Winds of Change in Europe

On May 8, 1945, celebrations erupted around the world to mark the end of World War II in Europe. On Victory in Europe Day, or V-E Day, Germany surrendered its military forces unconditionally to the Allies. Germany’s surrender ended years of devastating conflict and allowed European nations to begin the process of rebuilding and recovering from immense suffering and destruction.

Recovery was not uniform, however, as Europe was soon divided into opposing blocs. The countries in Western Europe liberated by the Allies would become thriving democracies, while those liberated in the East would become subject to the Soviet Union and be occupied by Soviet military units for decades.

We look back here over postwar history and consider where current events are headed in Europe, and what that ultimately means for the world at large.

The Soviet boot on Eastern Europe—the Iron Curtain

At the Yalta Conference, held in a Russian resort town in the Crimea Feb. 4-11, 1945, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin made important decisions about the postwar world, especially Eastern Europe. The American and British delegations generally agreed that the future governments of European nations bordering the Soviet Union should be “friendly” toward the eastern power. The Soviets promised to allow “the earliest possible establishment through free elections of governments responsive to the will of the people” in all territories in Eastern Europe liberated from Nazi Germany.

However, it soon became evident that the Soviet Union would not permit such free elections. On March 5, 1946, Churchill, now former prime minister, visited Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri and gave what became popularly known as his “Iron Curtain Speech.” In Churchill’s words:

“From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent. Behind that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia, all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I must call the Soviet sphere, and all are subject in one form or another, not only to Soviet influence but to a very high and in some cases increasing measure of control from Moscow.”

When the three western zones in Germany became the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) in 1949, the Soviet zone became the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a defensive alliance between Western European countries and the United States and Canada, was established in April 1949, and when West Germany joined in 1955, the Soviet Union responded with the Warsaw Pact, a military alliance of Soviet-dominated eastern European nations to counter NATO.

Instead of a peaceful harmonious Europe after World War II, the continent was divided into the opposing blocs of the Cold War for 40 years until the next winds of change swept across Europe.

Collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact

Mikhail Gorbachev fundamentally and unexpectedly changed the course of the Cold War when he became General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in March 1985. His policies of glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) signaled a liberalization of Communist government control. They also masked a deeper economic crisis driving this change and undermining the entire Soviet system, making it difficult for Moscow to maintain support for its Eastern European satellites. And when protest movements threatened in Poland, Czechoslovakia and East Germany, Moscow could not help.

This was dramatically demonstrated in East Germany when the Berlin Wall, symbol of the Iron Curtain and of a divided Europe, came down in November 1989 just months after the 40th anniversary of the German Democratic Republic (GDR). Within two years, the entire Soviet system collapsed with the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991.

Arising from the Soviet collapse were 15 independent countries, including Russia itself, the Baltic States and Ukraine. The Eastern European countries formerly under the Soviet boot later applied for membership in the European Union. On May 1, 2004, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia joined the EU. This was the largest enlargement in the EU’s history, both in terms of population and number of states. Romania and Bulgaria then joined in 2007.

The dissolution of the Warsaw Pact also allowed its former members to become NATO members. The Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland joined in 1999. Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia then became members in 2004. Notably, Poland and the three Baltic states all border Russia—despite a verbal agreement during German reunification talks that the NATO alliance would not expand eastward to Russia’s border.

The “peace dividend” expected with the end of the Cold War was short-lived. The initial honeymoon period in U.S.-Russian relations ended abruptly as it became increasingly clear that each country’s geopolitical goals were incompatible in various respects. Russia opposed the eastward expansion of NATO, although it eventually accepted the inevitability of NATO’s expansion to include Poland, a former Warsaw Pact member, and the three Baltic states.

The war in Ukraine and the new Trump administration

Regime change in Ukraine became a major concern in 2014, when a pro-Russian Ukrainian president was replaced by a Western-oriented government. Less than a week later, Russian forces seized Crimea, which had originally been Russian territory but was given to Ukraine by Russia in 1954. Russia was willing to accept Ukraine later becoming part of the EU but opposed NATO membership and threatened military intervention to prevent it.

