A leading editorial in the highly respected British newsweekly magazine The Economist simply stated in its brief drophead: "Sneaking a new constitution through on the sly is a bad idea for all Europeans" (Oct. 27, 2007). Yet a bad idea could very well become a stark reality.

The Economist summed up what really happened: "On October 18 [2007] the leaders of the European Union took the constitution that voters in France and the Netherlands had rejected in 2005, changed the odd phrase, muddled the odd concept and presented the Lisbon 'Reform Treaty' to the world...So there is no need for it to be put to any difficult referendums" (emphasis added throughout).

In other words, after the EU constitution had been rejected by voters in France and the Netherlands, EU leaders simply changed a few details and relabeled it a "treaty" so it could bypass European voters. The treaty was then signed by European leaders in Lisbon on Dec. 13 (though national parliaments must still ratify it before it goes into effect Jan. 1, 2009).

Major changes for Europe

The Daily Mail' deputy political editor, James Chapman, had previously stated in midsummer that the "new treaty is 96 [percent] identical to the rejected blueprint." The Economist later referred to the alterations as "cosmetic changes." However, for a short period public attention was focused on important new provisions in this new treaty (also found in the previous constitution):

• The creation of a new European president.

• The creation of a new EU foreign minister with political clout, funding and his own diplomatic service.

• The creation of a new EU public prosecutor.

• New powers for an EU Court of Justice.

The Economist summed up some important points: "Majority voting will become the rule in some 50 policy areas currently decided by unanimity: Most dramatically migration, criminal justice and judicial and police cooperation, where the European Court of Justice (ECJ) will also gain broad oversight for the first time" (Oct. 27, 2007).

While Britain and the Irish Republic have obtained some "opt-outs" from the treaty, in the past the European Commission has found ways of circumventing previous opt-outs agreed on in the 1990s. Some are concerned about the deviousness with which this new treaty/constitution has been formulated. The Economist firmly stated, "After barely a week many of the conjurors in Brussels have already given up the subterfuge, reassuring everybody that it is a constitution after all" (Oct. 27, 2007).

A "Mr. Europe" is coming

The Economist also pointed out that this new EU treaty creates three competing positions for the so-called and mystical post of "Mr. Europe": the newly proposed posts of EU president and EU foreign minister plus the president of the European Commission. This newsweekly speculated as to who "could become the figure regarded by the world as Mr Europe"—the most public face for this growing colossus.

Likened to a "beast" in the book of Revelation, Bible prophecy tells us that a "Mr. Europe" is indeed coming with charismatic and dictatorial powers that will make the whole world wonder in amazement and, in some cases, fear. "And all the world marveled and followed the beast" (Revelation 13:3). Students of history well remember that the ambitions of European leaders plunged the entire world into two bloodbaths in the last century.

Undoubtedly the present political leaders of the European Union have little or no conception of where present events are ultimately taking not only Europe, but the rest of the world as well. However, God has revealed the answer in Bible prophecy. To understand the significance of these trends in Europe, request or download our free booklets You Can Understand Bible Prophecy and The Book of Revelation Revealed.