EuroArmy – For Peace or War?

By Chris Cumming


The Euro Army Rapid Response Force stands on the threshold of becoming the greatest combat force of modern times.  The EU has every intention of being the economic and military rival of the United States.  Indeed, its existence as an emerging superpower demands it.  Bible prophecy indicates that coming world events will force it.


Force of Arms


Neither the EU nor its observers have been shy in their proclamations of these facts going back several years.  Europe has made it clear:  They are building a super state and an army that will impose its will around the globe.  This army is designed for war.


In June of 2001, the Thomas Crosbie Media group, in its article, “EuroArmy” spoke to the yet to be ratified Treaty of Nice saying:


Treaty of Nice (ratified 1 Feb 2003)


“This Treaty is about creating a European Super-State and a European army to impose its will by force of arms. This new Rapid Reaction Force is not a peacekeeping force, as the government would have us believe.

"Some spokespersons would have us believe that this army is a cross between the boy scouts and St Vincent De Paul. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is an army designed for war. Why else are they arming themselves with F 16 fighter-bombers, nuclear submarines, warships and combat planes?”


In an undated news story from 2001, “Labour Support Euro Army," we read…

“The United States has been described as a ‘hyperpower’ that needs to be counterbalanced. As French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine said, ‘there are no longer two superpowers on the planet, there is a US hyperpower.’

"Chancellor Schroeder explained the rationale behind the reasoning when he noted that ‘Europe should not behave on the world arena like an observer, but like a powerful actor…’

"Indeed yet another conformation of the French agenda that was spelt out by President Chirac in May 1999 when he said: ‘European Union can not fully exist until it possesses autonomous capacity for action in the area of defense.’

"The anti NATO and the anti-American feelings have not passed unnoticed in the US. Following these and similar remarks the US Secretary of State warned in January this year:

"Other voices have European accents and their emphasis is not on the many interests we share, but on narrow differences. They distort American intentions; revel in American setbacks; forget American sacrifice; and tell neighbors they must choose between Europe and the United States. What a false choice that is. What a fatal choice it would be.”


Chancellor Schroeder is correct; the EU will be a strong actor on the world stage.  The EuroArmy will insure its place.


“New Security Architecture”


The Financial Times published this statement in late 2000:


“There's going to be a ‘new model army.'  It's going to be 'the foundation of nothing less than a new security architecture.'  By 2003, the EU will have the ability to project ‘military muscle’ across the globe.”


Boris Johnson of the Daily Telegraph, in his November 2000 article, "The Euro-army will march to the beat of a different drum” stated:


“We now have one Western alliance, which brilliantly unites Europe and America. There is a real danger that a Euro-defense pact could not only produce idiotic tensions between Brussels and Washington - of a kind seen already over trade, and which could lead to American disengagement from Europe - but worse, from a British point of view, we could find ourselves locked into ‘Euro’ positions, on Iraq, for instance, or other parts of the Middle East, with which we do not agree.”


We are already seeing the “muscle” flex itself with EuroArmy interventions into the Macedonia and the Congo. Middle East leaders have asked for EU involvement in various countries there.


Undermining NATO and Making an Enemy of the US


Europe wants its own common army.  It wants independence from the USA. Europe’s problem is the USA!!


In a February 2000 news article, “Euroarmy: A Threat to Whom?, Jacek Boboli writes:


“And here we come to the heart of the problem, as seen in Continental Europe. The problem with a European army is neither with the Russians, nor the Chinese, nor the Senegalese, nor, of course, with most Europeans who see it as the only chance for a truly independent Europe.

“The only problem regarding the Euroarmy is with the U.S.A., which is against a Euroarmy superseding NATO.”


In the same article, he quotes French politician, Robert Schumann as saying:

“I believe that if Europe had a common army, it would create ties among military establishments, most importantly between Germany and its former enemies. This 'EuroArmy' would provide Europe with greater security from the U.S.S.R. as well as independence from the U.S.A.


This is indeed interesting, seeing the Plain Truth predicted this in November of 1962 saying:


“Where, in modern times, Napoleon, Bismarck, Hitler and Stalin failed, reason and mutual necessity are succeeding. A European political union would mean little if the ultimate power of deciding whether it fights – and dies – is going to rest with the Americans.


In October of last year, Washington requested an emergency meeting of NATO amid growing fears in America that the EU’s latest plans for its Euro Army will undermine the alliance.  Nicholas Burns, the US ambassador to NATO, told fellow ambassadors that the EU’s push for greater military autonomy posed “the most significant threat to NATO’s future.”

As the EuroArmy grows, NATO will become but a minor actor on Europe’s stage.  The US will find itself out altogether.


EU Imperialism: will it defeat the US economy?


The EU has become an imperialist block.  If the World transfers to the Euro, we could easily see a collapse of the US economy.


Imperialism is defined as the acquisition and maintenance of empires, through direct territorial control or through indirect methods of exerting control on the politics and/or economy of other countries.  As history has shown us, militarism is the key ingredient of imperialism.  The EuroArmy will insure and probably force its political agenda upon the world.


In April of this year, in his article, “The United States , NATO and the European army”, Dr. Pol De Vos writes:


“Also the European Union (EU) has become an imperialist bloc that is able to compete with the United States in the economic and financial fields. The Euro is challenging the position of the US dollar as the only international reserve currency. A transfer to the Euro of a significant part of the current world reserves held in dollars would provoke an economic earthquake. The same holds true if a major part of the oil trade, now in US currency, would shift to the Euro.”