With the annexation of Crimea, Russia provided support to pro-Russian separatists who were fighting the Ukrainian military in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine. Like Crimea, this region was once part of the Russian Empire. In February 2022, Russia shocked Europeans by launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, beginning the largest conflict in Europe since World War II. NATO countries had not intervened in Crimea, but now began individually supporting Ukraine with financial aid, military equipment and training in advanced weapons systems.

Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine was a rude awakening for Europe, revealing its military weakness and dependence on the United States and the NATO alliance for its defense. French President Emmanuel Macron was the first to emphasize the need for a European military structure independent of the United States. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius even said publicly that Germany’s army, the Bundeswehr, must prepare to wage war by 2030—a statement that in years past would have earned public ridicule and condemnation.

The new U.S. Trump administration’s handling of the Ukraine conflict has caused a lot of upset among European leadership. The open quarrel with Ukrainian President Zelensky and his dismissal from the White House, the suspension of military aid to help bring Ukraine to the table to negotiate a ceasefire, and the U.S. decision to conduct the initial phase of peace talks without Ukrainian and European participation made it clear that the transatlantic relationship will no longer be “business as usual.”

More galling to them was the U.S. position that the Europeans provide security guarantees for a peace agreement as next-door neighbors, with President Trump vaguely stating that America would just make sure everything goes well. European leaders took this to mean that any peacekeeping troops they sent in would not have assurance of U.S. backing if attacked (as Ukraine is not a NATO member). Trump has warned of direct fighting between U.S. and Russian military personnel as threatening nuclear war.

At the Munich Security Conference in mid-February American officials confirmed that the initial peace talks on ending the Ukraine war would take place without the Europeans and Ukrainians. French President Macron then convened an emergency meeting in Paris right after the Munich conference for several European nations. The meeting turned out to be the first in a series of consultations to deal with the new situation. European leaders were adamant that they would not allow themselves to become divided by President Trump’s policies.

Need for a “supranational organizational unit”

Dr. Stefan Bierling, a political scientist who lectures at the University of Regensburg in Germany, described the shock Europe experienced with America’s abrupt change on support for Ukraine: “This is the worst possible accident after 75 years of the Americans, quite frankly, dragging us along on their coattails in world affairs. Now all of a sudden we’re on our own, we’re like Kevin [the young boy] in the movie Home Alone, and we don’t really know how to defend ourselves against this unpeaceful, malicious environment.”

The first weeks of the second Trump administration have done more to unify Europe than anything else since World War II. The sentiment of many Europeans is that America has now defaulted on its position as long-recognized leader of the free world.

It’s realized that no individual European nation could replace the United States in this respect, but there is thought that a unified Europe could in time wield sufficient power. Yet how can that be achieved?

Europeans appear willing to assume the responsibility for security safeguards when a settlement is negotiated to end the Ukraine war. But since any joint effort would have to be managed outside the NATO structure, questions of logistic coordination and financing first need to be addressed. Without American support, initial estimates on necessary increased European defense spending ranged from 500 billion to a trillion euros and an increase in European troop strength by at least 300,000 soldiers. Since European NATO members rely in varying degrees on American military equipment, increased defense spending would also mean increased European military production to offset any dependence on the United States.

The current European Union framework does not provide for joint defense planning and financing directed by the EU headquarters in Brussels. Bierling emphasized the dilemma faced by European countries in their desire to coordinate their military efforts: “It’s not just a question of cooperation, it’s primarily a question of what individual states have to contribute, because defense policy, like foreign policy as a whole, is still the sovereignty of individual members of the European Union, including individual members of NATO. There is no real supranational organizational unit” (emphasis added).

Yet that lack of a “supranational organizational unit” in Europe is prophesied to change! As European leaders met for the first time following the Munich Security Conference, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot proclaimed that “winds of unity” were blowing across Europe.

Macron’s initiatives in Europe’s response to America prompted Russian President Vladimir Putin to describe the French president as a would-be new Napoleon. Napoleon was the head of a Catholic-recognized revival of the Holy Roman Empire. Putin’s characterization unwittingly foretells a future unified Europe that corresponds with the details of biblical prophecy.

