Category: Iran

  • Iran Says Talks Must Include Turkey-Brazil Fuel Plan

    Iran Says Talks Must Include Turkey-Brazil Fuel Plan

    By Ladane Nasseri

    (Adds details of dispute starting in third paragraph, updates with proposed locations for talks in final.)

    Nov. 3 (Bloomberg) — Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said talks with the world powers on Iran’s uranium enrichment should include acceptance of a May proposal brokered by Brazil and Turkey for the supply of nuclear-reactor fuel.

    If France, Russia, the U.S. and the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency are “prepared to enter negotiations based on this framework, a time and location for talks will be agreed on,” Mottaki said today, according to the state-run Press TV news channel.

    The U.S. said on Oct. 28 that will offer a “revised” proposal for Iran to exchange its low-enriched uranium for fuel to power a Tehran reactor that produces medical isotopes. The offer hinges on Iran agreeing to direct talks over its nuclear program, State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said. The New York Times reported that the terms of the U.S. proposal would be stricter than those of a 2009 UN plan rejected by Iran.

    Uranium enrichment is the key issue in the international dispute over Iran’s nuclear program, with Iran maintaining the right to produce the material and the U.S. leading efforts to force Iran to abandon the work. Enriched uranium can fuel a reactor and at higher concentrations form the core of a bomb. Iran denies claims by the U.S. and many of its allies that the nuclear program may be providing cover for the development of weapons.

    International Sanctions

    The European Union proposed a round of nuclear negotiations with Iran in Vienna for mid-November. The U.S., U.K., Russia, China, France — the five permanent members of the UN Security Council — and Germany would also participate. The Security Council approved a fourth round of sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program in June, followed by a tightening of U.S. and EU measures in response to the Iranian nuclear program.

    Iran, which is under increasing pressure from the international economic sanctions, has agreed to resume talks over its disputed uranium enrichment activities after Nov. 10. Mottaki told reporters today in Tbilisi, Georgia, that Iran is ready to hold the negotiations in Istanbul or Geneva. The parties haven’t yet reached an agreement on the content of the talks, he said.

    The proposal brokered by Turkey and Brazil, in which Iran would swap some of its enriched uranium for fuel in a form usable only in the Tehran reactor, was rejected by Western nations because it allowed the country to continue producing enriched uranium. Iran says it needs the material as part of its development of nuclear energy.

    The plan for the exchange followed an October 2009 proposal from the UN powers for Iran to send most of its stock of enriched uranium to Russia to be processed to a higher level of purity and then to France for conversion into fuel for the Tehran plant, which is running low on supplies.

    –With assistance from Helena Bedwell in Tbilisi. Editors: Heather Langan, Karl Maier

    To contact the reporter on this story: Ladane Nasseri in Tehran at lnasseri@bloomberg.net.

    To contact the editor responsible for this story: Maher Chmaytelli at mchmaytelli@bloomberg.net.

  • Missing in the rise of Islam in Turkey and Iran:  A U.S. strategy

    Missing in the rise of Islam in Turkey and Iran: A U.S. strategy

    By Dr. Assad Homayoun, Global Information System

    It is now clear that the West has no coherent strategies to cope with Iran and Turkey, the two important powers in the greater Middle East.

    Iran and Turkey dominate this zone of the greater Middle East, which extends from the Caucasus and Central Asia to the Indian Ocean, and from the Pamir Mountains to the Mediterranean. It is a region which contains perhaps 70 percent of the world’s known oil and gas energy reserves, is a major center of religious and ethnic rivalry; and is home to the Arab-Israeli dispute, international terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

    Tehran, Iran
    Tehran, Iran

    If the West is to cope with this reality, then it needs to better understand both of these powers, historically, and to understand the nature of the force which essentially drives them: political Islam.

    Iran and the Ottoman Turks experienced conflict and occasional wars for almost 250 years, but there has been no serious war between Iran and Turkey since 1747 (the battle of Kars). Border disputes, however, have persisted between them.

    After World War I, the Ottoman Empire disintegrated and the Turkish Republic came into existence in 1922. When Reza Khan came to power in Iran and founded the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925, and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk came to power in Turkey, relations and cooperation between the two countries improved and it continues to the present day. During the Cold War, both were allies of the U.S. and formed a line — or, indeed, a “Northern Tier” — against the USSR. In 1953, U.S. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, during his trip to the Middle East, for the first time referred to the “Northern Tier” as a political/military concept aimed at a collective security region on the southern borders of the Soviet Union.

    The situation changed, however, after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Now, Iran and Turkey keep their distance from the U.S. and are close to Russia and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Iran changed its direction in 1979 to the detriment of U.S. interests, and changed the balance of power in the region against the U.S. and the West.

    This change also marked the beginning of the rise of political Islam and modern jihadist movement, often exemplified by international terrorism, and mostly as a result of the growing weakness and strategic miscalculations of several U.S. administrations.

    Iranian history and Persian culture have been exemplified by tolerance and religious freedom, but the theocratic administration which emerged in 1979 in Iran was an aberration; it not only propagates radical Islam, but it also attempts to destroy and extirpate the roots of Persian history, civilization, and culture which, for three millennia, have been the strategic reserve and guardian of Iran. The theocratic administration continues to obliterate memories and appreciation of Iran’s past glories, and has consistently held a policy of indoctrinating students in schools and universities. Anti-democratic and anti-female behavior has become emphasized by the clerical leadership, as has enmity towards recognition of Iran’s non-Muslim past.

    Ideological opposition to United States’ policy in the Middle East and toward Israel is fundamental. Clerical Iranian policies of support for militant groups, alliance with radical leaders, and denial of the Jewish Holocaust will not change since the clerical leaders are, by definition, religiously dogmatic, apocalyptic, and strategic in their approach to building their power base.

    The key to change in Iran is not negotiation or intervention by external powers with the clerical leadership. International sanctions have been important and have great impact, but they may not be decisive. On the other hand, a war option — to change the Iranian political status quo — would merely catapult a volcanic region into chaos and balkanization. Clearly, a change of governance in Iran would transform the political landscape of the Middle East, and this is basically only feasible through the action of the Iranian people.

