copyright (c) 2005 by Mr. Reuven A. Kossover [mailto:hadas11@actcom.co.il]
LIBERATED YERUSHALIYIM, D.C. (David's Capital), Liberated Israelite Tribal Territories of Yehudah and Binyamin, Kingdom of David and Shlomo, United Israelite Kingdom of Yehudah and Yosef, Erev Shabbat (Eve of the Jewish Sabbath), Yom Shishi, 18 Tishrei, 5766, Root & Branch Information Services [mailto:rb@rb.org.il] [www.rb.org.il]:
I am a product of the Brooklyn public school system, I studied political science and public administration in university and I love history. Those of you who know me also know that I managed a Burger King in Roseville, Minnesota near St. Paul.
In 2004 I delivered a lecture dealing with this basic topic: "Looking at History Through a Jewish Lens: The War of Tisha B'Av".
Let us review some of the main points of last year's lecture, and add a couple of points that drive home the essential premise.
The actual subject of this essay is "Was the Messiah Born on Tisha B'Av? Looking at History Through a Jewish Lens".
When we Jews look at history, we tend to look at it through the lenses of those who teach the points of view of Christians. Most of us have gone to school in the Christian countries of the Diaspora. The history curricula there reflect that viewpoint. Jewish schools there rarely stray far from these because the students in those countries have to pass tests designed there.
The curricula of this country (Israel) have copied the curricula of gymnasia in Europe or of high schools in the United States. The big discovery that I made in the middle 1990's while reading through the Chumash (Five Books of Moses) and re-connecting with Torah, was that I was not reading fairy tales, or fables meant to convey a moral, but history. You don't believe me?
You shouldn't. Look at Parshat Ki Tavo, the one we read for the week of September 24. Think about the curses upon our people that Moses prophesied would come, especially towards the End. That is not a description of Jewish life for the last thousand years or so?
I want to emphasize one point before I go on. Looking at events through the Hebrew calendar is central to what I say here. It is central to our understanding of history and therefore central to our survival. If you take nothing else from this essay other than this one single point, I've accomplished my purpose in writing it.
To give us a small taste of what I'm talking about, let's return to Parshat Ki Tavo. This is read every year, once a year. In the year 5699 (1939), it was studied and read on the days leading up to September 2, 1939, which was the Sabbath. Let's look at the text.
This translation comes from my Artscroll edition of the Chumash, pages 1081 and 1085. First, Devarim/Deuteronomy 28:49-50 HaShem will carry against you a nation from afar, from the end of the earth, as an eagle will swoop, a nation whose language you will not understand, a brazen nation that will not be respectful to the old nor gracious to the young.
Rambam comments on Deuteronomy 28:49 that Vespasian and his son Titus came from Rome to conquer the Land of Israel and destroy Jerusalem and the Second Temple. The awful conditions described though verse 57 took place during the siege of Jerusalem. A yeshiva student studying these lines in Warsaw on the night of Wednesday, August 30, 1939, would have read Rambam in the Hebrew, saying exactly what I quoted you. However, if he had time to follow the reading of the Torah in shul (synagogue) on September 2 and could concentrate upon it, instead of the screaming of the Luftwaffe overhead, he might have had a very different comprehension of these same lines.
Hashem will carry against you a nation from afar, from the end of the earth, as an eagle will swoop...The eagle was the symbol of Rome, but it was also the symbol of Germany, which attacked Poland that day. Let us never forget that Moses was a prophet, the one prophet with the clearest view of the future. G-d spoke to Moses as though to a friend, face to face.
So Rambam was certainly right in his analysis of this portion of the Torah in that it referred to Rome and the events that led up to the destruction of the Temple. But could it not have also been a prophecy for the recent past, as well as our own day?
Prophecy layered upon prophecy?
Let's continue with Devarim/Deuteronomy 28:62-66:
You will be left few in number, instead of having been like the stars of heaven in abundance, for you will not have hearkened to the voice of HaShem, you G-d. And it will that just as HaShem rejoiced over you to benefit you and multiply you, so HaShem will cause them to rejoice over you to make you perish and to destroy you; and you will be torn from upon the ground to which you come to possess it.
HaShem will scatter you among all the peoples, from the end of the earth to the end of the earth, and there you will work for gods of others, whom you did not know -- you or your forefathers –- of wood and of stone. And among those nations, you will not be tranquil, there will no rest for the soul of your foot; there HaShem will give you a trembling heart, longing of eyes, and suffering of soul. Your life will hang in the balance, and you will be frightened night and day, and you will not be sure of your livelihood.
Need we stress the point that even in America, Jews are not tranquil, and have a trembling heart, longing of the eyes and suffer in their souls? Need we mention that from September 1939, onwards for at least 6 years, the idea of Jews's lives "hanging in the balance" is an understatement?
What about our lives here in Israel?
That was the foretaste. Now let's dig in to the main course. As most of us know, Tisha B'Av is our "national disaster day", so to speak. Tradition holds that the Sin of the Spies took
place on that day, our Temples were destroyed twice on that day; Beitar, the last stronghold of the Bar Koseba rebellion, fell also on that day. Three separate times in the last thousand years, Jews were expelled from Christian countries on that day.
In the last Christian (20th) century, there was a terrible conflict (World War One) that started on Tisha B'Av. The interesting thing about this conflict was that those who began it, who brought it about in the pendulous summer of that year, did not think about the significance of the date to us. We did not count at all in the calculations of the Christian and Moslem diplomats who weighed the fates of their nations and plunged four empires into a conflict from which they would never emerge.
This event, unlike many of the other disasters that befell our people on Tisha B'Av was not at all aimed at us in particular (at least not initially). Therefore, it cannot be argued, as it can with the expulsions of Jews from Britain, France and Spain (all in different years, of course), that the acts were dated to occur on Tisha B'Av because they would destroy the morale of the Jews targeted.
The incident that led up to this conflict was the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand and his wife Sophie in an open vehicle traveling in Sarajevo by a Serbian nationalist. Austria Hungary decided that this would provide the opportunity to squelch Serbian nationalism, but the Russians did not quite agree.
An uneasy game of "follow the leader to disaster" ensued. When the battle lines were drawn, there were two "Central Powers", Germany and Austria-Hungary on the one side, and three "Allied Powers", Russia, Britain and France on the other, coming to the aid of the Kingdom of Serbia. This all occurred by Tisha B'Av, 5674, August 2, 1914.
All this ties in with a very interesting Jewish tradition -– the messiah will be born on Tisha B'Av. The idea is that the day of disaster will produce for us national redemption. Does this mean that every shmendrick on a donkey traveling to the Golden Gate at the Old City has to be stopped and his Teudat Zehut searched to see what his birthday is?
It could mean just that. Christians looking for the "sign of the beast" tend to look at the forehead of suspicious individuals, thinking that some mark or number would indicate the evil identity of the individual. I know a Catholic lady who once speculated that the birthmark on top of Mikhail Gorbachev's head was just that. And there are a lot of Russians who feel that Gorbachev was worse than the devil.
Somehow, I don't think that this is the case. It just doesn't make sense. Jewish prophecies and prophetic traditions take a little more work than that. Our answer will be found where I started this discourse –- with the idea of looking at history through a Jewish lens. The Hevlei haMashiah, commonly translated into English as the "birth pangs of the messiah", began the day that the messiah was born.
The tradition does not refer to a specific birthday, but rather is a finger pointing to a specific date in history to show a beginning point. Everything I am sharing with you is designed to recast history in that light. One of the things this means is that we should stop regarding the catastrophic conflict that began in August 1914 -– Tisha B'Av, 5674, as the First World War. When looking at history through our Jewish lens, not that of the Christians who until now have been most of its authors, it isn't.
The War of Tisha B'Av, which began in 1914, was the defining conflict of the age immediately prior to the one we live in now. This conflict, as usually taught in schools, lasted four years. Not so. When you look at the War of Tisha B'Av through a Jewish lens, focusing on what this conflict meant for our own People, a very different picture emerges.
It is a picture of one long series of conflicts lasting 76 years; one that results in the murder of one third of our population, the rise of a Jewish enterprise in Eretz Yisrael, and the rise and fall of an empire in Russia that retarded the development of that Jewish enterprise until its fall.
The fall of that empire marks the end of the conflict and gave way to Milhemet haMifratz (the Gulf War) -– a war fought in two parts. One part began with the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq and ended on Purim (1991); the second part began the day after Purim with the invasion of Iraq by the United States two years ago (2003) and continues to this day.
The War of Tisha B'Av began with irony -- a string of defensive alliances, all intended to prevent war, which worked instead to drag the major European empires into a mortal conflict from which they did not really emerge until 1990. When they finally did, they were entirely different in their apparent composition, but basically ready to be united into one empire once again. The
European Union that emerged in 1992 is just that -- a new empire.
When the guns of August (1914) began to boom, they sounded the death knell for Austria Hungary, the German Empire, the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and many, many millions of people. In addition, this conflict spelled the end of the British Empire and the French Empire, though not as immediately, or as obviously.
Now let's look at the consequences of the conflict that began on Tisha B'Av 5674 (1914), focusing on the Jewish People and our calendar.
In its opening stages, thousands of Jewish soldiers fought against thousands of other Jewish soldiers. The price of Napoleon's "emancipation" from the ghettos over a century earlier was now being paid in blood. The Covenant of Abraham was overridden by the "call to the colors" -– loyalty to the "fatherland". It was more important to demonstrate loyalty to the Kaiser, the Czar, the King, the Republic, the Flag, etc. than to G-d. We see this difficulty even today -– our rabbis can't decide whether Israelis should be more loyal to the flag or to G-d.
The conflict supposedly stopped for a time in Western Europe, allegedly settled by a treaty in Versailles (1919) that was supposed to enshrine all sorts of high-flown principles. The two lasting effects of this Treaty was firstly, to engender hatred throughout Europe against Jews who had subsumed the Covenant of Abraham to the call to the colors in their attempts to
assimilate and be good Europeans. Secondly, it enabled the possibility of the resurrection of a Jewish state in Eretz Yisrael.
In reality, this conflict did not wind down in Europe for 9 years. The Greek nationalist leader Venezilos, talked about "Greece for the Greeks", implying that anyone who wasn't a Greek
Orthodox Christian just didn't belong. In 5679 (1919), the Greek army invaded Asia Minor (Turkey), where many Greeks lived, and fought until it was defeated and driven out entirely. The result was that Greece was indeed for the Greeks. But the Turks paid them back in kind, expelling all of the Greeks from Asia Minor. So a major transfer of populations took place. This
process ended in 5683 (1923), the first round of conflict after the Crown Prince Ferdinand was murdered in Sarajevo.
In Germany, Jews were accused of stabbing the war effort in the back. Similar accusations faced Jews in the new Austrian Republic, the tiny nugget of provinces surrounding Vienna. The new Polish Republic, under General Pilsudski, was anti-Semitic from the day it was declared. In fact, with the exception of Czechoslovakia, all of Eastern Europe was anti-Semitic.
Of course, in the years 5675 and 5676 (1915 & 1916), a major population transfer of another kind had already taken place in the Turkish Empire. One and a half million Armenian Christians were transferred from this side of the veil to the other. While this did not bear upon us immediately, it did eventually have its impact on us in a very major way a few years later.
The Ottoman Empire was divvied up by the French and the British, leaving a rump Anatolian state that is now the Republic of Turkey, the one born fighting the Greeks in Asia Minor. The big thing in this that mattered for us is that for the first time in eighteen centuries, a Jewish fighting force had been created that did not go down to ignominious defeat, and that the British
undertook to create a Jewish national homeland in Eretz Yisrael.
The possibility of a reishit tzmichat geulatinu (first flowering of our redemption) actually arose. So the war of Tisha B'Av quickened an already planted seed. This is an important point to file away for the moment. We'll return to it. The Russian regime collapsed during the first three years of the War of Tisha B'Av. In 5677 (1917), the Czar was overthrown and a republic declared by Aleksandr Kerensky. Kerensky was overthrown in 5678 (also 1917) by a man named Vladimir Ulyanov.
He is known to history as Vladimir Lenin. He died in 5685 (1924) and was eventually succeeded by a man from Gruzia, known as Georgia to English speakers, named Joseph Djugashvili. Djugashvili is known to history as Stalin –- man of steel.
Before we go further, three points here should be made crystal clear, points usually not fully understood by folks who come from Western Europe and the Americas. But, these are things that Russian Jews, understand very well.
First of all, Joseph Stalin had every intention of conquering the world. For the rest of his life, until he died from a stroke he suffered on Purim, 5713 (1953), this was his goal. His successors did not have the fire in the belly that he had and many of the individuals who possibly could have continued in his tradition had died in labor camps or prisons because Stalin was
extremely suspicious. So, the Soviet Union rotted away from the inside under the rule of his successors until it fell.
The second point is that the Yiddish speaking Bundists, who were hostile to the Zionist enterprise, rode to temporary power with the Bolsheviks. This antipathy kept Russian Jews imprisoned in the Soviet Union for many years. The Russians we see here now are the grandchildren or great-grandchildren of those who might have left there to live here in the mid twenties.
The third point is that when Stalin suffered what was to be a fatal stroke on Purim 5713, in 1953, he was on the verge of planning the mass murder of the Jews living in the Soviet Union.
For eight years from 1923 to 1931 (5683 to 5691), there was no fighting in Europe or Asia, except for the Arab rioting here. But one of the ultimate causes of the conflict, frustrated German ambition nurtured by Kaiser Wilhelm II, did not go away.
The German army was commanded by most of the same generals that had commanded it under the Empire and the Germans worked out a secret deal with the Bolsheviks to train soldiers on Russian territory to evade the provisions of the Versailles treaty limiting Germany to 100,000 soldiers.
The world that existed immediately after the first round of fighting in the War of Tisha B'Av died down in 5683 (1923) was a fantasy world with a bubble of prosperity that shook unsteadily over a reality of poverty and violence hidden just below the surface. Eventually, all bubbles burst. Early in 5690 (1929) the stock market, which had fueled the delusions of prosperity in
the United States, crashed in New York.
Let's focus on that crash for a minute, paying particular attention to the Jewish calendar. The terribly bloated stock market in New York was headed for a smash-up. Looking back with the hindsight of three quarters of a century, this cannot be denied.
In fact, the market first gave serious signs of instability in September, 1928, and nearly had a crash in March 1929. A lot of the "smart" money got out after that big scare. The market could have crashed then, but it didn't. Instead, it climbed to even dizzier heights, seducing fools out of their money.
Now, let's look at when the crash actually occurred. It was during the holiday of Sukkot, 5690. Bear in mind that we Jews believe that Divine judgment is rendered on Rosh HaShanah, sealed on Yom Kippur, and executed on Hoshana Raba at the end of the Sukkot festival. Hoshana Raba 5690 was Friday, 25 October 1929. Sukkot, 5690 began on Shabbat, 19 October 1929. The market was open for only a half a day that day, with little clue to the disaster coming the following week. On Monday, October 21, the market seriously declined. It was a scary experience.
According to the book "1929" by William Klingaman, "Taken as a whole", reported The New York Times, "the character of the market left Wall Street both bewildered and frightened". Consequently, the Hoover administration released a statement saying, "there was no evidence of a serious business or financial situation which could be held responsible for the decline of Stock Exchange values". Continues Klingaman, "Yale University's Irving Fisher contemptuously dismissed the day's break as a 'shaking out of the lunatic fringe that attempts to speculate on margin'; the market, he implied, was well rid of such amateur speculators".
Klingaman writes about the nest day, Tuesday, October 22, "Although Manhattan was buffeted by 50mph winds...the stock exchange observed a rare and blessedly peaceful day. On the morning of Wednesday, October 23, ... Wall Street opened the day in a haze of uncertainty. Those who confidently expected Tuesday's half-hearted rally to continue were disappointed… By noon it was obvious that the market was heading for another sharp fall. And this time even the strongest nerves cracked".
