Final Solution for the Middle East

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a private club based in New York, has supplied 50% of all U.S. government cabinet members in the last 50 years, whether the administration was Democrat or Republican. All U.S. Secretaries of State have been CFR members, Colin Powell included. Plainly speaking, the CFR controls world affairs.

CFR Comes Out of Closet, Mandates Peace

By Irvin Baxter


Foreign Affairs magazine is their official publication. It’s their mouthpiece. If you want to know where the global elite is taking us, read Foreign Affairs. Presidents do.


Because we know that the endtime world government players will have lead roles in the soon-coming confirmation of the covenant, the abomination of desolation and the battle of Armageddon, it is wise to keep one eye on the clouds and the other on the Council on Foreign Relations.


How the international community regards Israel and Middle Eastern affairs is of paramount importance to prophecy students. In the past, signs from the halls of global power had been vague. This has now changed. The CFR has opened its closet and published its first official peace proposal for Israel and the Middle East. They contend that the time has come for a settlement to be imposed by the international community.


Why has it taken this long? It’s because today’s global beast is dramatically more powerful than it was even five short years ago. It is coming of age, is speaking great things, and appears ready to confirm a covenant.


The Last Negotiation

On his most recent Middle East peace mission, Colin Powell left Israel in defeat. When it appeared that things couldn’t get any worse, he flew to Cairo to meet President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. He was stood up at the airport. Mubarak dispatched his foreign affairs minister to tell Powell that he was indisposed and unable to meet with him. It was a cold shoulder that left the world feeling the next step…the only hope for peace…would be war.


Where do we go from here? Is there an answer at all to this situation? Enter the CFR’s Foreign Affairs.


The article was entitled “The Last Negotiation—How to End the Middle East Peace Process,” written by Hussein Agha and Robert Malley. Agha is a senior associate member of St. Antony College at Oxford University in England. He has been involved in Israeli-Palestinian affairs for more than 30 years. Malley is Middle East Program Director at the International Crisis Group. Between 1998 and 2001, at the time when Bill Clinton was fixated on making a lasting mark on history by brokering a Mideast peace deal before leaving the presidency, Malley was Clinton’s special assistant for Arab-Israeli affairs. He’s hardly a lightweight. Both Agha and Malley are considered foremost experts in Middle Eastern affairs, and they are revealing what may very well be the Antichrist’s plan for The Last Negotiation.


This cannot be written off as just another article by two maverick intellectuals. We are reading from the think tank that directly feeds the U.S. government and other world leaders their foreign policy direction. And…they have a proposal: “…the confirmation of the covenant would be the confirming by the Antichrist and the world community of Israel’s right to the Promise Land…”


A Palestinian-less Covenant

I have pondered for many years how events leading to the confirmation of the covenant, which marks the beginning of the final seven years preceding Armageddon, would unfold. Many, including myself for a time, felt like the confirmation would be by an agreement between Palestinians and Israelis and confirmed by the man who would ultimately become the Antichrist.


Scrutinizing events over the last two years, however, I have been re-appraising this scenario very carefully. I noticed the Bible specifically states that 3 1/2 years after the confirmation of the covenant, there will be a horrible slaughter in the area Jesus called Judea, today known as the West Bank. If a bona fide peace agreement between Arabs and Israelis were achieved, then why would the conflict explode again 3 1/2 years later, and then in another 3 1/2 years, why would Israel be invaded by the world community?


Once I saw that there was going to be continuing conflict, I concluded that there would probably not be an agreement between Israelis and Palestinians. Even if there were an Israeli-Palestinian agreement, it was apparent that it would soon come apart at the seams.


Daniel 9:27 says that it is the Antichrist who will confirm the covenant. We know from the Bible that the Antichrist will be the recognized leader of the world. In the present global reality, he will be the recognized leader of the world community. Knowing this, it becomes obvious that the covenant will be confirmed by the Antichrist on behalf of the world community.


The covenant that will be confirmed by the Antichrist appears certain to be the covenant made between God and Abraham in Genesis 15:18, which promised the land of Israel to the seed of Abraham through his son Isaac. It follows that the confirmation of the covenant would be the confirming by the Antichrist and the world community of Israel’s right to the Promise Land.


If this is the scenario destined to play out, then the stage is set. Agha and Malley are proposing the very formula found in Daniel 9:27.


The Case for a US-led Coalition

Conventional wisdom always had it that the surest path to Middle East peace was the interim agreement method. This, in fact, was the foundation of the 1993 Oslo Accords. Negotiations over small and easy issues would build trust, leading to larger issues and more trust. Eventually the two 3,000-year-old enemies would just bang out a final comprehensive settlement.


This was the mainstream thinking that dominated diplomatic circles, and its success can be measured in gallons of blood. Agha and Malley begin their case with this point. While the incremental approach seemed sensible at the start, itcame up short in the end.


How then do we proceed from here amidst such bloodshed? The current state of affairs, write Agha and Malley, “is not an argument in favor of acting small, but rather a call to start thinking big.” The time has come “for a U.S.-led international coalition to put forward an end-of-conflict deal.”