    At present, it is important to stress that Iran and Turkey are the two most important players in the Greater Middle East, a region which has become — in many senses — the “center of political gravity” of the world.

    Iran and Turkey both have common interests in the region, even though they are rivals and compete with each other and have differences.

    Common interests:

    1. Both countries follow Islamic ideology, whereas Turkey is moderate and Iran is radical, but the situation in Turkey will not continue on the same path which it trod for the last three-quarters of the 20th Century. Turkey will have to go back to either secular Kemalism or move further toward Islam since Islam and democracy cannot concur with each other, despite the claims in this transitional period that Turkey exemplifies “democratic Islam”. If there is such a path, then it is more attuned to the careful steps which the Kingdom of Morocco is taking.

    2. Both countries had very close strategic relations with the U.S. Iran, of course, has postured itself as the enemy of the U.S. since 1979, and Turkey is gradually changing its direction, as it did with its policy towards Israel in mid-2010, and the establishment in 2008 of its partnership with Russia.

    3. Both countries are working together and are becoming strategic partners.

    4. Trade and economic relations between Iran and Turkey have been improving tremendously, in spite of U.S. sanctions

    5. Both have common interests with Syria to check the Kurdish movement and prevent the creation of an independent Kurdish state. There are more than 20 million Kurds in Turkey and around eight million in Iran.

    6. Iran and Turkey both have interests in Iraq and in the stability (or otherwise) of Iraq.

    Rivalries:

    1. While Iran and Turkey have predominantly Muslim populations, Iran is Shia and Turkey is Sunni. We need to remember that the two empires of Safavid Iran and the Ottoman Turks fought ideological wars for 250 years.

    2. Turkey is slowly and skillfully following a path of pan-Turkism/Ottomanism — even though pan-Turkism is, as most in modern Turkey forget, diametrically opposed to Ottomanism as it was originally expressed by Atatürk — and this new messianic pan-Turkist/Ottomanist set of goals will soon bring Turkey into conflict with Iran, which has Turkic speaking (Azari) populations in the North.

    3. Both claim leadership in the region.

    4. Turkey is concerned at the prospect of a military nuclear Iran which, with its resources and history and strong cultural identity, would at least attempt to be “lord paramount” of the region. For this reason alone, Turkey has begun steps to build its own nuclear energy and military nuclear options.

    5. Iran and Turkey compete in Central Asia and the Caucasus. This competition started after the downfall of the Soviet empire.

    6. Turkey is a member of NATO, whereas the theocracy of Iran and NATO are bêtes noires.

    In a nutshell, in spite of differences, there are compatibilities in ideology, religion, economy, and geopolitics which bring Turkey and Iran closer.

    This cooperation will continue with the present leaderships of the two countries, unless there is change in policy of Iran or Turkey.

    Stephen Kinzer, who, in his new informative book, Reset, espouses a future partnership among U.S., Turkey, and Iran, misses an important point. Certainly, as he said, the geopolitical interests of Iran and Turkey in many respects are in accord with U.S. interests in the Middle East, but without change in Iran and a return of Turkey to secular Kemalism and real democracy, it will be difficult for Iran and Turkey (which is gradually tilting toward radical Islamism) to rebuild their relationships with the U.S.

    Stability, in fact, does not mean anything in the Middle East. Democracy in the region similarly either does not exist or is artificial and ephemeral. Wherever the Muslim umma is, there are the polity of Islam and the abode of Islam. In the Islamic theory of international relations, dar-al-Islam is not defined by permanent territorial frontiers. Islam means submission without question.

    Islam does not believe in equality between men and women. In Islam there is no right, but only duty for the people. The idea of democracy is alien to the mindset of Islam, which does not provide for the division of power or popular sovereignty. The goal of political Islam — Islamism — is to impose Islamic law or sharia on the whole world. That is why many Muslim (non-Islamist) thinkers believe that reform is necessary for Islam to exist alongside democracy, or popular government, in the same way that Christianity reformed to co-exist with secular government.

    Contrary to what Mr. Kinzer suggests, the governments of Iran and Turkey are Islamist and act against U.S. interests. They are trying, directly or indirectly, to proselytize and expand their political and religious influence in the region and elsewhere. If they bring Egypt and Saudi Arabia to their line, that could happen sooner or later. They are already having an historical impact on all Muslim states, and world politics. It is possible that they could form a United Islamic bloc like NATO, and, with a strategic alliance with the PRC — which is in the making — they could well have a great impact on global affairs and change the balance of power against the U.S. and NATO.

    The real problem in the Northern Tier and the greater Middle East is that radical Islam is rising rapidly due to the lack of vision and grand strategy of the U.S., and because of the weakness of Europe. According to Eurasianet.org, even in the Central Asian republics the influence of Islam is growing rapidly. For example, in Tajikistan, instead of parents choosing Persian names for their children — names which mostly came from Shahname Ferdowsi — such as Jamshid, and Freidoon, they are instead choosing Arabic names. This represents a break with Tajik/Persian culture, identity, and the cultural past of the area.

    If nothing dramatic happens — by which I mean major war (and that possibility is very high) — political Islam will definitely advance, and, in the mid-21st Century, Islam could be in control of Europe. This would lead inevitably to clashes with non-Islamic states and communities. We are living in the most unstable period of human history, with ever-increasing cancerous problems, seemingly without solutions. It is interesting to remember the medicine which Hippocrates, the Greek physician, recommended against the cancer: “What medicine cannot heal, steel heals, what steel does not heal, fire does”.

    Political Islam, resorting to asymmetrical warfare and terrorism, has already intimidated a tired and perplexed Europe and has frightened the U.S. Even Queen Elizabeth II, during her visit to Turkey, through which she was wearing a headscarf, listened to a recitation of the Quran in the Green Mosque in Istanbul. It seems that the U.S. and the democratic West do not have a sound strategy to deal with political Islam. The West appears to have no strategy or will to prevent a shifting of power, or to guard Western culture, civilization, and democracy.

    On the other hand, there are many in the Muslim world who believe that Islam needs to be adjusted to new realities of life in a modern world, and, indeed, to be liberated from literalist ayatollahs and imams. Much of the Muslim world is intimidated by the ferocity of the Islamists and does not speak. Indeed, Islam has been hijacked by radical Muslims who are ready to be killed for their ideology. I am of the opinion that going against a religion — especially a popular one — is the height of folly, but criticizing and fighting with extremism is necessary for the cause of peace.