Klingaman continued a page later, "Thursday, October 24...Anticipating disorder, [New York City, Police Commissioner] Grover Whelan dispatched a squadron of police wagons to the financial district and instructed them to block the narrow entrance from Broadway to Wall Street. On the floor of the exchange, nervous and exhausted brokers and clerks took up their
posts early. Nearly all the 1,100 members of the exchange were present, about 300 more than on a normal business day.
Matthew Josephson, who had forsaken a brief and not terribly successful career as a stockbroker to pursue writing… recalled more than forty years later: 'I heard -– and I can still hear it -– the sound of running feet, the sound of fear, as people hastened to reach posts of observation before the gong rang for the opening of trading'. In the words of one Wall Street old-timer, the market opened 'like a bolt out of hell'. Trading was already extraordinarily heavy, involving more than 1,600,000 shares in the first thirty minutes alone. Until 10:30 the market seemed uncertain, directionless. Then it plunged straight down, and no power on earth could stop it".
Thursday, October 24, 1929, the day before Hoshana Raba 5690, is generally recorded in the history books as the start of the Great Depression. A less than astute man could see that an era was ending that day. There were many severely less than astute people who still kept their money in the market, unwilling to believe the goose that laid the golden egg through the
decade previous had indeed died and was being served up with sauce.
However, a man steeped in the Jewish calendar would have realized that a Divine Judgment had been executed, even if he could not see the ultimate consequence of that Judgment. That was why the crash, bound to occur anyway, occurred when it did. It was a Divine Finger pointing out that something extremely Significant had occurred, and it was time to pay careful
attention.
It did not take long for the illusions of prosperity that had fooled Americans to disappear worldwide. Europe's economy fell apart as well. With the illusory bubble of prosperity gone, hunger and violence resurfaced, giving new hope to the Communists in Moscow for world revolution.
Capital ceased to flow from America to Germany, making it impossible for that country to continue on the strangely jiggered repayments of the war debt that had been initiated several years earlier. When this was no longer possible, the so-called Weimar Republic that existed in Germany at the time began to fall apart. The extremists in that country, both on the right and
the left, began to gain in power.
One of the corporals in the German Imperial army, a man who had immigrated to Germany from Austria and who had won an Iron Cross in combat, tried to establish himself as something more than a starving artist. He joined an organization of disgruntled unemployed workers known as the National Socialist German Workers' Party, which was abbreviated as
N.S.D.A.P. His membership card was #7. He was a charismatic individual who had a way with words who soon attracted the attention of Bolshevik agents looking for something to re-spark a Communist revolution in Germany, a revolution to succeed where the previous one failed in 5680 (1919).
In addition, his group attracted the attention of bankers looking for means of controlling events in the unstable, inflation-ridden country that succeeded the German Empire. This was the Union Bank in New York with its branch in the Netherlands and its German branch, the Thyssen Bank. Its American representative in Europe was Prescott Bush. His grandson is the president of the United States. His other grandson is governor of Florida.
Adolf Hitler's attempted coup d'etat in Bavaria in 5683 (1923) provoked nothing but laughter amongst Germany's politicians. His Bolshevik backers were furious with him. They had plans for him to attempt his coup d'etat the next day when they would have had more backing for him. But investors saw an opportunity to laugh all the way to the bank. They built him a house in the Bavarian mountains. And later, the Bolsheviks were not entirely unhappy to have someone like the Nazis, as they soon became known, for an enemy. Their violence and extremism, and willingness to combat the German Communists in street battles helped to keep membership in the Communist party up.
Hitler had a series of policies for Germany's rebirth and redevelopment that he expounded in a book called Mein Kampf, which he wrote while sitting in prison. One of his policies included expelling or killing all the Jews in Germany. Asked about this, he commented that if the Turks could get away with killing a million and a half Armenians, Germany could get away with killing
the Jews.
The great depression gave Hitler the opportunity he sought. Over the next three years, from 1930 to 1933 (5690 to 5693), his Nazi Party increased its number of seats in the German Reichstag. In 1933 (5693), the president of the German republic von Hindenberg asked Hitler to become reichskansler, or prime minister. When the German president died soon after, Hitler took the opportunity to have the offices of president and reichskansler combined into the position of "leader" -- Fuehrer. The politicians weren't laughing anymore.
Now, let us return to the reishit tzmichat geulatinu (first flowering of our redemption) that began to arise here in Eretz Yisrael after the British took over. The local organizations that pushed this, the Zionist parties, tried hard to get settlers for this country from Europe, America and the Soviet Union, but there was an economic depression here in the 5680's (1920's).
Life was still better in Europe, bad as it was, Jews like my father were beginning to prosper in America, and the Soviet Union had become a prison for its Jews. Jewish organizations pressed ahead anyway, using the little blue pishkeh (charity box) as their funding method when nothing else worked. We're still using that little blue pishkeh or modern variants of it today.
A Hebrew University was founded on Har HaTzofim, with its opening attended by the British High Commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuels. But European Jews sniffed contemptuously at the Zionist enterprise.
The following is taken from an essay written by Albert Montefiore Hyamson, then Controller of Labor for the Government of Palestine. The essay was written for the "Historian's History of the World", a publication of the Encyclopedia Britannica and was entitled "Palestine Freed from Turkish Rule". It is a good sample of what Jews generally felt about re-establishing a
Jewish State at that period of our history:
The impracticability, to say nothing less, of a scheme whereby a handful of farmers, shopkeepers, students and workingmen should, even if increased by such limited immigration as the economic state of the country rendered possible, be able to secure the government of a state, seven eighths of whose population were determinedly and ineradicably opposed to
such a government, was brushed aside by these idealists.
The absurd proposals for creating a majority of Jews in Palestine put forward by impractical Jewish men of letters, who fortunately had no influence in the Zionist Organization or otherwise in Jewish politics, created more attention and alarm than the statesmanlike proposals of that party in the organization which may be said to be inspired by the Hebrew philosopher Ahad Ha'Am (Asher Ginzberg)...
This was just a sentence and a half written by a man whose views were typical of the day but whose vested interest it was to defend his employer. Interestingly enough though, this same writer used the term "Palestinian" to describe Arabs a few paragraphs later in the same essay.
Arabs in this country rioted a number of times during this short interregnum between major conflicts. When Albert Hyamson wrote his essay on Palestine in 5685 (1925), the population was seven eighths Arab. A decade later, the proportion of Jews had more than doubled. When major fighting re-ignited in Europe in 5700 (1939), one third of the population of Eretz Yisrael
was Jewish.
We are warned in Parshat Eikev not to view our accession to this Land as the result of our own merit, and certainly not to view it as the result of our own efforts. If we fail to see the Hand of G-d in the success of the Zionist enterprise in the years before the declaration of the State in 5708 (1948), we are all fools indeed.
If you review the rain records for the years leading up to 5700, you find an increased amount of rain. This filled the borot, the aquifers of the land, and allowed for cultivation of food to feed the increasing population here. This was not the doing of human beings.
We can also ask ourselves: was the animus to hate Jews that afflicted Europe and the Arab world over the last 90 years really the doing of man? Or was it the hardening of the hearts of our enemies, that we not feel too comfortable in exile and remember Jerusalem with more than just sayings on Pesach? We face this question now as well. Every time I read an ad on Janglo
describing a furniture sale by Jews leaving to relocate in the United States, I get nervous. A little for me, but, mostly for them.
The War of Tisha B'Av started up again, not in Europe, but in Asia in the year 5691 (1931). The background of this is a short summary of the growth of Imperial Japan. In 5655 (1895), the Japanese had seized the island of Taiwan from China. In 5665 (1905), the Empire of Japan had successfully humiliated the Russians in battle, defeating their armies and their fleet. In
reality, this war finished off the Russian Empire.
Five years after their defeat of the Russians, the Japanese seized control of the Korean peninsula. When the War of Tisha B'Av began, they sided against Germany and seized German colonial holdings in the Pacific. But in 5691 (1931), when the rest of the world slid into economic depression, the Japanese invaded China.
The Japanese saw the depression as their opportunity, because the European powers that had taken over almost all of Asia in the previous century were seriously weakened. They erected a puppet state in Manchuria. They made plans to conquer south Asia. Europe and America, broke and weakened, watched with alarm but could do nothing. The Japanese solution to dealing with depressed world markets was to go to war and turn them into internal markets with plenty of business.
Two yeas later when Hitler took over Germany (1933), he got Germany out of recession by building for war. He brought hope to Germany by building roads across the breadth of the country, the famous Autobahnen. He erected a car company to make vehicles cheaply for Germans to ride on these roads and enjoy them -– Volkswagen -– the people's car. He brought
dictatorship and terror and terrible corruption, but he also brought prosperity. I don't know if he copied the Japanese, but arming for war was a profitable business, and it brought prosperity to Germany again.
Again, one should not dismiss the hand of G-d in all this. Why did Germany's neighbors not act to squelch this danger to their own lands, even when Hitler began to seize other territories and openly violate the treaty of Versailles? When reading the sad history of this decade, one has to wonder where all the sense of the British and the French had fled to. One has to wonder if it
were not Divine Will that this basic sense of self protection should be absent.
While the Japanese continued to conquer Chinese territory, the European continent slid back to violence. The Fascist dictator Mussolini seized portions of the Kingdom of the South Slavs, Yugoslavia, and eventually annexed Albania. A rebellion began in Spain against the secular republic there and evolved into a civil war in 5696 (1936). This civil war gave the Soviets and the Nazis a chance to test their weapons. Six months after this civil war ended, the Germans invaded Poland.
In general, we know most of the details of this conflict. It ended in Europe shortly after Lag B'Omer, 5705 (1945). We should note that Hitler killed himself on the eve of Lag B'Omer and the bonfire that was his funeral extended into that holiday. Note how we celebrate Lag B'Omer –- with bonfires in the night. Active fighting in the Pacific ended shortly before Elul, 5705. It
unveiled a new terror for the world, the atom bomb.
After the fight against the Nazis ended, Stalin worked hard to get an atom bomb, and he shortly had one. His armies occupied Eastern Europe, ending whatever hope there might have been for democratic regimes to flourish there. This included eastern Germany and the northeastern quarter of Austria. His agents started a civil war in Greece, attempting to take over the entire
Balkan Peninsula.
Stalin's ally, Mao Dze Dung, effectively took over the Chinese mainland in 5709 (1949). The very next year, the Communist government set up by Russia in the northern half of Korea invaded the southern half of the Korean Peninsula. The Americans came to the aid of their ally, South Korea. When the Americans got close enough to the Chinese border in 5711 (1950), the
Chinese invaded Korea, nearly driving the Americans off that peninsula entirely. In short, the War of Tisha B'Av entered its final phase, the war against the Communists. This stage of the conflict finally dictated the face of the world we live in now.
As I've pointed out earlier, Joseph Stalin really intended to conquer the world. What happened after the Nazis were defeated should show this intent. The United States was engaged world wide in a fight for its survival, but it could not go to open war against the Soviet Union because of fear of what the atom bombs and, later, nuclear bombs could do. Those of us over the
age of fifty all remember this conflict. Some of us fought in one or more of the open conflicts that broke out between 5711 (1950) and 5751 (1990) and all of us remember the constant balance of terror that burdened us.
Europe reached a balance of sorts, but for as long as Stalin lived; he kept testing the limits of that balance. In Asia, the Communists did what they could to seize land. A nationalist, Ho Chi Minh, managed to succeed in so weakening the French in Indochina that they left open control to local regimes.
The war against Communism mostly moved to Asia, with open conflicts being waged in Indochina and Korea and finally, Afghanistan. Lesser wars broke out all over the world with "revolutionaries" attempting to replace the ruling regimes with "peoples' democracies" of various varieties.
Outside of Asia, only Cuba fell to the Communists. There is only one more point that needs to be made about this conflict against Communism. After the death of Joseph Stalin in 5713 (1953), there was a qualitative change in the challenge from Communist Russia.
The succession to Stalin was unclear at first, and when it finally did become clear, with Nikita Khrushchev at the helm, the idea of world conquest seemed abandoned. This is so even though the bloodiest conflict against Communism was to take place in Vietnam long after Stalin's death. Although the rhetoric was not abandoned -– it was Khrushchev who said "we will bury you" -- the "kitchen debate" that occurred between him and then Vice President Richard Nixon would have been unthinkable between an American leader and Stalin.
In a thousand small ways, Nikita Khrushchev signaled that he wanted peace –- co-existence, not conquest. The ultimate proof of this was in the Cuba missile crisis of 5721 (1961). Khrushchev blinked. He backed down.
The exact date to the end of the War of Tisha B'Av cannot be defined with certainty. Reality is that wars in history tend to peter out. Sometimes there is a grand treaty, as in the treaty that ended the Thirty Years War 370 years ago in 5408 (1648).
But, more often than not, treaties tend to set the stage for a new version of a conflict, because they set to writing results of a previous conflict, thereby drawing the battle lines for the next one. Sometimes wars end with the destruction of one of the combatants entirely. The destruction of Carthage 2,200 years ago is an example of this. Once Carthage was destroyed by the Romans, there was no need for a treaty. The results were obvious.
The very next year, the outward trappings of the Soviet empire began to crumble. The wall that divided Berlin fell. Communist regimes were ousted from country after country in Europe. The Russians withdrew their soldiers from Eastern Europe.
Germany rapidly became the leading power on that continent, set to do what it had been set to do 80 years earlier -- take over Europe through its economic power. Finally, the Soviet Union collapsed entirely in the year 5751 (1991). This was the year that a huge aliya (immigration) of Russian Jews began to this country. At this point, we may say for certain that the War of Tisha B'Av ended. A new era had already begun with its focus on this part of the world.
Wars and rumors of wars rumbled across ancient Babylon. On Purim, 5751 (1991), the United States, now viewing itself as the world's sole superpower, ended a campaign in Iraq known as "Desert Storm". This was the opening of the Gulf War, which as I mentioned earlier, continues today.
This leads us finally to the rise of our own state. The history of Jews suffering in Displaced Persons camps after the Germans were defeated hardly needs repeating. At least six million had died at the hands of Hitler's S.S. in his death camps. A guilty world tried hard to entice these people to come to their countries. Only Eretz Yisrael remained closed.
For a few short years, much of the world that seemed to give us nothing but spit in our faces and dirt in our eyes, gave us sympathy and understanding. Miracles seemed to take place. Arab forces fled from smaller Jewish ones. By Tu B'Shvat, 5709 (1949), there was a State of Israel.
In the month of Sivan 5727 (1967), the Arabs gathered their forces around us and threatened attack. Our leaders, in a very rare show of courage, attacked first. Our forces solved the problem of fighting on a two front war by fighting on a three front one.
Our armies conquered the Sinai, liberated and reunited Jerusalem and even scaled the Heights of Golan, driving the Syrians away from their Russian supplied artillery. The Arabs in Judea and Samaria fled from before our soldiers and massed at the bridges of the Jordan River, ready to cross into being refugees again. Looking back, it becomes clear. Because we had faith in G-d, He delivered the enemy into our hands.
And then it all went wrong. A man with an eye-patch, who was a national hero at the time, handed control of the Temple Mount to the Arabs. He ordered the bridges on the Jordan blown up. The Arabs of Judea and Samaria, unable to cross the river, returned to their homes. The decisive victory was thrown away.
Very few saw the loss in the victory or the consequences. I know that I certainly didn't. Six years later, on Yom Kippur (1973), the enemy attacked again. Our forces, fearing to anger the United States, waited for the attack instead of attacking first. The day of the bent backed Jew, wheedling and begging before the world, has returned. In addition, the world's contempt for him has returned also.