Garner Ted Armstrong confirms this conclusion in his Word from, “Its All About Oil


“There could be a major, underlying reason for Bush’s adamant insistence that Iraq will undergo a regime change. That reason is found in the move Iraq made prior to the war to sell its dollars and buy euros, and demand that henceforth all oil payments be made in euros. If Nigeria, Mexico, Venezuela and all of OPEC were to also insist upon payment in euros, it would flood the global economies with dollars, dropping the currencies’ value to around 40 to 50 per cent. That would mean the collapse of the US economy!”


The Global Economy is Linked to War


Modern history shows us that our economy is based on war machine industry---a constant preparation for war.


In March of 1999, New York Times journalist Thomas Friedman showed how the global economy is linked to war when, during the war against Yugoslavia, he wrote:


The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist - McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the builder of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force and Marine Corps .”  It is not superfluous to recall that the European Union has seen itself as an institution at the service of its own multinationals, and that “ if McDonald's needs McDonnell, Danone (food industry) also needs Dassault (aviation) ”.


EU imperialism will feed at the same trough as that of the US, but for its own interest, hence the coming clash between the two.


Role of Middle East Oil


The Middle East, because of oil is more strategic for Europe than the US.  The countries that insure oil and gas for Europe are often in conflict with Washington.  Dr. Pol De Vos continues in his article, The United States, NATO and the European army:"


“This is an essential point on which European and US interests risk to increasingly diverge in the future. The Middle East and Central Asia are more important for the oil provision of Europe than for the US . In this way, this part of the world is strategic for Europe (and for Japan , and for China , the rest of Asia and Russia ). Therefore, the fact that the US is interested to control this region is an affirmation of its desire of hegemony. While at the same time, it is ‘the' place where this supremacy could be challenged.

“The confrontation on Iraq during 2002-2003 shows the growing contradictions between US and European imperialism.”


Danger of World War (EU vs. US)


World events seem to be leading us to one overwhelming conclusion.  Political differences in the Middle East will force the EuroArmy to increase its growth at a rate that will stun the world.  Notice another statement from the Dr Vos article:


“If the ‘Europe of the monopolies' speaks about diplomacy, dialogue and multilateralism, it is mainly because it has not yet the means to impose its views against US military power. The European past in Africa, Latin America, Algeria or Asia shows the ferocity of European imperialism when and where it was dominant. The European army will only accelerate the rivalry and the danger for a major world war. The more this army will be able to develop its capacity for foreign interventions, the more it will reinforce the political capacity of the EU, the more it will make possible an independent European policy in favour of the European multinationals, the more it will offer the possibility to the EU to defend its zones of influence against eventual competitors, e.g. the US. This can lead to important conflicts, as has been seen in the two previous world wars.”


We predict a number of EU military interventions in the coming months and years.  At the same time we will be watching accelerated military growth in Europe.  One source gives the present EU combined troop strength (all countries) at 1.9 million vs. the approximately 1.4 million for the US.


How EU Militarism will Grow


Militarism has three facets.  History shows how they unfolded leading up to World War II.


1. Buildup of armed forces.

-- Between 1932 and 1939 Germany increased the navy from 30 to 95 warships, the air force from 36 to 8250 planes, and the army from 100,000 to almost a million soldiers.

-- I have not been able to find figures for Japan and Italy, but both built up huge armed forces so that in 1939 even Italy (whose armed forces were small compared to Germany and Japan) had an army greater than that of the United States.


2. Control of the government by the military and ‘hawks’ (people who want war)

-- In Germany, Hitler gave a key role to the army, and openly said that he was going to go to war to gain lebensraum [living space] in the east.

-- Mussolini boasted that he was going to rebuild the Roman Empire.

-- In Japan, the army established almost complete control over the government. Political enemies were assassinated – on 26 February 1936, about 1,500 soldiers went on a rampage of assassination against the current and former prime ministers and other cabinet members, and even members of the imperial court. Navy and army officers soon occupied most of the important offices, including the one of the prime minister. The civilian government was powerless to stop them doing what they wanted.


3. Aggressive foreign policy

-- Germany marched into the Rhineland (1936), Austria and the Sudetenland (1938) and Czechoslovakia and Poland (1939)

-- Italy invaded Abyssinia (1935) Albania (1939) and Libya (1939), and attacked Egypt (1940)

-- Japan invaded Manchuria (1931), Jehol (in China, 1933), China (1937) and attacked Pearl Harbor (1941)


Both this commentary and the EA web site show these same three facets of militarism manifesting themselves in Europe right now.  Garner Ted Armstrong said in his Word from on the EuroArmy:


“For decades, I have warned that it will ultimately be EUROPE which will emerge as the number one ENEMY of the United States! Now, every geopolitical move strongly indicates such a scenario is in the making!”

Was he right in his assessment?  As I write this, we just posted a news story from EU Observer, “EU Defense Ministers Admit Global Responsibility” in which is quoted:


“The European Union is a global actor, ready to share in the responsibility for global security.”



Breaking News Stories
Go here for the latest news stories on this subject. - news story added 4 July 2017

For further Reading:
See Word from, "Armies Surrounding Jerusalem"

See Two Key Prophecies story, Stepping towards a Euro Army  15 May 2004

See Word From,New European Army to be Formed Soon! 30 April 2003

See Word From,It’s All About Oil13 April 2003

See Word From, “How The War In Iraq Will Help The Beast To Rise Up In Europe
See latest information from German Foreign Policy web site

See European Forces
See European Security and De fence Policy
See European Defense Agency     
See European Rapid Reaction Force     
See European Union Battle Groups   
See EU Battlegroups Fact Sheet  [pdf file]
See Eurocorps [international military force]
See Eurocorps official web site
See Wikipedia article on EUFOR