    For classical Muslim thinkers and philosophers who have studied Aristotle and Plato it is not difficult to interpret Islam and adjust it to modern times and a new life. But the present interpretation of Islam by dogmatic and even fanatical ayatollahs and imams has given a new and macabre face to Islam. I should like to emphasize that this engine of political Islam and jihad against infidels was first ignited by “Ayatollah” Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979, and continues at an ever-faster pace. On January 14, 1980, more than 120 Pakistani Army officers on a pilgrimage to the religious city of Qum met with Khomeini who said to them: “We are at war against infidels. Take this message with you. I ask all Islamic nations, all Islamic armies to join us. There are many enemies to be killed. Jihad must triumph”.

    After the Iranian revolution and the establishment of the Shia system of Velayat-e-Faqih, the Wahhabi/salafi religious leaders — in order to not be left behind — introduced a Sunni version of radical Islam, re-stressing the export of the Quran, financing for madrasas, and building of new mosques worldwide. That race between Shia and Wahhabist/salafist proselytization continues, faster and faster. This competition led to the rise of Al Qaida, which attacked two centers of economic and military power of the United States on September 11, 2001, and created the present incarnation of international terrorism. Currently, the two important branches of Islam — Sunni and Shi’a — despite their differences, effectively undermine the democratic West. The West, instead of using the differences between Shi’ism and Sunnism, has lost its nerve and has been unable to devise a sound strategy to face political Islam.

    In the Seventh Century, a small Muslim army defeated two superpowers of the time, the Persian and Roman Empires. History repeats itself, since it is made by humans, and human nature has not changed in the past several thousand years. It will not change. It would take a hero with a sense of history to change the equation. I see no sign of such a hero. As Niccolò Machiavelli said: “if you wish to see what is to be, you must consider what has been: all things of this world in every era have their counterparts in ancient times.”

    Dr Assad Homayoun is a former Iranian diplomat, a senior fellow of International Strategic Studies Association, President of Azadegan Foundation for Democratic Change in Iran, and a member of the WorldTribune.com Advisory Board.

  • Is China in the Bible?

    Is China in the Bible?

    From the December 2010 Trumpet Print Edition »

    Bearded Dragon from CyprusThe scriptural, prophetic identity of the most populous nation on the planet.

    BY DAVID VEJIL

    China: The Next Superpower.” “China: America’s Number-One Enemy.”

    Such headlines have become common. It is logical that the nation with nearly 20 percent of the world’s population, the second-biggest economy and the biggest military (in terms of manpower) would inspire such discussion.

    But will China become the world’s next superpower? The truth is, you cannot know China’s future unless you understand that nation’s identity in the Bible, the only source that can reveal the answer!

    Yes, if you believe the Bible, you can actually know for certain—without a doubt—who will dominate the world very shortly!

    Hundreds of think tanks spend countless hours and vast sums of money in search of an answer to this question. Yet, the Bible reveals the answer—if they would only believe!

    The Bible is a book primarily about Israel, physical and spiritual. When other nations are mentioned, it is typically in relation to Israel. In biblical times, the interaction between the Chinese and the Israelites was of no major consequence, and so China was rarely mentioned.

    However, the Bible does speak prophetically of China’s role in end-time events. Technological advances in communication and trade have shrunken the distance between China and the modern descendants of Israel considerably (for an explanation of who these nations are, request our free book The United States and Britain in Prophecy). Today China has considerable global influence: Witness, for example, the amount of U.S. debt China holds and the huge trade imbalance between the two nations, and the fact that China is the world’s most dominant trading nation.

    An understanding of these prophecies hinges on knowing the biblical identity of the Chinese people. Before delving into this, however, we must gain a basic overview of Chinese history.

    A Brief History of a Great People

    The Chinese people comprise one dominant ethnic group and many small minorities. The ethnic Han comprise more than 90 percent of the 1.3 billion people living in China. Though minority ethnic groups—such as the Uygurs, Tibetans, Mongols and Manchu—make up a small percentage of the Chinese population, in absolute numbers they are still large populations. For example, there are actually more Mongols living in China than in Mongolia.

    These other ethnic groups have been absorbed into China through conquest by the Han Chinese. The Han have long dominated the heartland of China, usually defined by the Yellow River in the north, the Yangtze in the middle and the Pearl River on the south. This rich agricultural region is surrounded by border regions occupied by non-Han peoples, such as Tibet, Xinjiang (home of the Muslim Uighurs), Inner Mongolia and Manchuria, the historical name given to the territory north of North Korea.

    Historically, fierce nomadic cavalry armies from the northern border regions have posed a difficult challenge to the agriculture-based Chinese. The incursions motivated the building of the Great Wall.

    When the Han were strong, just like today, the border regions were under their rule. When they were weak, they lost control of those buffer regions and in some cases were even invaded by their Turkic and Mongol neighbors.

    The foreign invaders all achieved measures of success, controlling portions of Chinese territory for various periods, mainly in northern China. The most complete conquest was the Mongol invasion started by Genghis Khan in the a.d. 1200s: The resulting dynasty fully controlled China for a century.

    All these invasions had one thing in common, however: They all met their end by the Han Chinese.

    No matter which foreign invader occupied the throne, China always remained Chinese.

    One remarkable demonstration of the resilience of their society and culture was the survival, amid all the invasions, of the Chinese language—a feat few other languages have managed.

    This was partly due to the size of the Han population. In a.d. 2, the first available census shows a Chinese population of about 60 million, one fourth of the world’s population at the time!

    To better rule this immense population, nomadic invaders typically adopted Chinese administration techniques and the Chinese language, a language quite unrelated to their own. Eventually their descendents adopted Chinese culture and the agricultural lifestyle as well. When the Han reasserted themselves, they easily absorbed the invaders that remained.

    All the mixing and migrating of different peoples has made it impossible to characterize what a pure ethnic Han is. Nevertheless, prophetically speaking, China refers to all the people of China, not just the Han ethnic group. And at any rate, the Chinese and all the minority groups living in China are of the Mongoloid race, which stems from Noah’s son Japheth.