In the War of the Day of Judgment, the man with the eye-patch, by now the Minister of Defense, tried to restrain a headstrong brutal young man from attacking and destroying the enemy across the Suez Canal. General Ariel Sharon won the day for us in a sad war that could have been a victory but wasn't.
Even that was stolen away. Sharon sold out to the United States and now vents his brutality on Jews. Nobody much talks about the fellow with the eye-patch these days. There are those who talk endlessly about the need for our government to withdraw to defensible borders, citing all kinds of "demographics" problems. Such people do not look at the facts of history.
They try to dismiss them instead. The facts of history are that in spite of demographics, our population has increased, and the percentage of the world's Jews living here has increased.
Israel is one of the most crowded countries on earth. Nearly fifty percent of the world's Jews live here. Six hundred thousand of them lived here in 5708 (1948). This was about three times the amount that Albert Hyamson talked about in his essay written twenty years earlier.
Six hundred thousand Jews were 5% of the world's total in 5708. Today, percentage-wise, nearly ten times that number, live here now. These are just numbers, the dry statistics.
So much for efforts of men and their governments.
But G-d, in His wisdom, has seen fit to cause prophecy to come about in our days. The lines of Isaiah 49:20: "the children of your bereavement shall yet say in your ears, 'The place is too tight for me; make room for me that I may sit'", appear to have come to pass. When I visited this country thirty one years ago as a young man, the neighborhood I live in now was just being built. Most of it didn't even exist. Lots of neighborhoods here are just like that. Jerusalem stretches nearly as far south as Bethlehem.
In other words, in order to see prophecy, all we need to do is open our eyes. It is all around us.
Faith is what we require now, not armies or arguments. Armies, arguments and even nuclear weapons, which we also possess, will do us no good without faith and courage. The beginning of that faith is to look at the world through a Jewish lens -– to perform the mitzvah of keeping the moadim, the dates and festivals of the Torah, and looking at the world through the calendar that we have –- the one given us through G-d's word in the Torah -– not the one of our enemies.
Some have written that we received a "period of grace" after the founding of our State that would last for 40 years. During that forty years we were supposed to repent, return to the Torah and thus bring the messiah early without many of the dramatic and disastrous prophecies in the Tanakh needing to come true. This didn't happen.
This period of grace ended in 5748 (1988). And in the last 18 years, we have seen a stunning reversal of our fortunes in this country. Every day, we argue over that reversal of our fortunes.
I've attempted to refocus the events of the last 90 years or so to show that the date Tisha B'Av as seen as the "birth of the messiah" was a finger pointing to a beginning date of the era we call the "birth pangs of the messiah" (reishit smichat geulateinu). In addition, and far more important, I've attempted to focus the events of the relatively recent past through a Jewish lens.
In the last few weeks, another event occurred that began on Tisha B'Av. This was Hurricane Katrina. The tropical depression that was to develop into this storm began on Tisha B'Av. It emerged as a major storm in the Caribbean just as the process of expelling Jews from Gush Katif was being completed. It struck as the Jewish graves there were disinterred.
The parallels between the forced homelessness of 10,000 Jews and hundreds of thousands of residents of New Orleans are scary. The reports of floating coffins eerily reflect the bodies removed from Jewish Gaza.
Like the Shoemaker-Levy comet, which fell apart under Jupiter's gravitational pull and collapsed into twenty-one separate asteroids on Tisha B'Av in 1994, Hurricane Katrina may have also been the Finger of G-d telling us to wake up and smell the heavenly coffee.
HaShem tends to show mercy and give more than one warning or sign. It doesn't say "signs and wonders" in Torah for nothing. However, I fear that we will soon see the strong Hand and outstretched Arm of HaShem as more than a mere shadow to be guessed at.
Shabbat Shalom and Shana Tova (Happy New Hebrew Year of 5766) from Liberated Yerushaliyim,
Mr. Reuven A. Kossover [mailto:hadas11@actcom.co.il]
ABOUT REUVEN KOSSOVER:
Reuven Kossover spent his formative years in Brooklyn, N.Y. where he earned a Bachelor's degree in political science and public administration. He moved to Minnesota to pursue graduate studies and lived there for twenty-two years, writing stories and managing restaurants. Presently, he lives in Jerusalem with his wife and family, working as a writer and business
consultant.
rb@rb.org.il
AN OMEN
copyright (c) 2005 by Dr. Yacov M. Tabak [mailto:tasysymt@netvision.net.il]
An annular solar eclipse took place on Erev Rosh Hashanah (Eve of the Jewish New Year) 5766 -- October 3, 2005. Hazal (Our Sages) determined that "likui hamah -- siman ra leovdei kochavim" [Babylonian Talmud/Tractate Sukkah 29a] -- solar eclipses bode ill for the nations of the world.
Lunar eclipses on the other hand are worrisome for Israel (since we are the ones whose fortunes wax and wane...). Note where this eclipse is first to be observed:
The path of the annular eclipse begins in the North Atlantic at 08:41 UT. Rushing southeast, the antumbra quickly reaches the northern coast of Spain and Portugal (08:51 UT). Bisecting the Iberian Peninsula, the antumbra engulfs Madrid (08:56 UT) which lies near the central line. The annular phase will last 04m 11s from this capital city with 90% of the Sun's surface being obscured by the Moon.
This is from the website http://www.spaceweather.com/. I am grateful to my sister-in-law for the reference.
Madrid (gematria = 258) is the key take-off point for Milhemet Gog Umagog (War of Gog and Magog) [ki kibetzam ka'amir Gorna (258) -- Micha 4:11-12]. Please read the chapter carefully.
It describes Bat-Zion as a woman in trepidation and pangs of childbirth, who goes forth from the Kiryah (Israel's military headquarters), dwells in the field (as armies do), gets as far as
Bavel (Iraq) and at that point is saved by G-d.
How?
The Nations sit in judgement on Bat-Zion at a conference, decide that Bat-Zion is guilty ("techenaf" in Hebrew) and as punishment they want to gaze on Zion themselves (i.e. come here to Israel). They do not understand G-d's strategy in that He gathered them together at Gorna (a threshing floor, but the gematria equivalent of Madrid: A correlation first pointed out to me
by my son the day after then Secretary of State Baker announced this venue for the post-Gulf-War Conference).
The Nations end up getting thoroughly threshed, i.e. crushed, which the commentators identify as the outcome of the Gog Umagog (Gog and Magog) conflict!
http://israndjer.blogspot.com/2005/11/questions-ww3-whats-coming.html
This scenario in detail took place in 1991-92 with the first Madrid Conference, except that then the Nations did not decide on an invasion of Israel.
This time around, the Quartet - United States, Russia, United Nations, and European Union -- imposing its "road map" on Israel, was constituted on April 10, 2002, again in Madrid. Remember, important events happen twice -- even this one. If, on the day before Rosh HaShanah (Jewish New Year) 5766, a bad omen for the Nations of the world is first observed at
Madrid, it may well be that this is the year whose developments will lead to the finale of Gog Umagog (Gog and Magog).
This is not the first indication of the importance of 5766, but it may be a very powerful pointer. That would mean that the finale, preceded by a nine-month gestation-like occupation of Israel by a coalition of Christians and Moslems (see Zechariah 14), could take place on the night of Hoshana Rabbah, 5767.
Recall the January 15/Hoshanah Rabbah interval chart I prepared 4 years ago? Human gestation is an average 38 weeks -- 266 days. The interval in 2006 is 271 days. The year of the Gulf War 1991 it was 264 days. It does not match perfectly, but it is close. Humans do not deliver babies after an exact interval either.
So, if the U.N./Quartet convenes -- most appropriately but not necessarily in Madrid, delivers an ultimatum to Israel to destroy yishuvim (Jewish Pioneering Communities) in Yehuda and Shomron and perhaps even in the Old City of Jerusalem -- chas vechalilah [Heaven Forbid], delivers a deadline that this destruction must be initiated by January 15, 2006, and threatens to invade and do it themselves if we do not [since the Gaza precedent now shows that we know how], hold on to your hat.
Plan to be in Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel) for Sukkot (Tabernacles), 5767 (Shabbat, October 7 -- Shabbat, October 14, 2006).
It will be the safest place at the world-wide finale.
Shavua Tov and Chag Sameach from Liberated Yerushaliyim,
Dr. Yacov M. Tabak [mailto:tasysymt@netvision.net.il]
Friday, December 02, 2005
BELGIUM LEADER WANTS UNITED STATES OF EUROPE
Belgian leader proposes 'United States of Europe'01.12.2005 - 17:39 CET By Mark Beunderman
EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - In a bid to go against the eurosceptic tide that is dominating EU public opinion, Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt has pleaded for the creation of a federal "United States of Europe." Mr Verhofstadt, a liberal, on Thursday (1 December) presented his new book, provocatively entitled "The United States of Europe."
The work is meant as a "political statement against the current trend", the Belgian leader indicated.In the book, Mr Verhofstadt proposes to break the deadlock that faces the EU after French and Dutch voters voted down the EU constitution, by creating a federal Europe.
In analysing the current mood of EU uneasiness among citizens, Mr Verhofstadt primarily points to fears that European citizens have about globalisation and international crime, but these fears should not lead to calls for "less Europe", Mr Verhofstadt writes.Pointing to the European Commission's eurobarometer surveys on public opinion "people do not want less Europe, but another Europe", he states.
People want the EU to do more in foreign affairs, and do less unnecessary regulation that, for example "decides how French cheese should be made."Federalist architecture Mr Verhofstadt believes that citizens' concerns can be best addressed by a more deeply integrated Europe, which could make a fist in the globalised world, boost the European economy by better economic co-ordination and fight organised crime.
In proposing a concrete architecture for his "United States of Europe", the Belgian politician reverts to a range of ideas that have long since figured in the debate about the future of Europe, but are more federalist than the rejected constitution.He pleads for a "European social and economic government", which should set minimum and maximum standards for, for example, greater flexibility in labour markets, pension age and workers' protection.
The European Union - a term which the Belgian politician keeps using next to "United States of Europe" - should have an autonomous budget financed from taxes like VAT, which it should use to boost spending on research and development.
The EU should further have its own president, foreign minister, army and prosecutor.Two Europes Mr Verhofstadt calls a federal EU "the only option." "Clearly, it makes no sense to keep each other in a strangle hold and keep squabbling over the way we want to go, while other continents surpass us at high speed."Like all federalist thinkers, Mr Verhofstadt finds himself faced with the dilemma that not all EU states are that keen to participate in a federalist project. Again reverting to older ideas, Mr Verhofstadt proposes a two-speed Europe as a way out of the dilemma, with a core of integrationist states, surrounded by a circle of states that favour a looser Europaen construction.
The nucleus, with the prestigious "United States of Europe" title, could consist of the 12 EU states that have adopted the euro, but should be open to further expansion of states comprising the looser, outer circle of the "Organisation of European States" - a term that appears to have been borrowed from eurosceptic Czech president Vaclac Klaus.Inspiration from US history Mr Verhofstadt points to the fact that in the history of the United States of America, not all states immediately adopted the federalist constitution drafted in 1787, but today, "it is clear...that the choice for the federal model was the right one.
"The Belgian premier acknowledges that recent EU history points to a development contrary to federalism, writing that "some countries have relatively recently detached themselves from the federalist camp." But as in the US case, in the longer term "the direction indicated by history is nevertheless crystal clear", he writes.Concluding the book, Mr Verhofstadt says he is confident Europeans would "by an overwhelming majority" approve his federal Europe in a Europe-wide referendum.
EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - In a bid to go against the eurosceptic tide that is dominating EU public opinion, Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt has pleaded for the creation of a federal "United States of Europe." Mr Verhofstadt, a liberal, on Thursday (1 December) presented his new book, provocatively entitled "The United States of Europe."
The work is meant as a "political statement against the current trend", the Belgian leader indicated.In the book, Mr Verhofstadt proposes to break the deadlock that faces the EU after French and Dutch voters voted down the EU constitution, by creating a federal Europe.
In analysing the current mood of EU uneasiness among citizens, Mr Verhofstadt primarily points to fears that European citizens have about globalisation and international crime, but these fears should not lead to calls for "less Europe", Mr Verhofstadt writes.Pointing to the European Commission's eurobarometer surveys on public opinion "people do not want less Europe, but another Europe", he states.
People want the EU to do more in foreign affairs, and do less unnecessary regulation that, for example "decides how French cheese should be made."Federalist architecture Mr Verhofstadt believes that citizens' concerns can be best addressed by a more deeply integrated Europe, which could make a fist in the globalised world, boost the European economy by better economic co-ordination and fight organised crime.
In proposing a concrete architecture for his "United States of Europe", the Belgian politician reverts to a range of ideas that have long since figured in the debate about the future of Europe, but are more federalist than the rejected constitution.He pleads for a "European social and economic government", which should set minimum and maximum standards for, for example, greater flexibility in labour markets, pension age and workers' protection.
The European Union - a term which the Belgian politician keeps using next to "United States of Europe" - should have an autonomous budget financed from taxes like VAT, which it should use to boost spending on research and development.
The EU should further have its own president, foreign minister, army and prosecutor.Two Europes Mr Verhofstadt calls a federal EU "the only option." "Clearly, it makes no sense to keep each other in a strangle hold and keep squabbling over the way we want to go, while other continents surpass us at high speed."Like all federalist thinkers, Mr Verhofstadt finds himself faced with the dilemma that not all EU states are that keen to participate in a federalist project. Again reverting to older ideas, Mr Verhofstadt proposes a two-speed Europe as a way out of the dilemma, with a core of integrationist states, surrounded by a circle of states that favour a looser Europaen construction.
The nucleus, with the prestigious "United States of Europe" title, could consist of the 12 EU states that have adopted the euro, but should be open to further expansion of states comprising the looser, outer circle of the "Organisation of European States" - a term that appears to have been borrowed from eurosceptic Czech president Vaclac Klaus.Inspiration from US history Mr Verhofstadt points to the fact that in the history of the United States of America, not all states immediately adopted the federalist constitution drafted in 1787, but today, "it is clear...that the choice for the federal model was the right one.
"The Belgian premier acknowledges that recent EU history points to a development contrary to federalism, writing that "some countries have relatively recently detached themselves from the federalist camp." But as in the US case, in the longer term "the direction indicated by history is nevertheless crystal clear", he writes.Concluding the book, Mr Verhofstadt says he is confident Europeans would "by an overwhelming majority" approve his federal Europe in a Europe-wide referendum.
Thursday, December 01, 2005
3RD TEMPLE SACRIFICES TO BE DONE
THE FIVE LEVITICAL OFFERINGS
The Sacrifices: The sacrificial system was ordained by God and placed at the very center and heart of Jewish national life. Whatever the Jews may have thought of it at the time, the unceasing sacrifice of animals, and the never-ending glow of fire at the altar of sacrifice, there is no doubt that god was burning into the hearts of every man, an awareness of their own sin. An object lesson that would make your skin crawl was to be an age long picture of the coming sacrifice of Messiah. The sacrifices pointed to Him and they were fulfilled in Him.
There are many instructions for sacrifice throughout the Pentateuch, but Leviticus chapters 1-7 is completely dedicated to the 5 Levitical offerings which were the main sacrifices used in the rituals. They describe 5 kinds of sacrifices: The burnt offering, the meal offering, the peace offering, the sin offering, and the trespass offering. Each of the sacrifices were uniquely fulfilled in Jesus Christ.
The Burnt Offerings
The burnt offering was a sacrifice that was completely burnt. None of it was to be eaten at all, and therefore the fire consumed the whole sacrifice. It is also important to note that the fire on the altar was never to go out:Lev 6:13 'A fire shall always be burning on the altar; it shall never go out.