Why a US-led coalition? It’s simple. Without America, the coalition will lack the necessary authority. The UN knows this. But humility is a two-way street. The UN also knows that all U.S. attempts to establish peace have failed. The solution is to have a global coalition with the U.S. leading the flock. Acting alone and apart from the international community in the past, America has failed. It is now time for Washington to recognize that it can’t do it without the UN. Nobody should be acting outside of the UN.


We have just heard the pronouncement that an internationally sponsored Middle East peace summit has been scheduled for the summer, and there is universal support for U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell to spearhead the effort. Think not that this is a coincidence! Powell, like all Secretaries of State before him, is a CFR member, and we are reading the CFR blueprint. With barely enough time to pick our heads up from reading Foreign Affairs, we see the CFR’s U.S.-led coalition already in action.


The Case for an Imposed Agreement

The Foreign Affairs article explains that the failure of all attempts to establish peace stems from a basic fallacy—“that genuine, durable agreements can emerge only from direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.” Waiting for the two sides to build trust is over, we read. The world community is ready to make its move. The time has come to take the bull by its horns and impose a deal that itself will create the trust.


”Indeed, as a result of the character of the parties’ interactions, the inherent power imbalance, and the nature of their dispute, negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians have now reached the point of diminishing—even negative— returns.” Here comes the grand solution: “The time for negotiations has therefore ended. Instead, the parties must be presented with a full-fledged non-negotiable final agreement.”


Yes, it is time to present a deal that addresses each side’s needs, and no balking allowed!


The current stalemate is that Sharon will not negotiate under fire, but the Palestinians believe that without fire, the Israelis will have no incentive to negotiate. Therefore, asserts Foreign Affairs, “The only certain way to stop the killing is to offer the parties a tangible and fair way to end the underlying conflict.” To ensure that the agreement is carried out, an international military force would be introduced to the region, led by the United States and, at least in the beginning, an Israeli presence would be included.


The Case for Public Acceptance

Will the Israeli public stand for an imposed agreement? Agha and Malley contend that the answer to this question is an unequivocal yes. The same Israeli public that supported the most peace-oriented government in the country’s history under Ehud Barak swung radically in response to the intifada and elected one of its most aggressive Prime Ministers, Ariel Sharon. This indicates that, if presented with a realistic U.S.-backed deal, the electorate would swing back just as quickly. “Every poll confirms that Israelis want quiet, normalcy, and safety in their everyday lives.”


Indeed, Agha and Malley tell the truth. These were the very words spoken by Eve Harow, a spokesperson for the Jewish settlers who recently spoke with Endtime. She said, “One thing that’s interesting is that you no longer hear from the right or left in Israel the word ‘coexistence.’ And it’s not that we don’t want it. Those of us who live here felt that, for there to really be peace in this part of the world, people had to learn to live together. That’s something that we’ve tried to do for many years, and it has literally blown up in our faces. Israelis are so desperate for peace. I think there’s one critical error that we made. Even though most Israelis at the beginning of this process didn’t believe that the Palestinians deserved a state, we were willing to do it, both on the right and on the left, because we so desperately wanted peace.”


Another question to consider in the battle for public opinion—who is shaping it? When one follows the money trail behind the Council on Foreign Relations, it becomes clear that they wield considerable influence over numerous global media outlets. To sway public opinion is not perceived by them as an obstacle. They are confident that the public on both sides will jump on board.


National Leaders Become Irrelevant

The most telling point in the CFR’s new Middle East playbook is how they plan on handling resistance from Sharon or Arafat. “The forceful presentation by a U.S.-led international coalition of a deal like the one outlined would oblige the leaderships of both sides to either sign on or defy the world.” Continuing, “Indeed, even an immediate negative reply from one or both sides would neither erase the initiative nor rob it of its importance, for the very proposal would marginalize those reluctant to espouse it and set in motion a new political dynamic that, in due course, would force a change of heart among the leaders—or else a change of leaders.”


In other words, once the weight of the world community, led by the United States, is behind the action, you will have no choice but to sign on to this mandated agreement. Otherwise Mr. Prime Minister, Mr. Chairman, you will find yourself out of power and replaced by a ruler who thinks more clearly. March to the beat of the world community or you will be replaced. Ask Mr. Milosevic if this is an exaggeration.


The point for the CFR is not to cater to the whims and limitations of either leader. “It should instead be to make the limitations of both sets of leaders irrelevant.”


He Confirms the Covenant

Hussein Agha and Robert Malley summarize in closing: “The time has come for an effort that is neither top-down nor bottom-up, but outside-in: the forceful presentation by external actors of a comprehensive, fair, and lasting deal.” This statement rings of Daniel 9:27.


Currently, the CFR proposes to keep the Temple Mount in Palestinian hands. We will have to keep an eye on this issue.


This summer, the United States will lead an international coalition comprised of the United Nations, the European Union and the Russian federation to the “negotiating” table. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell will lead the alliance. Powell takes his directives from the CFR. He is of their ilk.


We have just read their blueprint for what could be the confirmation of the covenant, and it is plausible that it could happen yet this year. Yes, we could be that close. If you are not yet born again, or perhaps not sure what that phrase means exactly, it may be time to move that issue to the top of the pile.