    The Mongoloid Race

    As Herbert W. Armstrong taught throughout his ministry, Noah’s son Japheth married a woman of the yellow race, and went on to father the Mongoloid people. The Hebrew word Japheth means enlargement, according to The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary,and a glance at the modern world shows that the Oriental populations have been enlarged and multiplied to an unparalleled degree. Japheth’s descendants have long been the most populous people on Earth, with the bulk living in China, Southeast Asia and Japan.

    Genesis 10:2-5 show that the enlargement of Japheth began with the patriarch himself siring seven sons and an untold number of daughters. Obviously, these sons and daughters were a mix between the Caucasoid and Mongoloid races, the latter of which grew more definitive in subsequent generations. Soon after the dispersion at the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:8), Japheth’s descendants migrated through Central Asia to the lands they occupy now.

    One of the seven sons of Japheth bears special importance to the prophetic identity of the Chinese and even their nomadic neighbors. That is Magog, the second son of Japheth mentioned in Genesis 10:2.

    Where Did Magog Go?

    Again, the Bible deals primarily with Israel. Since Magog’s descendants migrated to an area largely independent of the civilizations developing in the Middle East, no sons of Magog are listed in Scripture.

    However, Jewish historian Josephus indicated where Magog’s descendants settled. He wrote in the first century, “Magog founded those that from him were named Magogites, but who are by the Greeks called Scythians” (The Complete Works of Josephus).

    In a prophecy in Ezekiel 38, the Bible labels this vast territory of northern Eurasia where the Scyths lived—a region that stretched from the Russian steppes east into modern-day China and Mongolia—as Magog.

    This territory contained many different tribes of people of the white and yellow races, all of whom were called Scyths or Scythians by the Greeks (see last month’s installment in this series). The Ezekiel 38 prophecy demonstrates this as well, listing numerous nations and peoples associated with or dwelling “in the land of Magog.” The people who most prominently settled this land are typically identified as Mongolic and Turkic. The name Mongol is even derived from the name Magog.

    The ancient history of this land is a story about different Turkic and Mongolic tribes vying for control of the area. Whenever a tribe grew strong enough, it would rule the area; in rare cases—such as with the Huns, Seljuk Turks and Mongols—if these nomadic tribes consolidated enough power, they conquered lands beyond their own.

    The resulting conquests led to much cultural and genetic intermixing with the people of Central Asia—and makes their national borders largely irrelevant to defining their ethnic backgrounds.

    Today the land the Bible calls Magog is dominated in the west by Russia—which is reasserting control over the region it once possessed through the ussr—and China in the east.

    Details of the ancient history of Magog and its people remain obscure since the Turks and Mongols didn’t develop a written language until after their contact with the Chinese or Persian civilizations. Though these nomadic peoples have a sketchy history, they still play an important role in understanding China’s prophetic role.

    While the Mongols’ connection to Magog is most obvious, they were just one tribe of a related people that carry the biblical name Magog. Ezekiel 38 is a prophecy about the land of Magog and all the distant “cousins” that live there and are associated with each other, such as the Russians and Chinese. One of the Mongolic nomadic tribes in this area bears a special relationship with China. They are the Khitan, a people responsible for China’s modern name and one of China’s biblical names, Chittim.

    China Is Chittim

    Isaiah 23:1 has a prophecy about “the land of Chittim.” To which modern nation does this end-time prophecy apply? This biblical name refers to both the island of Cyprus and to the nation of China, whose progenitors first populated Cyprus and gave it its name.

    Jewish historian Josephus records that some descendants of Japheth—such as the families of Gomer, Tubal and Togarmah—first settled in southern Europe before migrating east into Asia. Kittim was one such family, originally settling lands to the west of Mesopotamia before moving to the Far East.

    Genesis 10:4 lists the sons of Japheth’s fourth-born son: “The sons of Javan were Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim” (New King James Version). Kittim is synonymous with the Chittim of Isaiah’s prophecy. Verse 5 mentions that these sons of Javan settled the isles, or the coasts. This occurred shortly after the dispersion of the Tower of Babel, when the sons of Javan migrated to the northern Mediterranean. These tribes gave their names to various cities and islands, such as Cyprus and Rhodes.

    The Mongoloid types of these families, including the Kittim, did not stay in the Mediterranean, however. Over hundreds of years and many generations, some of these families migrated east into Asia from Cyprus, where they are found today, according to research by Dr. Ernest Martin, formerly of Ambassador College.

    The descendants of Javan’s son Kittim came to Asia some time after many of their cousins had already settled there. After their migration through Central Asia, the Kittim made their appearance in modern-day northern China and Mongolia under the name Khitan in the fourth century a.d. In the 10th century, the Khitan people managed to create a dynasty that subjugated the peoples, including the Chinese, in modern-day northern China. Their territory stretched from what is now Korea to eastern Kazakhstan, including Beijing, the seat of government in China today.

    Because the Khitans controlled the overland trade and communication route from China through Central Asia to Europe, China was called Cathay, after the Khitans. The designation first applied to north China, but later designated all of China. It is a name the Russians still use for China today.

    Isaiah 23:1-3 reveal that Chittim, modern-day China, will form a part of a global economic market along with Europe, one that is prophesied to shut out the nations of Israel. It should be no surprise that China will be an integral part of this economic partnership with Europe, as it is now the world’s greatest exporter. These two trading blocs will soon dominate the global economy!

    The history of the Khitan demonstrates what has happened to many of the Mongolic tribes that once roamed the western portions of what the Bible calls Magog. These nomadic tribes were not considered Chinese when they were conquering the Han civilization, but after centuries of living inside China’s borders, much of their populations have been ethnically absorbed by the Han Chinese. Whatever remnants of these Mongolic nomads that have managed to remain distinct, such as the Mongols, are now classified as ethnic minorities in China.

    In the Khitan’s case, their absorption was so complete that an ethnic minority group from their descendants doesn’t even exist!

    The history of these nomads shows just how strong a connection China has with biblical Magog. To a certain degree, they even share the same borders and the same people. But if this explains the Mongolic nomads whose descendants now live in northern China, what about the original Han people who settled and continue to live in China’s heartland?