The common Israelite worshipper brought a male animal (a bull, lamb, goat, pigeon, or turtledove depending on the wealth of the worshipper) to the door of the tabernacle.
Lev 1:3 'Let him offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it of his own free will at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD.
The animal had to be without blemish. The worshipper then placed his hands upon the head of the animal and in awareness that this innocent animal was standing in for the sinner he would seek the Lord for forgiveness and then killed the animal immediately.
Lev 1:4-9 'Then he shall put his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him. 'He shall kill the bull before the LORD; and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood and sprinkle the blood all around on the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of meeting . . . and the priest shall burn all on the altar as a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, a sweet aroma to the LORD.
The priests were also responsible to wash various parts of the animal before putting it on the altar:Lev 1:6-9 'And he shall skin the burnt offering and cut it into its pieces. 'The sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire on the altar, and lay the wood in order on the fire. 'Then the priests, Aaron's sons, shall lay the parts, the head, and the fat in order on the wood that is on the fire upon the altar; 'but he shall wash its entrails and its legs with water.
Later In Israel's history there were burnt offerings made twice per day, one at morning and one at evening (when the first star appeared:Num 28:3-4 "And you shall say to them, 'This is the offering made by fire which you shall offer to the LORD: two male lambs in their first year without blemish, day by day, as a regular burnt offering. 'The one lamb you shall offer in the morning, the other lamb you shall offer in the evening"
The Burnt offering was performed to atone for the peoples sins against the Lord and was a dedication offering of ones life before the Lord continually.
The Meal Offerings
The Israelites offered meal (cereals) or vegetables in addition to the animals. Leviticus chapter 2 mentions 4 kinds of cereal offerings and gives cooking instructions for each. The sinner could offer dough from wheat flour baked in an oven, cooked on a griddle, fried in a pan, or roasted to make bread (as in the offering of the first fruits). All meal offerings were made with oil and salt and no honey and leaven were to be used (oil and salt preserved while honey and leaven would spoil). The worshipper was also to bring a portion of incense (frankincense).
The meal offerings were brought to one of the priests, who took it to the altar and cast a "memorial portion" on the fire and he did this also with the incense. The priest ate the remainder unless he was bringing the meal offering for himself where he would burn the whole thing. The purpose of the meal offering was an offering of gifts and speaks of a life that is dedicated to generosity and giving.
The Peace Offerings
The peace offering was a meal that was shared with the Lord, the priests, and sometimes the common Israelites. The worshipper was to bring a male or female oxen, sheep, or a goat. The ritual was closely compared to the burnt offering up to the point of the actual burning where the animals blood was poured around the edges of the altar. The fat and entrails were burned and the remainder was eaten by the priests and (if it was a free-will offering) by the worshippers themselves.
This sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving was most of the time a voluntary act.
The Peace offerings included unleavened cakes. The priests ate all except the memorial portion of the cakes and certain parts of the animal on the same day the sacrifice was made, and when the worshipper joined in and the offering was free-will the worshipper could eat for 2 days of the whole animal except the breast and the right thigh which were eaten by the priests.
Jacob and Laban offered a peace offering when they made their treaty (Gen 31:43 ff). It was required to make offerings while making a vow of ones life to God and thanking Him with praise while free-will offerings were voluntary.
The Sin Offerings
The sin offering expiated (paid the debt in full) the worshippers unintentional weaknesses and failures before the Lord. Lev 4:1-4 Now the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, "Speak to the children of Israel, saying: 'If a person sins unintentionally against any of the commandments of the LORD in anything which ought not to be done, and does any of them, 'if the anointed priest sins, bringing guilt on the people, then let him offer to the LORD for his sin which he has sinned a young bull without blemish as a sin offering. 'He shall bring the bull to the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD, lay his hand on the bull's head, and kill the bull before the LORD.
Each class of people had various ordinances to perform:
Sins of the high priest required the offering of a bull and the blood was not poured on the altar but sprinkled from the finger of the high priest 7 times on the altar. Then the fat was burnt, and the remainder was burned (never eaten) outside the camp "unto a clean place" where the sacrifice was made and the ashes were poured out.
Lev 4:12 'the whole bull he shall carry outside the camp to a clean place, where the ashes are poured out, and burn it on wood with fire; where the ashes are poured out it shall be burned.
Sins of the leaders required the offering of a male goat. the blood was sprinkled only once and the remainder was poured around the altar as with the burnt offering.
Sins of the common Israelites required female animals, goats, lambs, turtledoves, or pigeons and in the case of the very poor an offering of grain was acceptable just like a meal offering.
Unintentional sins were difficult to identify and could happen at any time and therefore the priests worked closely as mediators with God and the people and were there to instruct the people as they sought the Lord.
In case any sins were not brought before the Lord there were offerings for the nation and for the high priest which covered them all in a collective way. On the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) the high priest sprinkled blood on the mercy seat for his own sins and the sins of the nation.
The Trespass Offerings
The trespass offering was very similar to that of the sin offering but the main difference was that the trespass offering was an offering of money for sins of ignorance connected with fraud. For example if someone unintentionally cheated another out of money or property, his sacrifice was to be equal to the amount taken, plus one-fifth to the priest and to the one offended. Therefore he repaid twice the amount taken plus 40 %.
Lev 6:5-7 "He shall restore its full value, add one-fifth more to it, and give it to whomever it belongs, on the day of his trespass offering. And he shall bring his trespass offering to the LORD, a ram without blemish from the flock, with your valuation, as a trespass offering, to the priest. So the priest shall make atonement for him before the LORD, and he shall be forgiven for any one of these things that he may have done in which he trespasses."
Jewish Tradition - The Treatment of Animals
Even though the Lord prescribed the slaughtering of animals for sacrifice and for food, the treatment of animals is of the utmost importance in Judaism. The Talmud describes with minute care and detail how an animal is to be slaughtered for food, and the regulations are given mainly because of the desire to inflict as painless a death as possible.
The slaughterer could not be a deaf-mute, or a minor, and he must be of sound mind (Chul. 1. 1). The knife must be perfectly smooth without the slightest perceptible notch and "the knife must be tested as to its three sides upon the flesh of the finger and upon the nail" (ibid. 17b).
There are five causes of disqualification (ibid. 9a). [1] Delay (Heb. shehiyah), there must be a continuous forward and backward motion of the knife without any interruption. [2] Pressure (Heb. derasah), the cut must be made gently, without the exercise of any force. [3] Digging (Heb. chaladah), the knife must not be inserted into the flesh instead of drawn across the throat.
[4] Slipping (Heb. hagramah), the cut must not be made except through a prescribed section of the neck. [5] Tearing (Heb. ikkur), the cut must be done without dislocating the windpipe or gullet. Any one of these actions would render the animal unfit for consumption, because it would have inflicted pain upon the animal.
Judaism teaches proper care of animals and a love and respect for them.They were to be properly fed (p. Jeb. 14d), and "a man must not eat his meal before giving food to his cattle (Ber. 40a). This was taken from the Scripture: Deut 11:15 "And He will give grass in your fields for your cattle, and then you shall eat and be satisfied."
Judaism teaches man to praise the animals because they are models for humans to imitate. "Had the Torah not been given to us for our guidance, we could not have learnt modesty from the cat, honesty from the ant, chastity from the dove, and good manners from the cock" (Erub. 100b). The Lord taught Moses to care for sheep before he would care for and lead his fellow man (Exod. R 11.2)
A Type of Christ
Every offering is a clear picture of Christ. Each of the 5 Levitical offerings were a finger pointing to Christ and He was each of them. This topic is further discussed in BKA16 The Five Levitical Offerings which is in the process of being upgraded. (1/98)
also see: Blood Atonement
© 1998 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator
The Sacrifices: The sacrificial system was ordained by God and placed at the very center and heart of Jewish national life. Whatever the Jews may have thought of it at the time, the unceasing sacrifice of animals, and the never-ending glow of fire at the altar of sacrifice, there is no doubt that god was burning into the hearts of every man, an awareness of their own sin. An object lesson that would make your skin crawl was to be an age long picture of the coming sacrifice of Messiah. The sacrifices pointed to Him and they were fulfilled in Him.
There are many instructions for sacrifice throughout the Pentateuch, but Leviticus chapters 1-7 is completely dedicated to the 5 Levitical offerings which were the main sacrifices used in the rituals. They describe 5 kinds of sacrifices: The burnt offering, the meal offering, the peace offering, the sin offering, and the trespass offering. Each of the sacrifices were uniquely fulfilled in Jesus Christ.
The Burnt Offerings
The burnt offering was a sacrifice that was completely burnt. None of it was to be eaten at all, and therefore the fire consumed the whole sacrifice. It is also important to note that the fire on the altar was never to go out:Lev 6:13 'A fire shall always be burning on the altar; it shall never go out.
The common Israelite worshipper brought a male animal (a bull, lamb, goat, pigeon, or turtledove depending on the wealth of the worshipper) to the door of the tabernacle.
Lev 1:3 'Let him offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it of his own free will at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD.
The animal had to be without blemish. The worshipper then placed his hands upon the head of the animal and in awareness that this innocent animal was standing in for the sinner he would seek the Lord for forgiveness and then killed the animal immediately.
Lev 1:4-9 'Then he shall put his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him. 'He shall kill the bull before the LORD; and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood and sprinkle the blood all around on the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of meeting . . . and the priest shall burn all on the altar as a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, a sweet aroma to the LORD.
The priests were also responsible to wash various parts of the animal before putting it on the altar:Lev 1:6-9 'And he shall skin the burnt offering and cut it into its pieces. 'The sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire on the altar, and lay the wood in order on the fire. 'Then the priests, Aaron's sons, shall lay the parts, the head, and the fat in order on the wood that is on the fire upon the altar; 'but he shall wash its entrails and its legs with water.
Later In Israel's history there were burnt offerings made twice per day, one at morning and one at evening (when the first star appeared:Num 28:3-4 "And you shall say to them, 'This is the offering made by fire which you shall offer to the LORD: two male lambs in their first year without blemish, day by day, as a regular burnt offering. 'The one lamb you shall offer in the morning, the other lamb you shall offer in the evening"
The Burnt offering was performed to atone for the peoples sins against the Lord and was a dedication offering of ones life before the Lord continually.
The Meal Offerings
The Israelites offered meal (cereals) or vegetables in addition to the animals. Leviticus chapter 2 mentions 4 kinds of cereal offerings and gives cooking instructions for each. The sinner could offer dough from wheat flour baked in an oven, cooked on a griddle, fried in a pan, or roasted to make bread (as in the offering of the first fruits). All meal offerings were made with oil and salt and no honey and leaven were to be used (oil and salt preserved while honey and leaven would spoil). The worshipper was also to bring a portion of incense (frankincense).
The meal offerings were brought to one of the priests, who took it to the altar and cast a "memorial portion" on the fire and he did this also with the incense. The priest ate the remainder unless he was bringing the meal offering for himself where he would burn the whole thing. The purpose of the meal offering was an offering of gifts and speaks of a life that is dedicated to generosity and giving.
The Peace Offerings
The peace offering was a meal that was shared with the Lord, the priests, and sometimes the common Israelites. The worshipper was to bring a male or female oxen, sheep, or a goat. The ritual was closely compared to the burnt offering up to the point of the actual burning where the animals blood was poured around the edges of the altar. The fat and entrails were burned and the remainder was eaten by the priests and (if it was a free-will offering) by the worshippers themselves.
This sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving was most of the time a voluntary act.
The Peace offerings included unleavened cakes. The priests ate all except the memorial portion of the cakes and certain parts of the animal on the same day the sacrifice was made, and when the worshipper joined in and the offering was free-will the worshipper could eat for 2 days of the whole animal except the breast and the right thigh which were eaten by the priests.
Jacob and Laban offered a peace offering when they made their treaty (Gen 31:43 ff). It was required to make offerings while making a vow of ones life to God and thanking Him with praise while free-will offerings were voluntary.
The Sin Offerings
The sin offering expiated (paid the debt in full) the worshippers unintentional weaknesses and failures before the Lord. Lev 4:1-4 Now the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, "Speak to the children of Israel, saying: 'If a person sins unintentionally against any of the commandments of the LORD in anything which ought not to be done, and does any of them, 'if the anointed priest sins, bringing guilt on the people, then let him offer to the LORD for his sin which he has sinned a young bull without blemish as a sin offering. 'He shall bring the bull to the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD, lay his hand on the bull's head, and kill the bull before the LORD.
Each class of people had various ordinances to perform:
Sins of the high priest required the offering of a bull and the blood was not poured on the altar but sprinkled from the finger of the high priest 7 times on the altar. Then the fat was burnt, and the remainder was burned (never eaten) outside the camp "unto a clean place" where the sacrifice was made and the ashes were poured out.
Lev 4:12 'the whole bull he shall carry outside the camp to a clean place, where the ashes are poured out, and burn it on wood with fire; where the ashes are poured out it shall be burned.
Sins of the leaders required the offering of a male goat. the blood was sprinkled only once and the remainder was poured around the altar as with the burnt offering.
Sins of the common Israelites required female animals, goats, lambs, turtledoves, or pigeons and in the case of the very poor an offering of grain was acceptable just like a meal offering.
Unintentional sins were difficult to identify and could happen at any time and therefore the priests worked closely as mediators with God and the people and were there to instruct the people as they sought the Lord.
In case any sins were not brought before the Lord there were offerings for the nation and for the high priest which covered them all in a collective way. On the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) the high priest sprinkled blood on the mercy seat for his own sins and the sins of the nation.
The Trespass Offerings
The trespass offering was very similar to that of the sin offering but the main difference was that the trespass offering was an offering of money for sins of ignorance connected with fraud. For example if someone unintentionally cheated another out of money or property, his sacrifice was to be equal to the amount taken, plus one-fifth to the priest and to the one offended. Therefore he repaid twice the amount taken plus 40 %.
Lev 6:5-7 "He shall restore its full value, add one-fifth more to it, and give it to whomever it belongs, on the day of his trespass offering. And he shall bring his trespass offering to the LORD, a ram without blemish from the flock, with your valuation, as a trespass offering, to the priest. So the priest shall make atonement for him before the LORD, and he shall be forgiven for any one of these things that he may have done in which he trespasses."
Jewish Tradition - The Treatment of Animals
Even though the Lord prescribed the slaughtering of animals for sacrifice and for food, the treatment of animals is of the utmost importance in Judaism. The Talmud describes with minute care and detail how an animal is to be slaughtered for food, and the regulations are given mainly because of the desire to inflict as painless a death as possible.
The slaughterer could not be a deaf-mute, or a minor, and he must be of sound mind (Chul. 1. 1). The knife must be perfectly smooth without the slightest perceptible notch and "the knife must be tested as to its three sides upon the flesh of the finger and upon the nail" (ibid. 17b).
There are five causes of disqualification (ibid. 9a). [1] Delay (Heb. shehiyah), there must be a continuous forward and backward motion of the knife without any interruption. [2] Pressure (Heb. derasah), the cut must be made gently, without the exercise of any force. [3] Digging (Heb. chaladah), the knife must not be inserted into the flesh instead of drawn across the throat.
[4] Slipping (Heb. hagramah), the cut must not be made except through a prescribed section of the neck. [5] Tearing (Heb. ikkur), the cut must be done without dislocating the windpipe or gullet. Any one of these actions would render the animal unfit for consumption, because it would have inflicted pain upon the animal.
Judaism teaches proper care of animals and a love and respect for them.They were to be properly fed (p. Jeb. 14d), and "a man must not eat his meal before giving food to his cattle (Ber. 40a). This was taken from the Scripture: Deut 11:15 "And He will give grass in your fields for your cattle, and then you shall eat and be satisfied."
