthened the EU’s visibility and efficiency of decision-making in the realm of external action, the successive enlargements since 2004 have nevertheless complicated the Union’s political balance. The Big 3 – France, Germany and the UK – continue to play a crucial role in the Union’s foreign and security policy-making, as their efforts to spearhead a resolution of the nuclear dispute with Iran demonstrates.At the next level down, Italy and Spain have been joined by Poland as another ‘large state’ demanding a seat at the top table. In certain domains (e.g. Ukraine), the Weimar Triangle has allowed Poland to steer EU foreign policy alongside France and Germany. Together with Sweden, Poland also tabled the plan for an Eastern dimension to the European Neighbourhood Policy, presenting it as a path toward EU membership – thereby truly envisaging the stated aim of the ENP, i.e. the eradication of new dividing lines on the continent after the 2004 enlargement.While the initiative for an Eastern Partnership immediately drew criticism from Bulgaria and Romania, that did not want to see the Union’s Black Sea Synergy undermined, the Commission and the Czech Republic threw their weight behind the plan, which led to the inaugural summit of the Eastern Partnership in Prague in May 2009, during the Czech rotating Presidency of the Council.Dominated by bans on foodstuff, plans on a missile shield and energy shortages, the political climate in EU-Russia relations has seen a dramatic drop in temperature since 2004. This was to a considerable extent the result of a more assertive attitude adopted by the EU under the influence of some new member states from Central and Eastern Europe.Gradually, older member states have hardened their positions as well. Yet, dealing with Putin’s Russia remains emblematic for the division among member states, even among the new ones. Countries like Slovakia and Bulgaria have different cultural, economic and political sensitivities from those exercised by the Baltic States and Poland. Geographical proximity and cross-border trade or minority issues condition the approaches to Russia in several and diverse ways. This goes to show that there is no Central and Eastern European ‘bloc’ within the EU. At best, there are changing coalitions around the ‘Visegrad 4’ (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia).As the majority of new member states can be classified as ‘small states’, their interests and sensitivities within foreign policy decision-making have been uploaded to the EU level, especially during the rotating Presidencies. Cases in point are Slovenia and Hungary’s focus on the Western Balkans, Cyprus’s attention to the Mediterranean and the Middle East, and Lithuania’s ambition to turn Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Armenia away from Russia, into the arms of the EU.Given their shared history under the Soviet yoke, the new member states of Central and Eastern Europe have more reason than most to be wary of Moscow’s intentions and actions.This has translated in their markedly western orientation, which has tipped the internal balance of the CFSP/CSDP in a Atlanticist direction. New member states have been increasingly engaged in civilian and military crisis management operations under EU flag. As a rule they have done so as modular components of bigger multinational units and under foreign command. Much as their contributions have been limited in time, scope and numbers, the new member states have proved their willingness and ability to participate and perform in CSDP operations, especially in the Western Balkans and the eastern neighbourhood, but also further afield.
Impact
In size, scope and character the ‘big bang’ enlargement of 2004 was nothing like the previous accession waves and it is unlikely to be anything similar of those in the future. The (by now not so) new member states have brought their own preferences and interests to bear, thereby complicating in some cases the already fractured foreign and security policies of the EU.Despite the nuances which persist among the latest entrants, the enlargement rounds of the last decade have introduced an undisputedly new eastern dimension to the EU’s foreign policy, a more encompassing and at the same time more assertive Ostpolitik than the one sought after by Willy Brandt in the 1970s.Today’s blurring distinctions between internal and external policies and between hard and soft security demands a more holistic and inclusive approach in tackling challenges and seizing opportunities if the EU is to make good on its foreign policy objectives. In this respect, the experience and expertise of the newer member states has been and will continue to be indispensable for the European Union.The writer is Senior Research Fellow & Head of the EU Foreign Policy Unit at the Centre for European Policy Studies