    Handling the Han

    The history of the Han Chinese is much less obscure. In fact, the Han people record their history all the way back to the time of the Tower of Babel!

    Ancient Chinese records speak of China’s first emperors, Yaou, Shun and Yu.

    One such record, The Shoo King, explains that one of Yaou’s tasks was to deal with the effects of a great flood that ravaged the land: “Destructive in their overflow are the waters of the inundation. In their vast extent they embrace the mountains and overtop the hills.”

    While scholars explain the inundation as a local flood in China, it is clear from the biblical account, God’s sacred Word, that these annals are talking about Noah’s Flood. Consider:

    During Yaou’s lifetime a new leader, Shun, came to power. According to another ancient Chinese manuscript, The Bamboo Annals, Shun is described as having a “black body.” He was obviously not Chinese, and his mother was called “the queen mother of the west,” indicating him as a foreigner. The Shoo King gives the name of Shun’s father as Koo-sow.

    According to Dr. Herman Hoeh’s Compendium of World History, this Shun was none other than the Nimrod of the Bible. Therefore Koo-sow, which can also be spelled Kusou, is Nimrod’s father Cush! And the “queen mother of the west” can only be Semiramis. She was the mother-wife of Nimrod who called herself “queen of heaven,” as documented in Alexander Hislop’s Two Babylons. These are the three principal figures of man’s rebellion at the Tower of Babel.

    Nimrod was a son of Cush and therefore of the black race. The Bible describes him as a mighty rebellious leader who caused the people to revolt against God shortly after the Flood (Genesis 10:8-9). He gathered the different races and peoples together to build the Tower of Babel, but was stopped when God intervened and confused the languages (Genesis 11:1-7). The different races and peoples were then scattered to different areas of the world (verse 8).

    At that point, Yu became the next ruler. Yu, China’s first great hero, founded the Xia dynasty; from that point forward, leadership was given on a hereditary basis. The return of government to a Chinese ruler indicates that the Chinese immediately left the area of Babel and broke free from Nimrod and his successors’ rule. Under Chinese rulers, they migrated to their modern-day location.

    The chronology as presented by The Shoo King places the rules of these three kings toward the end of the third millennia b.c. (The Chinese Classics). This time frame also agrees with the Bible.

    The Chinese have preserved the most complete secular history of their civilization, dating back more than 4,000 years. There is a lot of myth and legend included as well, but the general chronology of emperors is verified by archeological finds, as well as what is recorded in Scripture.

    Archeological Proof

    Western scholars and the Chinese themselves, heavily influenced by Western thought after the 1920s, believed the Xia dynasty and the history immediately following were mere inventions, mythical heroes and kingdoms.

    However, an archeological find in 1959 at Erlitou in the western part of the Henan province revealed an early Chinese society dating back to the same time and place that The Shoo King records the Xia dynasty existed! The city found at Erlitou is the largest of all cities found dating to this time period and is believed to be the capital city of the Xia government.

    Since that find in the North China Plain off the Yellow River, archeologists have found some 200 sites revealing the same culture throughout a broad area, demonstrating a rapid settlement and urbanization during 1900 to 1500 b.c. This was the formation of the first Chinese state! (The Chinese Neolithic: Trajectories to Early States).

    The Bamboo Annals records the existence of other Chinese states and how the Xia rulers expanded their control over them. Archeologists have found evidence of other Chinese states, but none contained as many settlements as those closely identified with the city found in Erlitou where the Xia ruled—clearly the center of power of the first post-Flood Chinese civilization.

    Interestingly, the archeological record shows a period of extremely low-population settlement in the period immediately before the Erlitou culture arrived. The archeologists, steeped in evolutionary thought, call the time before the Flood the Neolithic period. They have found evidence of a thriving civilization in China in this time period, followed by a contraction in settlement, with evidence pointing to drastic flooding in the region (ibid.).

    Though the archeologists won’t admit it, this is evidence of a great flood followed by a resettlement of the area led by the Xia dynasty!

    Back to Gog and Magog

    So if history is clear that Shun is Nimrod, who are Yaou and Yu? How do these names fit in our biblical identity?

    A basic understanding of Ezekiel 38 gives us that information. That chapter speaks of the land of Magog and specific people or peoples living in that land: “Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog” (verse 2). Gog and Magog are also mentioned together in Revelation 20:8, showing a close connection between the land and peoples. When Arab historians talked of the Mongols, they used the terms Yagog and Magog.

    According to Dr. Hoeh, Yaou in Chinese history is likely the same person the Arabs call Yagog in their tradition. Every prophetic indication is that China has a strong connection with Gog and Magog. Ezekiel 38:2 refers to China. Along with Russia, China dominates the entire area of Magog and is associated with the nations listed in subsequent verses.

    Therefore, the Chinese Han people were ruled first by a Japhetic descendant associated with Magog—possibly his son, though the Bible doesn’t say specifically. During Nimrod’s rebellion at the Tower of Babel, the Chinese were ruled by Nimrod. After his reign, when God intervened and changed the languages, government over the Chinese returned to the Japhetic line, under Yu’s rule. These people then migrated north and east to modern-day China, setting up their capital in the North China Plain at the end of the third millennium b.c.

    The location of China helps reveal other biblical identities as well.

    Kings of the East

    In a prophecy recorded in Daniel 11, a clash is foretold between “the king of the north,” a German-led European power, and “the king of the south,” a radical Islamic power led by Iran (these prophetic identities are explained in our booklets Germany and the Holy Roman Empire and The King of the South, both free upon request). Emerging victorious, the European army is then prophesied to conquer the tiny Jewish nation now called Israel. At that point, verse 44 foretells, “tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble” this European king.

    Any map will show that north and east of Jerusalem are Russia and China, the two dominant powers of the land biblically referred to as Magog!

    This event is further expounded in Revelation 16:12, where it is prophesied that the “kings of the east” will gather an army that numbers 200 million soldiers! (Revelation 9:14-16). Such a vast army could only be assembled with the massive population of China. Clearly China is one of those kings of the east!

    So back to our original question: Will China become the world’s next dominating superpower after the decline of the U.S.? The answer is no!