Judaism teaches man to praise the animals because they are models for humans to imitate. "Had the Torah not been given to us for our guidance, we could not have learnt modesty from the cat, honesty from the ant, chastity from the dove, and good manners from the cock" (Erub. 100b). The Lord taught Moses to care for sheep before he would care for and lead his fellow man (Exod. R 11.2)
A Type of Christ
Every offering is a clear picture of Christ. Each of the 5 Levitical offerings were a finger pointing to Christ and He was each of them. This topic is further discussed in BKA16 The Five Levitical Offerings which is in the process of being upgraded. (1/98)
also see: Blood Atonement
© 1998 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator
WORDING OF THE JERUSALEM COVENANT
Whose Jerusalem ?
Whose Land ?
Covenant of Jerusalem - Key to 25th Anniversary
by Kaye Corbett
Jerusalem - The historic Covenant of Jerusalem was presented to the Israeli government on Wednesday, May 19, 1993. It marked the conclusion of a year of celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Holy City's reunification, which reaffirmed the indelible bond between the Jewish people and its eternal spiritual and cultural capital.
On May 31, 1992 a proclamation, under the signatures of Deputy Minister Avraham Verdiger, Mayor Teddy Kollek and Jewish Agency Chairman Simcha Dinitz, was sent to Jewish communities around the world, inviting them to share in this moment of history with Jerusalem.
Ministry Director-General Yeshayahu Barzel said the year-long celebration had three goals. First, to strengthen the feeling that the entire Jewish people stand united with Israel on the indivisibility of Jerusalem; second, to impart to all Jews - especially those in the former Soviet Union who have been cut off from world Jewry for four generations - a feeling of unity; and third, to remind the non-Jewish world that the entire Jewish people are unified on the emotional and religious significance Jerusalem has for Jews everywhere.
Although there has been considerable opposition from those who want Jerusalem to be an "international city," the covenant of Jerusalem was inspired by the covenant renewal ceremony convened by Ezra and Nehemiah for the Israelites who returned to their homeland from Babylon.
According to David A. Gross's article in Israel Magazine, the Covenant has seven paragraphs, as Jerusalem has seven gates from Ezra's day. Even today, there are seven open gates to the Old City: Jaffa Gate, New Gate, Damascus Gate, Herod's Gate, Lion's Gate, Dung Gate and Zion Gate.
There's a legend which says Jerusalem will have seven gates in the days to come and shine "from one end of the world to the other."
Prepared by Justice Menahem Elon, Deputy President of the Supreme Court Vice, and with input from a wide range of writers, historians and archaeologists, the Covenant, in the form of a scroll written on parchment, was signed by President Chaim Herzog on May 31, 1992.
Besides Herzog, the original scroll was also signed by a lengthy list of dignitaries and national leaders.
Two parchment scrolls of the Covenant were sent to authorities in Israel from Metulla in the north to Eilat in the south and there were signing ceremonies throughout the world, similar to the main signing ceremony in Jerusalem.
The Jerusalem Covenant
As of this day, Jerusalem Day, the twenty-eight day of the month of Iyar in the year five thousand seven hundred fifty-two; one thousand nine hundred and twenty-two years after the destruction of the Second Temple; forty-four years since the founding of the State of Israel; twenty-five years since the Six Day War during which the Israel Defense Forces,
in defense of our very existence, broke through the walls of the city and restored the Temple Mount and the unity of Jerusalem; twelve years since the Knesset of Israel reestablished the 'Jerusalem, unified and whole, is the Capital of Israel'; the State of Israel is the State of the 'Jewish People' and the Capital of Israel is the Capital of the People of Israel.
We have gathered together in Zion, national leaders and heads, of our communities everywhere, to enter into a covenant with Jersualem, as was done by the leaders of our nation and all the people of Israel upon Israel's return to its Land from the "Babylonian exile; and the people and their leaders will dwell in Jerusalem, the Holy City.
Once again, 'our feet stand within your gates, O Jerusalem - Jerusalem built as a city joined together' which 'unites the people of Israel to one another', and 'links heavenly Jerusalem with earthly Jerusalem.'
We have returned to the place that the Lord vowed to bestow upon the descendants of Abraham, Father of our Nation; to the City of David, King of Israel; where Solomon, son of David, built a Holy Temple; a Capital City which became the Mother of all Israel; a metropolis for justice and righteousness and for the wisdom and insights of the ancient world;
where a Second Temple was erected in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah. In this city the prophets of the Lord prophesied; in the City the Sages taught Torah; in this City the Sanhedrin convened in session in its stone chamber.
'For there were the seats of Justice, the Throne of the House of David', 'for out of Zion shall go forth Torah, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem.'
Today, as of old, we hold fast to the truth of the words of the Prophets of Israel, that all the inhabitants of the world shall enter within the gates of Jerusalem: 'And it shall come to pass at the end of days, the mountain of the House of the Lord will be well established at the peak of the mountains and will tower above the hills, and all the nation shall stream towards it.'
Each and every nation will live in it by its own faith: 'For all the nation will go forward, each with its own Divine Name; we shall go in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever.' And in this spirit the Knesset of the State of Israel has enacted a law: The places holy to the peoples of all religions shall be protected from any desecration and from any restriction of free access to them.
Jerusalem - peace and tranquility shall reign in the city: 'Pray for the peace of Jerusalem; may those who love you be tranquil. May there by peace within your walls, and tranquility within your palaces.' Out of Jerusalem, a message of peace went forth and shall yet go forth again to all the inhabitants of the earth:
'And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation will not lift up sword against nation, nor shall they learn war any more.' Our sages, peace be upon them, said. In the future, The Holy One, the Blessed, will comfort Jerusalem only with peace.
From this place, we once again take this vow: "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its strength; may my tongue cleave to my palate if I do not remember you, if I do not raise up Jerusalem at the very height of my rejoicing.'
And with all these understandings, we enter into this Covenant and write: We shall bind you to us forever; we shall bind you to us with faithfulness, with righteousness and justice, with steadfast love and compassion.
We love you, O Jerusalem, with eternal love, with unbounded love, under siege and when liberated from the yoke of oppressors. We have been martyred for you; we have yearned for you, we have clung to you. Our faithfulness to you we shall bequeath to our children after us. Forevermore our home shall be within you.
Whose Land ?
Covenant of Jerusalem - Key to 25th Anniversary
by Kaye Corbett
Jerusalem - The historic Covenant of Jerusalem was presented to the Israeli government on Wednesday, May 19, 1993. It marked the conclusion of a year of celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Holy City's reunification, which reaffirmed the indelible bond between the Jewish people and its eternal spiritual and cultural capital.
On May 31, 1992 a proclamation, under the signatures of Deputy Minister Avraham Verdiger, Mayor Teddy Kollek and Jewish Agency Chairman Simcha Dinitz, was sent to Jewish communities around the world, inviting them to share in this moment of history with Jerusalem.
Ministry Director-General Yeshayahu Barzel said the year-long celebration had three goals. First, to strengthen the feeling that the entire Jewish people stand united with Israel on the indivisibility of Jerusalem; second, to impart to all Jews - especially those in the former Soviet Union who have been cut off from world Jewry for four generations - a feeling of unity; and third, to remind the non-Jewish world that the entire Jewish people are unified on the emotional and religious significance Jerusalem has for Jews everywhere.
Although there has been considerable opposition from those who want Jerusalem to be an "international city," the covenant of Jerusalem was inspired by the covenant renewal ceremony convened by Ezra and Nehemiah for the Israelites who returned to their homeland from Babylon.
According to David A. Gross's article in Israel Magazine, the Covenant has seven paragraphs, as Jerusalem has seven gates from Ezra's day. Even today, there are seven open gates to the Old City: Jaffa Gate, New Gate, Damascus Gate, Herod's Gate, Lion's Gate, Dung Gate and Zion Gate.
There's a legend which says Jerusalem will have seven gates in the days to come and shine "from one end of the world to the other."
Prepared by Justice Menahem Elon, Deputy President of the Supreme Court Vice, and with input from a wide range of writers, historians and archaeologists, the Covenant, in the form of a scroll written on parchment, was signed by President Chaim Herzog on May 31, 1992.
Besides Herzog, the original scroll was also signed by a lengthy list of dignitaries and national leaders.
Two parchment scrolls of the Covenant were sent to authorities in Israel from Metulla in the north to Eilat in the south and there were signing ceremonies throughout the world, similar to the main signing ceremony in Jerusalem.
The Jerusalem Covenant
As of this day, Jerusalem Day, the twenty-eight day of the month of Iyar in the year five thousand seven hundred fifty-two; one thousand nine hundred and twenty-two years after the destruction of the Second Temple; forty-four years since the founding of the State of Israel; twenty-five years since the Six Day War during which the Israel Defense Forces,
in defense of our very existence, broke through the walls of the city and restored the Temple Mount and the unity of Jerusalem; twelve years since the Knesset of Israel reestablished the 'Jerusalem, unified and whole, is the Capital of Israel'; the State of Israel is the State of the 'Jewish People' and the Capital of Israel is the Capital of the People of Israel.
We have gathered together in Zion, national leaders and heads, of our communities everywhere, to enter into a covenant with Jersualem, as was done by the leaders of our nation and all the people of Israel upon Israel's return to its Land from the "Babylonian exile; and the people and their leaders will dwell in Jerusalem, the Holy City.
Once again, 'our feet stand within your gates, O Jerusalem - Jerusalem built as a city joined together' which 'unites the people of Israel to one another', and 'links heavenly Jerusalem with earthly Jerusalem.'
We have returned to the place that the Lord vowed to bestow upon the descendants of Abraham, Father of our Nation; to the City of David, King of Israel; where Solomon, son of David, built a Holy Temple; a Capital City which became the Mother of all Israel; a metropolis for justice and righteousness and for the wisdom and insights of the ancient world;
where a Second Temple was erected in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah. In this city the prophets of the Lord prophesied; in the City the Sages taught Torah; in this City the Sanhedrin convened in session in its stone chamber.
'For there were the seats of Justice, the Throne of the House of David', 'for out of Zion shall go forth Torah, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem.'
Today, as of old, we hold fast to the truth of the words of the Prophets of Israel, that all the inhabitants of the world shall enter within the gates of Jerusalem: 'And it shall come to pass at the end of days, the mountain of the House of the Lord will be well established at the peak of the mountains and will tower above the hills, and all the nation shall stream towards it.'
Each and every nation will live in it by its own faith: 'For all the nation will go forward, each with its own Divine Name; we shall go in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever.' And in this spirit the Knesset of the State of Israel has enacted a law: The places holy to the peoples of all religions shall be protected from any desecration and from any restriction of free access to them.
Jerusalem - peace and tranquility shall reign in the city: 'Pray for the peace of Jerusalem; may those who love you be tranquil. May there by peace within your walls, and tranquility within your palaces.' Out of Jerusalem, a message of peace went forth and shall yet go forth again to all the inhabitants of the earth:
'And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation will not lift up sword against nation, nor shall they learn war any more.' Our sages, peace be upon them, said. In the future, The Holy One, the Blessed, will comfort Jerusalem only with peace.
From this place, we once again take this vow: "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its strength; may my tongue cleave to my palate if I do not remember you, if I do not raise up Jerusalem at the very height of my rejoicing.'
And with all these understandings, we enter into this Covenant and write: We shall bind you to us forever; we shall bind you to us with faithfulness, with righteousness and justice, with steadfast love and compassion.
We love you, O Jerusalem, with eternal love, with unbounded love, under siege and when liberated from the yoke of oppressors. We have been martyred for you; we have yearned for you, we have clung to you. Our faithfulness to you we shall bequeath to our children after us. Forevermore our home shall be within you.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
3RD TEMPLE UPDATE
THE 3rD TEMPLE UPDATE.
Grant Jeffrey was on Benny Hinn today November 29,05. He was talking on the future 3RD and 4TH Temples to be rebuilt very Shortly.
In Daniel 9:27 we see that before the future 7 year peace treaty is signed the 3RD Temple has to be rebuilt. And in Ezekiel chapters 40-48 we see a 4TH Temple rebuilt by the Messiah 25 miles north of Jerusalem after the 7 yr tribulation is over and the 1000 year reign of the Messiah begins from Davids throne.
First we go to Ezekiel 44:1-3 The East Gate will never be opened until Messiah walks through it in the future. to Rule and reign.
Then he brought me back by way of the outer Gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east; and it was shut. 2-Adonai said to me, "This gate will remain shut; it will not be opened, and no one will go through it; because Adonai (Lord), God of Israel, has gone through it. Therefore, it is to be kept shut. 3-Only the prince, since he is a prince, is to sit there to eat his meal before Adonai; he is to enter through the vestibule of the gate and leave the same way.
We go back also to Ezekiel 43:1-3 After this, he brought me to the gate facing east. 2-There I saw the glory of the God of Israel approaching from the east. His voice was like the sound of rushing water, and the earth shone with his glory. 3-The vision seemed like the vision I had seen when i came to destroy the city; also the visions were like the vision I had seen by the K'var River; and I fell on my face. 4-Adonai's glory entered the house through the gate facing the east.
Now we go to Revelation 11:1-2 to see this 3RD Temple being rebuilt.
I was given a measuring rod like a stick and told, "Get up, and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count how many people are worshipping there! 2-But the court outside the Temple, leave that out; don't measure it; because it has been given to the Goyim (Nations), and they will trample over the holy city for forty-two months (3 1/2 YRS).
I never knew that the temples have to be built in front of a gate, so the priest can enter and go directly into the Temple.
If that is the case then the 3RD Temple can not be built on the Dome of the Rock because the East gate would not lead directly to the Temple. But 100 yards to the North of the Dome of the Rock by the Dome of the spirits there is all kinds of room to build the 3RD Temple and the East gate lines up perfectly with the bibles description of were the 3RD Temple will be rebuilt.
Daniel 9:24 say that JERUSALEM will be the main goal in the future.
Seventy weeks (70x7=490 yrs) have been decreed for your people (Israelis) and for your holy city for putting an end to the transgression, for making an end of sin, for forgiving iniquity, for bringing in everlasting justice, for setting the seal on vision and prophet, and for anointing the especially Holy Place (Temple Mount and Jerusalem).
9:25 Know, therefore, and discern that 7 weeks of years (7x7=49YRS) will elapse between the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an annointed prince comes. It will remain built for 62 weeks (62x7=434YRS), with open spaces and moates; but these will be troubled times. 26-Then, after 62 weeks (434YRS), Messiah will be cut off and have nothing. The people of a prince yet to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary (THE ROMANS), but his end will come with a flood, and desolations are decreed untill the war is over.
Notice in these passages its ISRAEL and JERUSALEM were all the action is here , 70 weeks are determined 490 years, but up to now there is only 69 weeks fulfilled (483 years). so we still have a 7 YR future time when GOD once again deals with ISRAEL and JERUSALEM once again. to end all the troubles and bring in peace.
But first Israel had to become a nation again Ezekiel 36:24 For I will take you from amoung the Nations, gather you from all the countries, and return you to your own soil.
Then Ezekiel 37 These bones are the whole house of Israel coming back to life and having a great army.
And Matthew 24 32-35 says Israel would literally be born before summer may or spring is just before summer starts as we read.
Now let the fig tree (Israel) teach you its lesson: when its branches begin to sprout and leaves appear (Springtime) , you know that summer is approaching. 33-In the same way, when you see all these things (All the signs Jesus told us to look for), you are to know that the time is near, right at the door. 34-Yes! I tell you that this people (A Generation) will certainly not pass away before all these things happen. 35-Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
Ok so we see ISRAEL is now a nation but notice JERUSALEM will be involved allso so we have to go to Luke 21:24 to see that JERUSALEM will become property of the ISRAELIS.
