Did the Bible Foretell the Present Power Struggle?

POWER POLITICS has been on the world scene for thousands of years. It appeared to fade into the background during the late 1960’s and the 1970’s, when a seeming “new atmosphere” in international relations (called détente) led some to believe that the fundamental conflict between East and West was subsiding. However, recent events have shown that the power struggle is not a thing of the past.

American self-esteem was seriously hurt by the hostage affair in Iran, and this sparked a resurgence of patriotism in the United States. Then came the election of Ronald Reagan as the new U.S. president. One of the main planks of his platform has been the counterbalancing of the Soviet Union’s rapid military buildup. Even before the U.S. presidential elections, Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev reacted, stating emphatically: “There is no doubt whatsoever that the United States will never attain military superiority.”

No sooner had Mr. Reagan been elected president than he hit back hard, affirming that détente had been a “one-way street” used by the Soviet Union “to pursue its own aims.” He expressed the opinion that the Soviet leaders are still out for “world revolution” and was reported as saying that “the only morality they recognize is what will further their cause, meaning they reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat in order to obtain that.” Moscow retorted by calling President Reagan’s attack an “unworthy maneuver.” Reporting on this verbal skirmish, France’s Le Monde said the tone used was that of the “Cold War.”

NO LETUP IN THE ARMS RACE

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, during the late 1970’s the Soviet Union devoted between 11 and 14 percent of its gross national product to military spending, compared with 5 percent in the United States. Thus the U.S.S.R. now has an advantage over the U.S.A. in military equipment. It has more intercontinental ballistic missiles (but not more warheads), submarine-launched ballistic missiles, nuclear and diesel-powered submarines, major surface ships (but not aircraft carriers or helicopter carriers), warplanes and tanks. Additionally, as of December 1980 there were 3,658,000 men and women in the Soviet armed forces, compared with 2,050,000 in the U.S. forces.

Mr. Reagan’s new administration intends to remedy this situation. In his first message to the American military, Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger stated that his mission was to “rearm America.” Whereas it has been estimated that the Soviet Union is currently spending $165 billion a year on its armed forces, the United States plans to boost its military budget to $157.9 billion this year, with regular annual increases until it reaches $250 billion in 1984.

In view of Mr. Brezhnev’s statement that “the United States will never attain military superiority,” it seems obvious that the U.S.S.R. will also have to increase its military spending. Moreover, the allies of these two superpowers (such as the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] and of the Warsaw Pact) apparently will be expected to follow suit. Decidedly, then, the arms race is still on​—with a vengeance!

THE MARCH OF WORLD POWERS

Both sides in the current power struggle already possess sufficient arms to destroy the entire human race many times over, including the men and women who are dedicated to the Almighty God, Jehovah. So it is not surprising that God’s Word, the Bible, speaks of the present situation. And better still, it shows us the outcome.

The Bible book of Daniel (chapters 2 and 7) describes a succession of world powers symbolized by the various parts of a huge image, and also by four wild beasts. These represent the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman World Powers, the latter extending on into the Anglo-American World Power.a

In Da chapter 11, the prophecy of Daniel depicts the struggle for world power between two symbolic “kings.” They are “the king of the north” and “the king of the south,” and this duel for world domination culminates at “the time of the end.” (Da 11 Vs. 40) Whom do these “kings” symbolize? What will be the outcome of their rivalry? We will consider these questions in the following article.

[Footnotes]