    Though it will grow to tremendous world power, even superpower status—especially through economic means, as indicated in Isaiah 23—it will not rise to the top spot. That position will be filled by the European power led by Germany! After a short economic partnership, China will violently contend with the king of the north for global dominance.

    But this war will end when Jesus Christ returns and destroys both powers!

    After that, according to biblical prophecy, Christ will restore His government on Earth, a government that will bring peace and prosperity for 1,000 years. Yet Ezekiel 38 prophesies that not every nation will submit to Christ’s rule voluntarily. Soon after the Second Coming, the people of Asia will form an army in order to attack the people living in Jerusalem!

    This will be the last great rebellion in the 1,000-year period. Christ will utterly destroy it and deliver His people. It is a grand statement from God: “Thus will I magnify myself, and sanctify myself; and I will be known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I am the Lord” (Ezekiel 38:23).

    Believing the Bible gives us an understanding of ancient Chinese history that scholars reject, and reveals the future status of China and major events this world power will participate in. But even more, it gives us the final and inspiring end result: Christ establishing His Kingdom on Earth!

    God is offering the wonderful opportunity to know, now, who is the Lord! Horrible wars are prophesied to occur shortly, but God will deliver His people, those who know He is the Lord and rely on Him. That should lead to the next big question: Are you one of those?

    For further study, order a free copy of our booklet Russia and China in Prophecy.

  • Role of Cuban Pilots in Jewish Air Exodus to Israel Revealed

    Role of Cuban Pilots in Jewish Air Exodus to Israel Revealed

    cubaFollowing the foundation of the State of Israel in 1948, a Cuban airline and a group of Cuban pilots were commissioned to transport all the Jewish people who wished to immigrate to the dawning state. Their many flights between 1951 and 1952 as part of what may be the largest air evacuation in human history had remained unknown until now.

    By: Luis Hernández Serrano

    Email: serrano@juventudrebelde.cu

    They were not diplomats or delegates going to an international convention, nor pilgrims on the search for indulgences or archaeological relics. The group of pilots that departed from Cuba in 1951 to the Holy Land had a different mission.

    The event remained unknown for almost 60 years. The Cuban pilots were to take part in the largest mass air evacuation in human history.

    Aviation historian Captain Rolando Marron told Juventud Rebelde newspaper the details of their ordeal.

    “In 1948,” he began, “the Republic of Israel was founded in a territory that had been part of Palestine and was under British control. The deficient economy of the country demanded arms to harvest the land and brains to administrate the dawning republic.”

    “In Europe, as a consequence of the recently concluded world war, there were hundreds of thousands of dispossessed Hebrews eager to move to the new homeland they were being offered. Large groups of immigrants began to arrive in Israel from all over Europe, as it was easier for them to find ways to get there.

    “As the relations between Jewish and Arabs became tenser in Arab countries, the Israeli government intervened to facilitate the evacuation of a larger number of Jewish people to their Promised Land.

    “Arab governments prohibited Jewish immigrants to travel by road, and the Egyptian blockade of the Suez Canal made it impossible for them to get to Israeli territory by sea.

    “The only option left was organizing a mass air evacuation. Negotiations began under acute time constraints. Since Israel had no diplomatic relations with Arab League member states, and planes bearing Israeli flags could not therefore be used for the exodus, they had to hire planes from a neutral country.

    “By coincidence, an important official of the Israeli mission in New York was a very good friend of Cuban businessman and civilian pilot Narciso V. Rosello Otero, who was appointed chair of the company created for the plan: Intercontinental Aerea de Cuba S.A

    “When the company had secured the required permits in Cuba, its central office opened at 464 Zulueta, in Old Havana, and a branch office was also inaugurated in Nicosia, Cyprus.

    The historian said that while the final arrangements were made to the administrative structure of the company, Cuban pilot were hired, in compliance with Cuban laws, to fly the planes.

    “The first group was made up of five pilots who were unemployed at the time because the company they worked for, Aerovias Cubanas Internacionales S.A., had gone bankrupt due to the incipient development of domestic commercial flights in Cuba.

    The Air Exodus

    Historian Marron adds that during the nearly two years that the mission lasted, more than 115,000 refugees were brought from Iraq; 25,000 from Iran, and a few hundred from India and Yemen. The Yemen refugees had to cross the border to reach the English territory of Aden to board the planes.

    “Most of the refugees from Iraq boarded at the airport of Baghdad, and the rest in Bahra, near the famed Abadan oil refinery, at the important oil harbour located only a few miles away from the Persian Gulf border.”

    The historian noted that it was in Iraq where the Jewish passengers experienced the most difficulties, given the persecutions and dangers they faced in that country, and it was necessary to evacuate them as soon as possible. The abovementioned number of Iraqi refugees was rescued over a period of approximately ten months.

    “The Iranian refugees,” continued Marron, “were picked at the Teheran airport. They were not forced to leave the country, and all of them immigrated to Israel voluntarily, with the exception of 1,000 who had escaped from Iraq and Afghanistan through the border, and could not remain in Iran due to immigration regulations.

    “The longest flights were to Bombay, in India, where a few hundred decided to immigrate. Many of them would return later to India because they were not able to adapt to the living conditions they found in their new homeland.

    “Taking off from the modern Lydda airport in Tel Aviv, the flight had a stopover in Sharjah, at the Royal British Air Force base, in the remote area of Oman Trucial off the coast of the Arabian Peninsula, in the Persian Gulf.

    “A typical Arab village by the seaside and the barracks of the English troops were the only signs of life near the airfield in the middle of the dessert. The second part of the trip was the crossing of the Indic Ocean, battered by the dangerous monsoons, and the journey concluded at the Santa Cruz airport in Bombay.

    “The hardest and more frequent routes were Lydda-Baghdad and Lydda-Teheran,” said Marron.

    A Forced Landing

    “Although the first of these routes was relatively easy in the winter,” explained Marron, “flying conditions would drastically change in the summer, when sandstorms considerably reduced visibility in Baghdad, impeding access to the airport. Sometimes pilots had to land in alternate airfields to wait for the weather conditions in their places of destination to change.