21:24 Some will fall by the edge of the sword, others will be carried into all the countries of the Goyim (nations), and JERUSALEM will be trampled down by the nations until the age of the nations has run its course.
Well on June 5-10, 1967 the age of nations has run its course. So we see ISRAEL had to be in control of JERUSALEM before the last age would come into force.
After Israel has control of Jerusalem what happens next as we read on.
Luke 21:25-26 There will appear SIGNS in the sun,moon and stars; and on earth, nations will be in anxiety and bewilderment at the sound and surge of the sea, 26-as people faint with fear at the prospect of what is overtaking the world; for the powers in heaven will be shakin (Earthquakes,climate change,Ozone depletion,Terrorism ETC...)
Well now Israel and Jerusalem are once again United now we go back to Daniel 9:27 to see this final 1 week or 7 year period called the tribulation that was predicted to bring in the age of peace by Messiah ruling and reigning from Davids throne in Jerusalem.
9:27 He (The EU PRESIDENT) will make a firm (Strong) Covenant with leaders for 1 week ( 7 YEARS). For half of the week ( 3 1/2 YRS) he will put a stop to the sacrifice and the grain offering. On the wing of detestable things the desolator will come and continue until the already decreed destruction is poured out on the desolator (THE FUTURE EU PRESIDENT THAT SIGNS THIS 7 YR PEACE TREATY WITH ISRAEL/ARABS AND MANY).
So we see here that the 3RD Temple has to be rebuilt before the 7 year peace treaty is signed.
How will this come about.
Grant Jeffrey thinks that the Russians and Arabs will march in Ezekiel 38-39 ,will be destroyed and this will allow Israel to rebuild the 3RD Temple.
I believe however the 3RD TEMPLE will be built as a result that Israel has the deed to prove they own the Temple Mount (THE JERUSALEM COVENANT). And that Israel will rebuild the 3RD Temple 100 yards North of the dome of the rock, by the dome of the Spirits. All kinds of space here to rebuild the 3RD TEMPLE.
I also believe all nations will get involved when it comes down to the final status talks on JERUSALEM. I just think Russia and the Arabs won't march to Israel till just before the 3 1/2 year mark of the 7 year tribulation. But maybe Grant could be right the Ezek 38+39 war might be fought before the future peace treaty is signed, and with 5/6 or 85% of Islam destroyed, they would be no threat to stop Israel from rebuilding the 3RD TEMPLE.
Now we go to the end of the 7 yr treaty when the true MESSIAH (JESUS) returns to earth bodily to rule and reign for 1000 years.
Now at this point im not sure if the EARTHQUAKE AT THE END OF THE TRIBULATION DESTROYS THE 3RD TEMPLE OR NOT. The last 3 1/2 years of the tribulation, the EU WORLD POLITICIAN WILL BE SITTING IN IT PROCLAIMING TO BE GOD, SO IT WILL BE DEFILED and might be destroyed when Jesus returns to earth bodily.
Or 2ndly Jesus will not destroy it at this time , he will cleanse it and rule from the 3RD Temple until the 4TH Temple gets built. Since Jesus enters through the east gate to the Temple in the future.
This fourth Temple Grant Jeffrey says will be built 25 miles North of Jerusalem since this 4TH TEMPLE of Ezekiel 40-48 will be 1 mile in length by 1 mile in width, that big of a Temple will not fit on the Temple Mount.
The 3RD Temple might be destroyed since it says the MESSIAH will be in charge of rebuilding the 4TH Temple. And he cant sit in the 3RD and be 25 miles away directing the work of the 4TH TEMPLE.
Only time will tell exactly what will happen but I know Israels and our 1 GOD will make everything come to pass in his time.
WE ALL PRAY COME QUICKLY LORD JESUS, KING OF JERUSALEM, KING OF THE WORLD. AND RULER FROM THE WORLD CAPITAL JERUSALEM FOR 1000 YRS , THEN FOREVER.
Grant Jeffrey was on Benny Hinn today November 29,05. He was talking on the future 3RD and 4TH Temples to be rebuilt very Shortly.
In Daniel 9:27 we see that before the future 7 year peace treaty is signed the 3RD Temple has to be rebuilt. And in Ezekiel chapters 40-48 we see a 4TH Temple rebuilt by the Messiah 25 miles north of Jerusalem after the 7 yr tribulation is over and the 1000 year reign of the Messiah begins from Davids throne.
First we go to Ezekiel 44:1-3 The East Gate will never be opened until Messiah walks through it in the future. to Rule and reign.
Then he brought me back by way of the outer Gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east; and it was shut. 2-Adonai said to me, "This gate will remain shut; it will not be opened, and no one will go through it; because Adonai (Lord), God of Israel, has gone through it. Therefore, it is to be kept shut. 3-Only the prince, since he is a prince, is to sit there to eat his meal before Adonai; he is to enter through the vestibule of the gate and leave the same way.
We go back also to Ezekiel 43:1-3 After this, he brought me to the gate facing east. 2-There I saw the glory of the God of Israel approaching from the east. His voice was like the sound of rushing water, and the earth shone with his glory. 3-The vision seemed like the vision I had seen when i came to destroy the city; also the visions were like the vision I had seen by the K'var River; and I fell on my face. 4-Adonai's glory entered the house through the gate facing the east.
Now we go to Revelation 11:1-2 to see this 3RD Temple being rebuilt.
I was given a measuring rod like a stick and told, "Get up, and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count how many people are worshipping there! 2-But the court outside the Temple, leave that out; don't measure it; because it has been given to the Goyim (Nations), and they will trample over the holy city for forty-two months (3 1/2 YRS).
I never knew that the temples have to be built in front of a gate, so the priest can enter and go directly into the Temple.
If that is the case then the 3RD Temple can not be built on the Dome of the Rock because the East gate would not lead directly to the Temple. But 100 yards to the North of the Dome of the Rock by the Dome of the spirits there is all kinds of room to build the 3RD Temple and the East gate lines up perfectly with the bibles description of were the 3RD Temple will be rebuilt.
Daniel 9:24 say that JERUSALEM will be the main goal in the future.
Seventy weeks (70x7=490 yrs) have been decreed for your people (Israelis) and for your holy city for putting an end to the transgression, for making an end of sin, for forgiving iniquity, for bringing in everlasting justice, for setting the seal on vision and prophet, and for anointing the especially Holy Place (Temple Mount and Jerusalem).
9:25 Know, therefore, and discern that 7 weeks of years (7x7=49YRS) will elapse between the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an annointed prince comes. It will remain built for 62 weeks (62x7=434YRS), with open spaces and moates; but these will be troubled times. 26-Then, after 62 weeks (434YRS), Messiah will be cut off and have nothing. The people of a prince yet to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary (THE ROMANS), but his end will come with a flood, and desolations are decreed untill the war is over.
Notice in these passages its ISRAEL and JERUSALEM were all the action is here , 70 weeks are determined 490 years, but up to now there is only 69 weeks fulfilled (483 years). so we still have a 7 YR future time when GOD once again deals with ISRAEL and JERUSALEM once again. to end all the troubles and bring in peace.
But first Israel had to become a nation again Ezekiel 36:24 For I will take you from amoung the Nations, gather you from all the countries, and return you to your own soil.
Then Ezekiel 37 These bones are the whole house of Israel coming back to life and having a great army.
And Matthew 24 32-35 says Israel would literally be born before summer may or spring is just before summer starts as we read.
Now let the fig tree (Israel) teach you its lesson: when its branches begin to sprout and leaves appear (Springtime) , you know that summer is approaching. 33-In the same way, when you see all these things (All the signs Jesus told us to look for), you are to know that the time is near, right at the door. 34-Yes! I tell you that this people (A Generation) will certainly not pass away before all these things happen. 35-Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
Ok so we see ISRAEL is now a nation but notice JERUSALEM will be involved allso so we have to go to Luke 21:24 to see that JERUSALEM will become property of the ISRAELIS.
21:24 Some will fall by the edge of the sword, others will be carried into all the countries of the Goyim (nations), and JERUSALEM will be trampled down by the nations until the age of the nations has run its course.
Well on June 5-10, 1967 the age of nations has run its course. So we see ISRAEL had to be in control of JERUSALEM before the last age would come into force.
After Israel has control of Jerusalem what happens next as we read on.
Luke 21:25-26 There will appear SIGNS in the sun,moon and stars; and on earth, nations will be in anxiety and bewilderment at the sound and surge of the sea, 26-as people faint with fear at the prospect of what is overtaking the world; for the powers in heaven will be shakin (Earthquakes,climate change,Ozone depletion,Terrorism ETC...)
Well now Israel and Jerusalem are once again United now we go back to Daniel 9:27 to see this final 1 week or 7 year period called the tribulation that was predicted to bring in the age of peace by Messiah ruling and reigning from Davids throne in Jerusalem.
9:27 He (The EU PRESIDENT) will make a firm (Strong) Covenant with leaders for 1 week ( 7 YEARS). For half of the week ( 3 1/2 YRS) he will put a stop to the sacrifice and the grain offering. On the wing of detestable things the desolator will come and continue until the already decreed destruction is poured out on the desolator (THE FUTURE EU PRESIDENT THAT SIGNS THIS 7 YR PEACE TREATY WITH ISRAEL/ARABS AND MANY).
So we see here that the 3RD Temple has to be rebuilt before the 7 year peace treaty is signed.
How will this come about.
Grant Jeffrey thinks that the Russians and Arabs will march in Ezekiel 38-39 ,will be destroyed and this will allow Israel to rebuild the 3RD Temple.
I believe however the 3RD TEMPLE will be built as a result that Israel has the deed to prove they own the Temple Mount (THE JERUSALEM COVENANT). And that Israel will rebuild the 3RD Temple 100 yards North of the dome of the rock, by the dome of the Spirits. All kinds of space here to rebuild the 3RD TEMPLE.
I also believe all nations will get involved when it comes down to the final status talks on JERUSALEM. I just think Russia and the Arabs won't march to Israel till just before the 3 1/2 year mark of the 7 year tribulation. But maybe Grant could be right the Ezek 38+39 war might be fought before the future peace treaty is signed, and with 5/6 or 85% of Islam destroyed, they would be no threat to stop Israel from rebuilding the 3RD TEMPLE.
Now we go to the end of the 7 yr treaty when the true MESSIAH (JESUS) returns to earth bodily to rule and reign for 1000 years.
Now at this point im not sure if the EARTHQUAKE AT THE END OF THE TRIBULATION DESTROYS THE 3RD TEMPLE OR NOT. The last 3 1/2 years of the tribulation, the EU WORLD POLITICIAN WILL BE SITTING IN IT PROCLAIMING TO BE GOD, SO IT WILL BE DEFILED and might be destroyed when Jesus returns to earth bodily.
Or 2ndly Jesus will not destroy it at this time , he will cleanse it and rule from the 3RD Temple until the 4TH Temple gets built. Since Jesus enters through the east gate to the Temple in the future.
This fourth Temple Grant Jeffrey says will be built 25 miles North of Jerusalem since this 4TH TEMPLE of Ezekiel 40-48 will be 1 mile in length by 1 mile in width, that big of a Temple will not fit on the Temple Mount.
The 3RD Temple might be destroyed since it says the MESSIAH will be in charge of rebuilding the 4TH Temple. And he cant sit in the 3RD and be 25 miles away directing the work of the 4TH TEMPLE.
Only time will tell exactly what will happen but I know Israels and our 1 GOD will make everything come to pass in his time.
WE ALL PRAY COME QUICKLY LORD JESUS, KING OF JERUSALEM, KING OF THE WORLD. AND RULER FROM THE WORLD CAPITAL JERUSALEM FOR 1000 YRS , THEN FOREVER.
Monday, November 28, 2005
EU WANTS IN FINAL STATUS TALKS ALREADY
HERE WE GO ALREADY FOLKS. THE EU IS TRYING TO SPLIT THE TEMPLE MOUNT BETWEEN THE ARABS AND THE ISRAELIS. BUT AS WE CARRY ON WITH THE FINAL STAUS TALKS ALL NATIONS GET INVOLVED. I JUST DISCOVERED THAT THIS IS ISRAELS LEGAL LAND THEY BOUGHT THE TEMPLE MOUNT. NOW I KNOW WHY JERUSALEM WILL BE A CUP OF TREMBLING, BECAUSE ISRAEL HAS THE DEED TO PROVE IT (THE JERUSALEM COVENANT) AND ALL THE REST OF THE ARABS WILL BE STICKING UP FOR THE PALESTIANIANS. NOW WE KNOW WHY THE EU WILL FORCE ISRAEL TO SIGN THE 7 YEAR PEACE TREATY IN THE NEAR FUTURE, THE EU WILL GUARANTEE ISRAELS SECURITY TO DIVIDE THEIR LAND. (PROBABLY JERUSALEM) AS THIS ARTICLE SAYS THE EU WANTS SPLIT UP.
http://israndjer.blogspot.com/2005/11/final-status-talks-will-be-trouble.html
EU Wants Israel to Divide Jerusalem
By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu. Arutz 7 NEWS. The EU has accused Israel of a de facto annexation of eastern Jerusalem. An EU conference in Barcelona is discussing the issue, with the PA calling for dividing Israel's capital. A European Union (EU) document, reported in The New York Times and The Guardian, urges member countries to prevent the security fence from "sealing off most of East Jerusalem" and allowing Israel a "de facto annexation" of Jerusalem.
The city which was re-united after the 1967 Six Day War.The report charges that "Israeli activities in Jerusalem are in violation of both its roadmap obligations and international law." Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and virtually every previous prime minister and leader of major parties have declared that Jerusalem will remain united. The Palestinian Authority (PA) has insisted that its proposed new Arab state will include Jerusalem as its capital.
The EU report, prepared by its diplomats in eastern Jerusalem and Ramallah and written by British consulate officials, was sent to foreign ministers of the 25 countries in the group. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said he hoped the document would not lead to a "regression to the one-sided [European] position of the past.
"The report is to be published in December, but was leaked as the EU increased its involvement in PA-Israel relations by placing European observers at the re-opened Rafiah border between Gaza and Egypt. The report, along with an EU conference in Barcelona on Sunday, may put the status of Jerusalem in the forefront in the current Israeli election campaign.
PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is to attend the Barcelona meeting, but both Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom have absented themselves to continue their campaign in the upcoming elections in Israel. Finance Minister Ehud Olmert is taking their place. Abbas is expected to exploit the opportunity to demand that Israel tear down the security fence.
The EU implicitly has sided with the Palestinian Authority against Israel on the status of Jerusalem. Its official policy states, "The EU opposes... actions aimed at changing the Palestinian character of East Jerusalem."The EU has blamed Israel for policies that it says "are reducing the possibility of reaching a final-status agreement on Jerusalem that any Palestinian could accept," because the security fence separates 230,000 Arabs from Judea and Samaria.
The result is a "de facto annexation of Palestinian land," according to the report, which the Times said was leaked "from someone who wanted to publicize it."Diplomats also accused Israel of "radicalizing the hitherto relatively quiescent Palestinian population of East Jerusalem" by discrimination against them on matters of work and building permits, house demolitions and taxation.
http://israndjer.blogspot.com/2005/11/final-status-talks-will-be-trouble.html
EU Wants Israel to Divide Jerusalem
By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu. Arutz 7 NEWS. The EU has accused Israel of a de facto annexation of eastern Jerusalem. An EU conference in Barcelona is discussing the issue, with the PA calling for dividing Israel's capital. A European Union (EU) document, reported in The New York Times and The Guardian, urges member countries to prevent the security fence from "sealing off most of East Jerusalem" and allowing Israel a "de facto annexation" of Jerusalem.