The winds stirring a succession of empires

The prophet Daniel in a vision beheld “the four winds of heaven . . . stirring up the Great Sea” (Daniel 7:2). Out of the churning waters came a succession of four beasts representing empires. A composite image of these creatures is found in Revelation 13, the succession of kingdoms culminating in the Roman Empire—which through revivals would continue to the end time.

These prophecies present two themes running through European history—a tyrannical political system and a false religious system partnered with it. In Revelation 17:1-2 the apostle John sees a vision of how the relationship between church and state would play out in Europe’s history: “Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls [of end-time plagues] came and talked with me, saying to me, ‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication.”

The “many waters” represent “peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues” this false religious system rules over (Revelation 17:15). And fornication with political powers here is a figurative way of describing selling oneself or one’s favors for material gain or advantage. The Roman church endorsed state rulers, promoting popular allegiance, in return for the state ensuring the church’s protection, advancement and enrichment. The church described here has been a powerful force in European history, involved in the various resurrections of the Roman Empire through history.

Revelation 17:10 shows that there would be seven “kings”—rulers who, with church sanction, would lead these imperial revivals. The last one “has not yet come.” He will lead a final revival immediately before the second coming of Jesus Christ. We can identify the first six of these revivals as: Justinian, Charlemagne, Otto the Great, Charles V, Napoleon and the Mussolini-Hitler axis.

The groundwork for the final resurrection of the Roman Empire began with the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957, which established the European Economic Community or Common Market, forerunner of today’s European Union. As currently constituted, the European Union cannot be the final formation of the seventh and last Roman revival—though it can well lead into it.

The coming European superpower

The Bible is clear that the final revival involves 10 “kings”—which today could include presidents, premiers or prime ministers—“who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour [indicating a very short time] as kings with the beast” (verse 12).

“The beast” is the title Scripture gives to the leader of this end-time power bloc, which is likewise called “the beast,” given its savage nature in the tradition of its tyrannical predecessors. Together the rulers forming this alliance “will make war with the Lamb”—the returning Jesus Christ (Revelation 17:14).

The Scriptures do not give clear indications of what will bring about the transition to the “ten kings” at some point in the future. Revelation 17:13 says that the 10 leaders in this final union will be “of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.” In other words, those 10 leaders will voluntarily cede their “power and authority” to a central authority.

It might seem hard to believe, but this prophecy describes Europe’s future! The most likely scenario to cause this would be a crisis that individual European nations could not cope with individually. The European Union’s current structure allows for what many call “two-speed” integration, with unification of “core” member nations willing to advance to full political union without the others being required to participate.

This option is one way the prophecy in Revelation 17 could be fulfilled within the current EU framework. A “coalition of the willing” is the term already being used in Europe for its current response to the Ukraine crisis.

Does this sound far-fetched? Other observers have predicted the possibility of a unified Europe arising out of a U.S. drawback from its roles in the international order. Around 15 years ago the Canadian newspaper Ottawa Citizen had this to say: “If and when the United States begins to retrench, no certain thing but a real possibility, the European Union may well begin to fill the vacuum in the Western world . . . If one goes back five centuries . . . Europe suddenly came together under the leadership of the young dynamic Habsburg Charles V, who ruled from Belgium . . . Europe enjoyed a global reach under his reign, not only by military might but by ‘soft power’ and diplomacy” (“The Decline of America,” Dec. 24, 2009).

The Ukraine crisis may well bring about the initial phase of an expansion of Europe’s military capacity, enabling it to no longer be dependent on the United States or the NATO alliance. The prophecy of the Beast in Revelation 13 foretells the world’s future astonishment over the rise of this militant power: “‘Where is there anyone as great as he?’ they exclaimed. ‘Who is able to fight against him?’” (verse 4, The Living Bible).

Keep watching developments in Europe and changes in the relationship between Europe and the United States. The winds are churning up the masses and key players. At some point, what God has foretold will come to pass!