    “Furthermore, high temperatures affected the performance of plane engines. In Baghdad, it was normal to have temperatures between 45ºC and 50ºC in the shade! And not only at noon, but also in the morning and late afternoon. That is why pilots always tried to take off in the night, in order to gain time.

    “Adolfo Diaz Vazquez was the only pilot who had to make a forced landing during the evacuation program. One of the engines of the C-46 he was flying stopped on route between Baghdad and Lydda, at night! Thanks to his vast experience, all the passengers and the plane escaped unharmed. The passengers and the crew were taken to Israel in another plane. Some days later, Eugenio Ramos Escandon flew the plane to Lydda. The aircraft had been repaired by a group of Cuban mechanics under the guidance of Eduardo Segredo Salgado.

    “By the end of 1952, the wave of immigration to Israel decreased and some of the planes that had been used for these ends began flying to European cities: Paris, Rome, Amsterdam, Zurich, London, Athens and Geneva.

    “In early 1953, the group of Cuban pilots returned to Cuba, after having successfully transported almost 150,000 Jewish immigrants to Israel. The crew of these flights wore an insignia with a Cuban flag on their uniforms.

    “The main base of operations of the Intercontinental Aerea de Cuba S.A. Company was always in Cuba, but its planes never flew in the national territory; they never even touched Cuban soil. Part of the money earned in this operation was probably used to bribe the Cuban president at the time, since permits were only granted following a local inspection of the aircrafts.

    Pilots who took part in the evacuation program:

    Manuel Gonzalez Linares, with more than 6,000 hours of flight.

    Eugenio Ramos Escandon, experienced C-46 capatain.

    Guillermo Verdaguer Boan, survivor of a plane crash in which one of his comrades lost his life.

    Miguel Acosta Rosellp.

    Antonio “Nico” Fernandez Martinez

    Adolfo Diaz Vazquez, also known as “Lindbergh,” an aerobatics champion. He was the sixth pilot on Narciso Rosello’s payroll.

    Eduardo Segredo Salgado, the brilliant mechanic of the team.

    The Zionist State of Israel

    When the Second World War ended in 1945, Jewish political organizations led by Theodor Herzl pushed for the creation of a state that should have its capital in Jerusalem, Palestine, which was a British protectorate at the time. The plan was to give the Jewish victims of the Nazi genocide a place to start over after the war. It is said that the area was infiltrated by terrorist groups with a view to speeding up the British withdrawal.

    Arab Palestinians, with the support of Eastern Arab states, energetically opposed the plan, which was paradoxically fascist. The wave of immigration had the support of US and British Jewish organizations, and a US-British supervising commission was created for the forced Jewish colonization.

    After the failure of the Conference of Palestine in 1947, England brought the issue to the attention of United Nations, and in November of that year, a plan was drawn up to split the Palestinian territory into two states: a Jewish state and an Arab state. On May 14, 1948, when there were only a few hours left before the British rule was to expire, the Jewish proclaimed the independence of the Hebrew state, and they called it Israel.

    Arab government representatives, who never agreed to the UN ruling, rejected this political decision, giving way to an armed conflict in which the Zionist groups, that were better trained and equipped, managed to expand their domain over a broader area, extending as far as the Jordan River. They would later gain more and more ground.

    The foundation in 1948 of the Zionist state in the heart of the Arab region was the beginning of the historic suffering of the Palestinian people, which has come to be one of the most heartbreaking contemporary conflicts in the world.

    In 1967, for example, the human cost of the conflict amounted to more than one million displaced Arab Palestinians, their homes and lands given to the Jewish settlers from Europe.

    It is a fact that the state of Israel was founded by splitting up the Palestinian territory inhabited by Arab Palestinians who had been born in those lands, with the objective of bringing justice to the Jewish people but at the cost of a new injustice.

    Israel’s subsequent history has been a history of unstoppable territorial expansionism in order to gain more land and water, and consolidate their privileged geopolitical position.

    , 21.10.2010

    [2]

    In 1951-52, Cuban dictatorship operated Jewish immigration airlift to Israel

    The Cuban newspaper Juventud Rebelde (Rebel Youth) reported that an airlift was organized in the early 1950s by the Cuban company Intercontinental Aérea de Cuba S.A., owned by businessman Narciso V. Roselló Otero, to fly 150 000 Jewish immigrants to Israel (of which 115 000 were from Iraq and 25 000 from Iran).

    These revelations shed light on a little-known operation until now.

    In order to colonize Palestine, the Zionist movement planned to displace not only the European survivors of Nazi persecutions, but also the Jewish populations living in the Middle East.

    To compel Iraqi Jews to emigrate, the Zionist movement mounted an operation in three stages:
    An agreement was reached with pro-British Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Said to force Iraqi Jews to accept a one-way ticket to Israel. On 9 March 1950, Parliament adopted a law requiring that Iraqi Jews leaving the country had to renounce their citizenship in writing and would not be allowed to return.
    From 19 March 1950 to 30 January 1951, a series of bomb attacks targeted the venues of Jewish congregation. The attacks were falsely attributed to the Golden Square officers (who had sided with Germany against the British during World War II). As it is, they had been orchestrated by Israeli intelligence under the direction of Mordechaï Ben Porat (as endorsed in 1956 by Uri Avnery’s Israeli magazine Haolam Hazeh).
    Immediately, an airlift was set up from Cuba by the dictatorial regime of General Fulgencio Batista enabling the evacuation of 115 000 Jews, terrified by the turn of events. Cuban planes and pilots took off from Baghdad stopping over in Nicosia (Cyprus). Towards the end of the operation, planes with a bigger capacity shuttled from Iraq to Israel directly so as to speed up the operation.

    Mordechaï Porat, a terrorist with close ties to David Ben-Gurion, served four times as member of parliament and once as minister without portfolio. In 2001, he was awarded the Israel Prize for the whole of his career and in particular for having pushed Iraqi Jews to emigrate.

    Narciso V. Roselló left Cuba for the United States after the attack on his home at the hands of Fidel Castro’s revolutionaries, who thus confiscated the weapons that they used to conquer Havana and overthrow General Batista.

    ==

    “Pilotos cubanos en la Tierra Santa”, by Luis Hernández Serrano, Juventud Rebelde, 16 October 2010.