The city which was re-united after the 1967 Six Day War.The report charges that "Israeli activities in Jerusalem are in violation of both its roadmap obligations and international law." Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and virtually every previous prime minister and leader of major parties have declared that Jerusalem will remain united. The Palestinian Authority (PA) has insisted that its proposed new Arab state will include Jerusalem as its capital.
The EU report, prepared by its diplomats in eastern Jerusalem and Ramallah and written by British consulate officials, was sent to foreign ministers of the 25 countries in the group. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said he hoped the document would not lead to a "regression to the one-sided [European] position of the past.
"The report is to be published in December, but was leaked as the EU increased its involvement in PA-Israel relations by placing European observers at the re-opened Rafiah border between Gaza and Egypt. The report, along with an EU conference in Barcelona on Sunday, may put the status of Jerusalem in the forefront in the current Israeli election campaign.
PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is to attend the Barcelona meeting, but both Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom have absented themselves to continue their campaign in the upcoming elections in Israel. Finance Minister Ehud Olmert is taking their place. Abbas is expected to exploit the opportunity to demand that Israel tear down the security fence.
The EU implicitly has sided with the Palestinian Authority against Israel on the status of Jerusalem. Its official policy states, "The EU opposes... actions aimed at changing the Palestinian character of East Jerusalem."The EU has blamed Israel for policies that it says "are reducing the possibility of reaching a final-status agreement on Jerusalem that any Palestinian could accept," because the security fence separates 230,000 Arabs from Judea and Samaria.
The result is a "de facto annexation of Palestinian land," according to the report, which the Times said was leaked "from someone who wanted to publicize it."Diplomats also accused Israel of "radicalizing the hitherto relatively quiescent Palestinian population of East Jerusalem" by discrimination against them on matters of work and building permits, house demolitions and taxation.
Sunday, November 27, 2005
CLUB OF ROME - 10 WORLD REGIONS
SYNERGIES BETWEEN THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS, THE GLOBAL MARSHALL PLAN, THE EU SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND THE LISBON STRATEGY
H.R.H. Prince El Hassan bin Talal
President, The Club of Rome
(1) The Millennium Development Goals
The current year, 2005, will see the first overall review of progress made towards attaining the UN-Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – the global development targets which all 191 United Nations member states pledged to meet by 2015 in the UN-Millennium Development Declaration of September 2000. The current inequitable distribution of the benefits of globalisation is not only morally and ethically unsustainable, but will lead ultimately to greater global instability or MAD – mutually assured destruction.
A new and holistic approach to global development, based on the awareness that our human interdependence is our community, is not only long overdue, but could by contrast engender positive change and promote a propensity for good or MAS – mutually assured survival. The MDG’s represent a renewed commitment to addressing some of the most enduring failures of human development. Their implementation is crucial to the attainment of sustainable development, to overcoming persistent poverty, to achieving a balance between peoples of all nations and cultures and finally, to ensuring world peace.
The European Union (EU) stands out in terms of both its commitment of resources and energy towards the achievement of the MDGs. Sadly however, to date insufficient progress has been made, bringing into doubt the feasibility of their attainment within the projected timeframe and in the context of free and open markets and the current global order. More, much more must be done, as has been emphasised repeatedly by the British Government, in its current position of holding the presidency of both the G8 and the EU, and as was stressed in the statements of the leaders of Great Britain, France and Germany at the recent meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos.
(2) The Global Marshall Plan: its complementary role
Peace cannot be achieved through economic and political development alone, but requires the commitment of individuals and communities (in addition to national governments and multinational organisations.) whose security involves such intangibles as culture, religion, honour, the ability to provide for one’s family, dignity and self-determination. Policies and action aimed at national and international peace and security are doomed unless they take these intangibles seriously. The challenge facing society is how to build peace and foster development in a rapidly changing world.
The Global Marshall Plan Initiative
born of the decade old idea of a worldwide Marshall Plan, was conceived and refined by a number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), including the Club of Rome, the Eco-Social Forum Europe and the Global Contract Foundation. It has already found strong support both in Europe and the wider world amongst representatives of all societal groups, not only the political, but the civil and private sector, as well as science and the media.
The Initiative’s goals are closely linked with MDGs, the attainment of which by 2015 it sees as an important first step, rather than end goal (and it is this that distinguishes it from so many other concepts) in the achievement of its own long term objective – the realisation of a worldwide Eco-Social Market economy. The central tenets of the Initiative are inspired by the ideas that underpin the constitutions of all EU Member States, the European Constitution itself and the EU enlargement process and thus the Initiative sees the EU as a natural supporter of its concept in international politics.
In brief, the Initiative seeks an international order based on partnership and cooperation, leading to an optimal use of human and natural resources to the benefit of all. It offers a viable concept for stimulating worldwide sustainable socio-economic development aimed at eradicating poverty and provides a path of sustainability in the ecological field by promoting and rewarding resource-efficient technologies and lifestyles. The core concept of co-financing the development processes of weaker partners by the richer partners, thereby eliminating the need for poorer countries to undermine standards in order to retain a competitive edge, simultaneously offers partnership in fair development cooperation and makes possible the establishment of mutually agreed strict economic, social, cultural and ecological standards between partners, essential to sustainable development with equity.
In other words, the Global Marshall Plan Initiative will promote growth in both the richer and the poorer part of the world with naturally higher growth rates in poorer countries promoting greater equity, to the benefit of all.
As can be seen from the above, Europe is in a particularly credible position to support such an Initiative. The embedding of the attainment of the MDGs into a long-term strategy that combines global institutional design with development is a peculiarly European approach that would extend globally one of the EU’s best working principles, as successfully applied in the EU enlargement process. It would also give Europe the lead in the shaping of our common future.
The following five elements are central to the Global Marshall Plan:
(i) Implementation of the Millennium Development Goals by 2015, integrated into a long-term strategy for the realisation of a worldwide Eco-Social Market Economy as described by the Initiative.
(ii) Implementation of a coherent global institutional design by linking the ILO, UNESCO and global environmental standards – plus other standards where appropriate (eg: the World Bank’s Safeguard Policies and the ISO standards) to the WTO, IMF and World Bank to form a coherent system of global governance.
One of the greatest scandals of our time is surely the fact that the current system of global economy allows for the constant sidelining, or overriding of social, cultural and environmental concerns by the WTO, IMF and World Bank, simply because they are governed by separate bodies. Granted, it is usually the poorer countries that object to the integrated approach suggested above because they cannot currently afford to meet the more stringent social, cultural and environmental standards involved. However, considerable co-financing of development for the adoption of such standards could make compromise possible.
The implementation of this integrated approach, together with the proposed new institutional design, lies at the heart of the Global Marshall Plan Initiative. It does moreover reflect the basis on which the enlargement processes of the EU are undertaken.
(iii) Additional co-financing to the sum of 100 billion dollars. Whilst poverty cannot be defined in terms of dollars alone, human dignity and all that it entails can never be achieved by the indigent. An additional 100 billion dollars has been independently identified by a range of experts and expert reports, including the UN Zedillo Report, The British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, and the George Soros Open Society Foundation, as the sum required to achieve the Millennium Goals.
100 billion dollars would both enable Official Development Aid (ODA) to reach the level of interest paid annually by the poorer to the richer nations (approximately 165 billion dollars p.a.) and bring us closer to the 0.7% GDP level of ODA promised repeatedly by donor countries over more than 30 years (cf. Rio 1992 World Conference).
(iv) New Forms of Financing. In order to raise the funds required to implement the Global Marshall Plan without imposing an increased burden on national budgets or distorting economic competition, the Plan envisages new and innovative approaches to financing using global instruments. Global instruments would have the added benefit of avoiding the current erosion of national governance, whilst simultaneously curtailing the depletion of the environment by global economic actors.
In brief, the proposed system would involve the imposition of reasonable levies on global capital transfers and global trade, both raising funds and improving the balance between local and global economic actors; special drawing rights of the IMF, a cap-and-trade regime based on equal per capita pollution rights (eg: CO2 pollutions), a reasonable insolvency scheme for states and the establishment of an International Finance Facility as proposed by Gordon Brown. It was interesting to note that European leaders at the last World Economic Forum in Davos are increasingly leaning towards the position advocated by the Global Marshal Plan Initiative.
(v) Innovative and effective modes of implementation will be required to achieve development with equity in poorer countries. A major challenge facing the Initiative will lie in avoiding the pitfall of feeding corruption by ensuring that funds are allocated appropriately. Core principles are transparency and strict control over the flow of funds, as well as a ‘bottom-up’ approach, while concrete examples of implementation are micro-financing and ‘partnership aid’ (ie. the empowerment of local intermediaries). Additionally, experience has taught us that independent, self-motivated and responsible development can be achieved through enabling the participation, education and empowerment of civil society, especially women.
The Global Marshall Plan Initiative may not offer an easy option, but it does offer an alternative to the unjust, unsustainable, unethical, largely unregulated and ultimately destabilising globalisation processes we are witnessing today. Should the EU adopt the Plan as an integral element in its own policy formation, it would gain the support of large numbers of important stakeholders from the political sector, civil society, and the business community, as well as attracting broad societal and media attention. Under strong European leadership the Plan then will have the chance of reaching fruition and Europe can offer the world a new option, a positive way forward out of the present impasse of spiralling violence, towards a better, more sustainable and peaceful future.
(3) The EU Sustainable Development Strategy and the Lisbon Strategy
I would like to emphasise here that in my personal opinion the Global Marshall Plan Initiative not only complements the Millennium Declaration and can assist in the achievement of its goals, but offers possibly the best opportunity of promoting the EU Sustainable Development Strategy, currently under review. It should additionally not only assist in focusing the orientation of the European position in the second phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), but encourage a greater and more positive involvement of the US in these issues.
Similarly, the Initiative can offer innovative thinking to the Lisbon Strategy, designed to create growth whilst maintaining social balance and to promote sound ecological policies (and environmental protection where required), which is currently also under review. It would seem clear that current global policies and systems do not benefit the majority of the world’s citizens. Far from making
4 ‘Globalisation Work for All’1, global change is taking place at a breakneck speed to the advantage of the few ‘globalisers’, but not necessarily to that of the many ‘globalised’. Globalisation at present is based on a free-market economy, rather than a more inclusive and ethically justifiable free-market society. As a result, in order to remain competitive in the current world economy, European countries find themselves forced, by and large, to scale down efforts to maintain social balance, while environmental concerns all too often become an outright casualty.
The Global Marshall Plan proposes to address these issues by imposing tax levies on both global resource use and global actors, thereby simultaneously offering a financial incentive to encourage sound environmental activities and increasing available funds. The channeling of these funds to increase wealth in poorer countries via co-financing for development and the implementation of standards, such as ILO standards, worldwide would go some way towards redressing current global imbalances in that it would increase the competitiveness of national economic actors (especially small and medium enterprises) allowing them to challenge purely international actors. The above proposal dovetails perfectly with the Lisbon Strategy.
Unless social issues are integrated into the global scheme, Europe will find itself unable to continue to maintain the social balance it currently enjoys and will be forced to erode further current environmental standards, resulting in the strange contradictions between the Lisbon Strategy and the EU Sustainable Development programme that currently frustrate European citizens and politicians alike. It is my firm belief that the Global Marshall Plan offers a strategy not only for the improved placing of European contributions worldwide, but can assist the EU in the attainment of the Lisbon Strategy and the Sustainable Development Programme within an integrated programme.
(4) Where to begin?
As each successive UNDP Development Report underlines, life on our planet is currently far from equitable – almost half the world’s population suffers from starvation -, far from humane for the many – who do not have access to clean water for example, let alone civil rights, and far from ecologically sustainable for any of us, or for future generations in the longer term. Action is needed to redress the imbalances that are a root cause of instability and threaten the future of the human habitat.
Efforts to bridge the gap between rich and poor, between North and South and to safeguard the environment have so far proved grossly inadequate. The Global Marshall Plan Initiative seeks an international order based on partnership and cooperation to redress the balance via linkages between environmental and social standards with co-financing in partnership for development.
In line with EU Sustainable Development Programme, The Lisbon
1 Conference on ‘Making Globalisation Work for All: The Challenge of the Monterrey Consensus’, London 16 Feb 2004. 5 Strategy and MDGs (see above) it is a strategy that could be appropriately promoted by the EU in for example the forthcoming WTO meeting in Doha.
The US has always supported the inclusion of ILO and environmental standards into the WTO trade agreements. Europe could take the lead by advocating additional co-financing for development as the corellating strategy, encouraging developing countries to step up to the template by easing the burden of the additional costs this would impose on them.
Beyond the WTO the EU could play an even greater role and maximise its position of the greatest ODA donor worldwide. Were it to concentrate additional effort on the poorest countries and focus on the UN MDGs, its leadership would be strengthened. Further, within ‘Partnerships for Development’ with the poorest countries, it could co-finance development in tandem with the progressive adoption of key social and environmental standards – as it has done so successfully within the context of EU enlargement. It could moreover consider raising additional development funds at the EU level via for example the imposition of a European levy on fuel for internal flights, whilst simultaneously meeting the C02 emission trading agreements under the Kyoto protocol. Perhaps most importantly, it could put its full weight behind Gordon Brown’s proposal for an International Finance Facility to generate more immediate development funding.
In the longer term additional development funds could be raised worldwide through environmental and resource-use levies. This is an idea which still needs to be developed and here again, the EU could take the lead.
(5) Concluding Remarks
To summarise, there are multiple positive synergies between the UN Millennium Development Goals, EU Development programmes and the vision of the Global Marshall Plan Initiative. It is within our reach to make poverty history. And as a first step attainment of the MDGs is crucial. We have the means to make this globe a better and a safer place – for all, and in particular the most vulnerable.
However we cannot focus on economic considerations alone. For if economic and political decisions are made without reference to human culture – and especially the transparent fostering of human dignity and self-worth for all human beings – then they cannot succeed in improving people’s lives and they lose credibility.
The relevant issue is to enhance the capacities of the poor to contribute to the process of growth by empowering them to participate, on more equitable terms, in the dynamics of the economy, in a bottom-up approach to improving their
6 standards of living. Development efforts will fail if not built on democratic values and ideals, and on human rights. Every region, every culture has its own specificity. A better understanding of people’s perception of their reality will facilitate the design of culturally attuned programmes.
Development programmes should accommodate religious, linguistic and historical values. They should respect diversity in all its aspects and manifestations. Imported culture cannot be imposed with imported commodities.
The challenge facing society is how to build peace and foster development in a rapidly changing world. To be sustainable, development must be founded on justice. Justice, in turn, depends on the framework of ethical references called democracy. What I am suggesting is both consensual and contractual and basically focuses on the importance of restoring justice to development. Our actions, whether in developing or developed countries, impact upon us all, and in this context, it is crucial that we recognise that our future depends not only on finding technical solutions to the problems we face, but also on reaching a consensus about the ethical basis of our response – a universal code of conduct and an ethic of human solidarity.
Much has been achieved during the last five years and the EU has been a major contributor to this progress, but it is not enough. Meeting the MDGs remains a far-off dream. The next five years will be critical. This is not the time for a piecemeal approach. We need global action, similar in size and scope to the reconstruction efforts in Europe following the second World War – the first Marshall Plan. The time has come for a Global Marshall Plan. once again, combining huge investment in development with effective insitutional design and targeted modes of implementation. The European Union, acting in partnership with the rest of the world, can be the architect and catalyst of this plan.