    Bibliography:
    Ropes of Sand : America’s Failure in the Middle East, by Wilbur Crane Eveland, WW Norton & Co (1981, 382 p.), ISBN-13 : 978-0393013368.
    Ben Gurion’s Scandal : How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews, by Naeim Giladi, Dandelion Books,U.S. (Seconde edition 2003, 364 p.), ISBN-13 : 978-1893302402.

    https://www.voltairenet.org/article167398.html, 24 OCTOBER 2010

  • Proposed NATO defense shield in Turkey highly suspicious

    Proposed NATO defense shield in Turkey highly suspicious

    Proposed NATO defense shield in Turkey highly suspicious: Iran

    Tehran Times Political Desk

    Mehmanparast

    TEHRAN – A proposal by NATO to establish a new ballistic missile defense shield in Turkey is “seriously suspicious”, the Iranian Foreign Ministry announced on Tuesday.

    “We think NATO’s aim to deploy military forces in the region is seriously suspicious,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told a weekly press briefing.

    Mehmanparast added, “We think the stationing of NATO military forces would disrupt security in the region.”

    He went on to say that the regional countries are able to maintain their own security and “they have no need to foreigners”.

    At a meeting last week, NATO members discussed a proposal presented by the United States to establish a new ballistic missile defense shield in Turkey.

    Turkish officials say they will analyze and deliberate on all the possible outcomes and implications of the proposed plan before reaching a decision.

    Iran confirms financial assistance to Afghanistan

    After President Hamid Karzai admitted receiving aid from Iran a Foreign Ministry official in Tehran confirmed that the Islamic Republic gives aid to Afghanistan in reconstructing the war-ravaged country.

    “The Islamic Republic of Iran, as a neighboring country is deeply concerned about Afghanistan’s stability, and has given much assistance for the reconstruction of Afghanistan,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters.

    “The Islamic Republic of Iran has done its part in helping Afghanistan rebuild and develop its economy and will do so in the future,” Mehmanparast explained.

    Karzai insisted at a news conference in Kabul on Monday that the payments to his chief of staff were transparent payments for his presidential office.

    The New York Times reported on Saturday that Karzai’s chief of staff, Umar Daudzai, received regular cash payments from Iran.

    Karzai angrily denied that the payments were secret.

    Cash payments “are done by various friendly countries to help the president’s office… this is transparent,” Karzai said Monday, according to AFP.

    “This is nothing hidden. We are grateful for Iranian help in this regard. The United States is doing the same thing. They’re providing cash to some of our offices.”

    He said Iran has assisted his government with up to 700,000 euros once or twice a year in the form of official aid.

    “He (Daudzai) is receiving the money on my instructions,” he added

  • Turkey faces risks over ‘Iran policy,’ experts say

    Turkey faces risks over ‘Iran policy,’ experts say

    Turkey is taking a risk with its strategy to avoid viewing Iran as a threat within NATO plans for a missile defense system and its lack of precautions in the face of Tehran’s armament, according to experts.

    “A country can’t make its plans according to intentions. We might enjoy good relations with Iran but this can change, just as the good relations during the shah times between

    Turkey is taking a risk with its strategy to avoid viewing Iran as a threat within NATO plans for a missile defense system and its lack of precautions in the face of Tehran’s armament, according to experts.

    “A country can’t make its plans according to intentions. We might enjoy good relations with Iran but this can change, just as the good relations during the shah times between Washington and Tehran changed,” said former army official Serdar Erdurmaz.

    “What counts for NATO are not intentions but capabilities,” said Ümit Pamir, Turkey’s former envoy to NATO.

    “What is important is not whether Iran will use its ballistic missiles against Turkey. Actually, I as well do not believe that Iran will attack Turkey. What matters is not the actual threat but the perception. Iran’s influence will increase as its armaments efforts continue, and if you don’t counterbalance that armament effort, your political influence will automatically diminish,” said Ahmet Han, an international relations expert from Istanbul’s Kadir Has University.

    Erdurmaz, who is now working for the Turkish Center for International Relations and Strategic Analysis, or TÜRKSAM, recalled that Turkey was seeking to purchase anti-missile defense system through its own means. A tender for the purchase of a long-range air and missile defense system was opened in 2007 by the Undersecretariat of Defense, said Erdurmaz, but said the plans were later suspended due to its high cost.

    “The most economic way of counterbalancing Iranian armament efforts is to accept the system that will be endorsed by NATO. Refusing this offer from NATO is jeopardizing Turkey’s long-term interests, and is not clever at all,” said Han.

    Experts also recalled that Turkey was among alliance members to ask the United States to incorporate its anti-missile plans within NATO. When the U.S. administration under George W. Bush devised an anti-missile plan, which envisaged the deployment of key elements in Poland and Czech Republic, Turkey was among alliance members to ask Washington to incorporate its plans with NATO, said Pamir. Like some other members of the alliance, Turkey was concerned by Russia’s reaction to the Bush plans and thought it would be better to have a missile defense system within NATO.

    Pamir is one of the 12 wise men tasked by NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen with preparing a report on the new strategic concept that will be endorsed by NATO at its next summit in November. The report about the road map on the challenges and missions of the alliance specifically named Iran as a threat to the alliance. “But the NATO secretary-general does not have to endorse this view. He has prepared his own proposal,” Pamir said.

    If Turkey blocks NATO plans to have an anti-missile mechanism, it will lift the debates on Turkey’s shifting axis to a whole new level, said Han. After the stalemate with the EU, troubles with NATO will further fuel debates on Turkey’s policies, Han believes. He said this would contradict Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu’s logic that the reason Turkey is influential in the East stems from its influence in the West.

    Meanwhile, internal dynamics are also playing a role in Turkey’s policy choices on Iran’s armament efforts.

    Han argued that the government’s “zero problems with neighbors” policy aims to de-militarize foreign relations in order to keep the army at a low profile. “In order to counterbalance Iran’s army you need to do it by military means, which means you have to give credit to the army and raise its profile.” Han said the government’s internal policies overlook long-term international relations, despite the fact that it will be to the detriment of Turkey’s long-term interests.hurriyet

    via Turkey faces risks over ‘Iran policy,’ experts say.