My colleagues in the Club of Rome and the initiators of the Global Marshall Plan Initiative call today on the EU to demonstrate its commitment to a better future for all. We would like to suggest the inclusion of a statement in the EU position paper for the forthcoming UN Millennium+5 Summit, to be held in New York from the 14-16 September 2005, to the following effect:
The EU considers the Millennium Declaration to be of unparalleled importance. It is the promise made by the wealthy nations to the less developed world. It reflects the hopes and aspirations of our peoples. This world can make poverty history. We have the means to make the globe a better and a safer place for all – particularly the most vulnerable.
7 The achievements of the last five years are impressive, but they still fall short and in many areas we have failed to meet our own commitments. More must be done. The next five years are critical. To continue on the present path will doom us to failure.
The EU is of the firm opinion that a piecemeal approach will be inadequate. We need integrated global action on a scale similar to the US Marshall Plan following World War II. We need a Global Marshall Plan and the EU is ready to engage in such an initiative. Such a plan must again combine huge investment in development with functional institutional design and a particular focus on effective modes of implementation.
The EU will cooperate with the Club of Rome and all other interested parties in establishing a Global Marshall Plan Initiativ and an International Finance Facility to develop an integrated operational framework for the urgent measure now needed. We invite the nations of the world to join with us in this ambitious undertaking.
H.R.H. Prince El Hassan bin Talal
President, The Club of Rome
(1) The Millennium Development Goals
The current year, 2005, will see the first overall review of progress made towards attaining the UN-Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – the global development targets which all 191 United Nations member states pledged to meet by 2015 in the UN-Millennium Development Declaration of September 2000. The current inequitable distribution of the benefits of globalisation is not only morally and ethically unsustainable, but will lead ultimately to greater global instability or MAD – mutually assured destruction.
A new and holistic approach to global development, based on the awareness that our human interdependence is our community, is not only long overdue, but could by contrast engender positive change and promote a propensity for good or MAS – mutually assured survival. The MDG’s represent a renewed commitment to addressing some of the most enduring failures of human development. Their implementation is crucial to the attainment of sustainable development, to overcoming persistent poverty, to achieving a balance between peoples of all nations and cultures and finally, to ensuring world peace.
The European Union (EU) stands out in terms of both its commitment of resources and energy towards the achievement of the MDGs. Sadly however, to date insufficient progress has been made, bringing into doubt the feasibility of their attainment within the projected timeframe and in the context of free and open markets and the current global order. More, much more must be done, as has been emphasised repeatedly by the British Government, in its current position of holding the presidency of both the G8 and the EU, and as was stressed in the statements of the leaders of Great Britain, France and Germany at the recent meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos.
(2) The Global Marshall Plan: its complementary role
Peace cannot be achieved through economic and political development alone, but requires the commitment of individuals and communities (in addition to national governments and multinational organisations.) whose security involves such intangibles as culture, religion, honour, the ability to provide for one’s family, dignity and self-determination. Policies and action aimed at national and international peace and security are doomed unless they take these intangibles seriously. The challenge facing society is how to build peace and foster development in a rapidly changing world.
The Global Marshall Plan Initiative
born of the decade old idea of a worldwide Marshall Plan, was conceived and refined by a number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), including the Club of Rome, the Eco-Social Forum Europe and the Global Contract Foundation. It has already found strong support both in Europe and the wider world amongst representatives of all societal groups, not only the political, but the civil and private sector, as well as science and the media.
The Initiative’s goals are closely linked with MDGs, the attainment of which by 2015 it sees as an important first step, rather than end goal (and it is this that distinguishes it from so many other concepts) in the achievement of its own long term objective – the realisation of a worldwide Eco-Social Market economy. The central tenets of the Initiative are inspired by the ideas that underpin the constitutions of all EU Member States, the European Constitution itself and the EU enlargement process and thus the Initiative sees the EU as a natural supporter of its concept in international politics.
In brief, the Initiative seeks an international order based on partnership and cooperation, leading to an optimal use of human and natural resources to the benefit of all. It offers a viable concept for stimulating worldwide sustainable socio-economic development aimed at eradicating poverty and provides a path of sustainability in the ecological field by promoting and rewarding resource-efficient technologies and lifestyles. The core concept of co-financing the development processes of weaker partners by the richer partners, thereby eliminating the need for poorer countries to undermine standards in order to retain a competitive edge, simultaneously offers partnership in fair development cooperation and makes possible the establishment of mutually agreed strict economic, social, cultural and ecological standards between partners, essential to sustainable development with equity.
In other words, the Global Marshall Plan Initiative will promote growth in both the richer and the poorer part of the world with naturally higher growth rates in poorer countries promoting greater equity, to the benefit of all.
As can be seen from the above, Europe is in a particularly credible position to support such an Initiative. The embedding of the attainment of the MDGs into a long-term strategy that combines global institutional design with development is a peculiarly European approach that would extend globally one of the EU’s best working principles, as successfully applied in the EU enlargement process. It would also give Europe the lead in the shaping of our common future.
The following five elements are central to the Global Marshall Plan:
(i) Implementation of the Millennium Development Goals by 2015, integrated into a long-term strategy for the realisation of a worldwide Eco-Social Market Economy as described by the Initiative.
(ii) Implementation of a coherent global institutional design by linking the ILO, UNESCO and global environmental standards – plus other standards where appropriate (eg: the World Bank’s Safeguard Policies and the ISO standards) to the WTO, IMF and World Bank to form a coherent system of global governance.
One of the greatest scandals of our time is surely the fact that the current system of global economy allows for the constant sidelining, or overriding of social, cultural and environmental concerns by the WTO, IMF and World Bank, simply because they are governed by separate bodies. Granted, it is usually the poorer countries that object to the integrated approach suggested above because they cannot currently afford to meet the more stringent social, cultural and environmental standards involved. However, considerable co-financing of development for the adoption of such standards could make compromise possible.
The implementation of this integrated approach, together with the proposed new institutional design, lies at the heart of the Global Marshall Plan Initiative. It does moreover reflect the basis on which the enlargement processes of the EU are undertaken.
(iii) Additional co-financing to the sum of 100 billion dollars. Whilst poverty cannot be defined in terms of dollars alone, human dignity and all that it entails can never be achieved by the indigent. An additional 100 billion dollars has been independently identified by a range of experts and expert reports, including the UN Zedillo Report, The British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, and the George Soros Open Society Foundation, as the sum required to achieve the Millennium Goals.
100 billion dollars would both enable Official Development Aid (ODA) to reach the level of interest paid annually by the poorer to the richer nations (approximately 165 billion dollars p.a.) and bring us closer to the 0.7% GDP level of ODA promised repeatedly by donor countries over more than 30 years (cf. Rio 1992 World Conference).
(iv) New Forms of Financing. In order to raise the funds required to implement the Global Marshall Plan without imposing an increased burden on national budgets or distorting economic competition, the Plan envisages new and innovative approaches to financing using global instruments. Global instruments would have the added benefit of avoiding the current erosion of national governance, whilst simultaneously curtailing the depletion of the environment by global economic actors.
In brief, the proposed system would involve the imposition of reasonable levies on global capital transfers and global trade, both raising funds and improving the balance between local and global economic actors; special drawing rights of the IMF, a cap-and-trade regime based on equal per capita pollution rights (eg: CO2 pollutions), a reasonable insolvency scheme for states and the establishment of an International Finance Facility as proposed by Gordon Brown. It was interesting to note that European leaders at the last World Economic Forum in Davos are increasingly leaning towards the position advocated by the Global Marshal Plan Initiative.
(v) Innovative and effective modes of implementation will be required to achieve development with equity in poorer countries. A major challenge facing the Initiative will lie in avoiding the pitfall of feeding corruption by ensuring that funds are allocated appropriately. Core principles are transparency and strict control over the flow of funds, as well as a ‘bottom-up’ approach, while concrete examples of implementation are micro-financing and ‘partnership aid’ (ie. the empowerment of local intermediaries). Additionally, experience has taught us that independent, self-motivated and responsible development can be achieved through enabling the participation, education and empowerment of civil society, especially women.
The Global Marshall Plan Initiative may not offer an easy option, but it does offer an alternative to the unjust, unsustainable, unethical, largely unregulated and ultimately destabilising globalisation processes we are witnessing today. Should the EU adopt the Plan as an integral element in its own policy formation, it would gain the support of large numbers of important stakeholders from the political sector, civil society, and the business community, as well as attracting broad societal and media attention. Under strong European leadership the Plan then will have the chance of reaching fruition and Europe can offer the world a new option, a positive way forward out of the present impasse of spiralling violence, towards a better, more sustainable and peaceful future.
(3) The EU Sustainable Development Strategy and the Lisbon Strategy
I would like to emphasise here that in my personal opinion the Global Marshall Plan Initiative not only complements the Millennium Declaration and can assist in the achievement of its goals, but offers possibly the best opportunity of promoting the EU Sustainable Development Strategy, currently under review. It should additionally not only assist in focusing the orientation of the European position in the second phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), but encourage a greater and more positive involvement of the US in these issues.
Similarly, the Initiative can offer innovative thinking to the Lisbon Strategy, designed to create growth whilst maintaining social balance and to promote sound ecological policies (and environmental protection where required), which is currently also under review. It would seem clear that current global policies and systems do not benefit the majority of the world’s citizens. Far from making
4 ‘Globalisation Work for All’1, global change is taking place at a breakneck speed to the advantage of the few ‘globalisers’, but not necessarily to that of the many ‘globalised’. Globalisation at present is based on a free-market economy, rather than a more inclusive and ethically justifiable free-market society. As a result, in order to remain competitive in the current world economy, European countries find themselves forced, by and large, to scale down efforts to maintain social balance, while environmental concerns all too often become an outright casualty.
The Global Marshall Plan proposes to address these issues by imposing tax levies on both global resource use and global actors, thereby simultaneously offering a financial incentive to encourage sound environmental activities and increasing available funds. The channeling of these funds to increase wealth in poorer countries via co-financing for development and the implementation of standards, such as ILO standards, worldwide would go some way towards redressing current global imbalances in that it would increase the competitiveness of national economic actors (especially small and medium enterprises) allowing them to challenge purely international actors. The above proposal dovetails perfectly with the Lisbon Strategy.
Unless social issues are integrated into the global scheme, Europe will find itself unable to continue to maintain the social balance it currently enjoys and will be forced to erode further current environmental standards, resulting in the strange contradictions between the Lisbon Strategy and the EU Sustainable Development programme that currently frustrate European citizens and politicians alike. It is my firm belief that the Global Marshall Plan offers a strategy not only for the improved placing of European contributions worldwide, but can assist the EU in the attainment of the Lisbon Strategy and the Sustainable Development Programme within an integrated programme.
(4) Where to begin?
As each successive UNDP Development Report underlines, life on our planet is currently far from equitable – almost half the world’s population suffers from starvation -, far from humane for the many – who do not have access to clean water for example, let alone civil rights, and far from ecologically sustainable for any of us, or for future generations in the longer term. Action is needed to redress the imbalances that are a root cause of instability and threaten the future of the human habitat.
Efforts to bridge the gap between rich and poor, between North and South and to safeguard the environment have so far proved grossly inadequate. The Global Marshall Plan Initiative seeks an international order based on partnership and cooperation to redress the balance via linkages between environmental and social standards with co-financing in partnership for development.
In line with EU Sustainable Development Programme, The Lisbon
1 Conference on ‘Making Globalisation Work for All: The Challenge of the Monterrey Consensus’, London 16 Feb 2004. 5 Strategy and MDGs (see above) it is a strategy that could be appropriately promoted by the EU in for example the forthcoming WTO meeting in Doha.
The US has always supported the inclusion of ILO and environmental standards into the WTO trade agreements. Europe could take the lead by advocating additional co-financing for development as the corellating strategy, encouraging developing countries to step up to the template by easing the burden of the additional costs this would impose on them.
Beyond the WTO the EU could play an even greater role and maximise its position of the greatest ODA donor worldwide. Were it to concentrate additional effort on the poorest countries and focus on the UN MDGs, its leadership would be strengthened. Further, within ‘Partnerships for Development’ with the poorest countries, it could co-finance development in tandem with the progressive adoption of key social and environmental standards – as it has done so successfully within the context of EU enlargement. It could moreover consider raising additional development funds at the EU level via for example the imposition of a European levy on fuel for internal flights, whilst simultaneously meeting the C02 emission trading agreements under the Kyoto protocol. Perhaps most importantly, it could put its full weight behind Gordon Brown’s proposal for an International Finance Facility to generate more immediate development funding.
In the longer term additional development funds could be raised worldwide through environmental and resource-use levies. This is an idea which still needs to be developed and here again, the EU could take the lead.
(5) Concluding Remarks
To summarise, there are multiple positive synergies between the UN Millennium Development Goals, EU Development programmes and the vision of the Global Marshall Plan Initiative. It is within our reach to make poverty history. And as a first step attainment of the MDGs is crucial. We have the means to make this globe a better and a safer place – for all, and in particular the most vulnerable.
However we cannot focus on economic considerations alone. For if economic and political decisions are made without reference to human culture – and especially the transparent fostering of human dignity and self-worth for all human beings – then they cannot succeed in improving people’s lives and they lose credibility.
The relevant issue is to enhance the capacities of the poor to contribute to the process of growth by empowering them to participate, on more equitable terms, in the dynamics of the economy, in a bottom-up approach to improving their
6 standards of living. Development efforts will fail if not built on democratic values and ideals, and on human rights. Every region, every culture has its own specificity. A better understanding of people’s perception of their reality will facilitate the design of culturally attuned programmes.
Development programmes should accommodate religious, linguistic and historical values. They should respect diversity in all its aspects and manifestations. Imported culture cannot be imposed with imported commodities.
The challenge facing society is how to build peace and foster development in a rapidly changing world. To be sustainable, development must be founded on justice. Justice, in turn, depends on the framework of ethical references called democracy. What I am suggesting is both consensual and contractual and basically focuses on the importance of restoring justice to development. Our actions, whether in developing or developed countries, impact upon us all, and in this context, it is crucial that we recognise that our future depends not only on finding technical solutions to the problems we face, but also on reaching a consensus about the ethical basis of our response – a universal code of conduct and an ethic of human solidarity.
Much has been achieved during the last five years and the EU has been a major contributor to this progress, but it is not enough. Meeting the MDGs remains a far-off dream. The next five years will be critical. This is not the time for a piecemeal approach. We need global action, similar in size and scope to the reconstruction efforts in Europe following the second World War – the first Marshall Plan. The time has come for a Global Marshall Plan. once again, combining huge investment in development with effective insitutional design and targeted modes of implementation. The European Union, acting in partnership with the rest of the world, can be the architect and catalyst of this plan.
My colleagues in the Club of Rome and the initiators of the Global Marshall Plan Initiative call today on the EU to demonstrate its commitment to a better future for all. We would like to suggest the inclusion of a statement in the EU position paper for the forthcoming UN Millennium+5 Summit, to be held in New York from the 14-16 September 2005, to the following effect:
The EU considers the Millennium Declaration to be of unparalleled importance. It is the promise made by the wealthy nations to the less developed world. It reflects the hopes and aspirations of our peoples. This world can make poverty history. We have the means to make the globe a better and a safer place for all – particularly the most vulnerable.
7 The achievements of the last five years are impressive, but they still fall short and in many areas we have failed to meet our own commitments. More must be done. The next five years are critical. To continue on the present path will doom us to failure.
The EU is of the firm opinion that a piecemeal approach will be inadequate. We need integrated global action on a scale similar to the US Marshall Plan following World War II. We need a Global Marshall Plan and the EU is ready to engage in such an initiative. Such a plan must again combine huge investment in development with functional institutional design and a particular focus on effective modes of implementation.
The EU will cooperate with the Club of Rome and all other interested parties in establishing a Global Marshall Plan Initiativ and an International Finance Facility to develop an integrated operational framework for the urgent measure now needed. We invite the nations of the world to join with us in this ambitious undertaking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)