The Origins and Future of the Mideast Conflict Over Israel

Why is there so much unrest in the Middle East? Why do we see constant strife between the Israelis and their neighbors? The answers to these questions didn't begin with the formation of the state of Israel in 1948. The history of these conflicts goes back 4,000 years and is recorded in a place many people would never think to look - the Bible!

Many have long envisioned the Middle East as an exotic, faraway mixture of the ancient past and the modern world. This area of conflict between Arab and Jew is the land of the Bible, of Moses and Jesus, of prophets bringing messages of God's wrath and apostles proclaiming God's love.

The United States has been politically, economically and sometimes militarily involved in the Middle East for decades. It supported the United Nations' creation of the state of Israel in 1948, and U.S. dollars and military hardware helped Israel to win its wars with Arab neighbors.

America's roller-coaster relationship with Arab nations has run the gamut from alliance to hostility. In 1956 the United States was instrumental in putting pressure on Great Britain, France and Israel to withdraw from the Suez Canal after a military strike that seized the waterway from Egypt. It was a U.S.-led coalition that drove the Iraqis from Kuwait during the Gulf War of the early 1990s, and another that toppled Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in 2003.

The horrifying attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dramatically raised American consciousness of the age-old conflicts of the Middle East. Westerners are trying to understand the reasons for the hatred between Arab and Jew and why it spilled over into the Western world.

For students of biblical prophecy these and similar events aren't a complete surprise. The Middle East is the focal point of biblical prophecy. Jerusalem is where Jesus the Messiah delivered the gospel of the Kingdom of God, and it is where He promises to return to set up that Kingdom.

Over the centuries, the land of Israel has been at the center of conflict between Arabs and the Israelites—and between foreign powers vying for control of the area. Let's consider the origins of this conflict—and where it is headed.

Ancient animosities rooted in the family of Abraham

The Bible contains a great deal of information concerning the roots of the bad blood between Israeli and Arab.

The Arab peoples comprise numerous clans and tribes. Many historians trace the peoples of the southern Arabian Peninsula to the biblical figure Joktan (Genesis:10:25-30), who was born five generations before the patriarch Abraham. Other Arab peoples are descendants of Abraham's nephew Lot, who fled Sodom—those of Moab and Ammon. But to really understand the history of the Arab peoples, we must study the life of Abraham.

We begin our search some 4,000 years ago in the city of Ur near the Euphrates River in the Fertile Crescent. It was in this crescent-shaped strip stretching from the Persian Gulf to the Egyptian Nile that the first great civilizations appeared.

In Ur the Creator appeared to a man named Abram who would become a central figure in Judaism, Christianity and Islam. God's relationship with Abram starts in Genesis:12:1-3: "Now the Lord had said to Abram: 'Get out of your country, from your family and from your father's house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation . . .'"

Genesis 16 contains the fascinating, but ultimately tragic, story of the attempt of Abram and his wife Sarai to bring about God's promise through human means. Since it was physically impossible for Sarai to bear children, she gave an Egyptian servant girl to Abram as a surrogate mother. The child of this union was named Ishmael. For 13 years Ishmael was probably told that he was the son of promise, the recipient of God's promises to Abram.

God appeared again to Abram as we read in Genesis:17:1-2: "When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, 'I am Almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless. And I will make My covenant between Me and you, and will multiply you exceedingly.'"

God renamed him Abraham and made an amazing promise to him—his descendants would be a special people for God's purposes for generations. God previously told Abraham that in him all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Genesis:12:3). The promise also included the land of Canaan (Genesis:17:8)—the geographically diverse strip of land running along the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea.

God reestablished His covenant with Abraham, but there was another promise that would come as a shock to this man to whom God had promised so much: "Then God said to Abraham, 'As for Sarai your wife . . . I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her'" (verses 15-16).

God's statements seemed incredible. Not only had Sarai, now renamed Sarah, been barren all her life, but she was now well past normal childbearing age. What God was promising could only happen through divine intervention. Besides, Abraham already had a son, whom he loved dearly (verse 18).

What about Ishmael?

Abraham had believed for many years that Ishmael was the son of promise, but the Sovereign Lord of history informed him that He had other plans. It was always God's plan for the son of promise to come from Abraham and Sarah. The use of Hagar as a surrogate was of their devising, not God's.

What an important lesson! How many times do we proceed with our own ideas of God's will, while in reality He has totally different plans? Abraham and Sarah tried to fulfill God's promise by human means on a human timetable. What happened next shaped the history of many generations.

God promised a son to Abraham through his wife Sarah, but what about Ishmael? Abraham asked God if Ishmael could be the son of promise. God's answer is recorded in Genesis:17:19-20:

"Then God said: 'No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him. And as for Ishmael, I have heard you. Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall beget twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation.'"

As God promised, Sarah miraculously became pregnant and gave birth to Isaac. The hurt and resentment between the mothers of the two boys led to Sarah demanding that Ishmael and his mother Hagar be sent away into the wilderness—and Abraham acquiescing at God's direction.

The young man—again, likely told since childhood that he was the son of promise—found himself an outcast from his father. This set the stage for generations of strife between him and Abraham's new son, Isaac. Ishmael went on to become the father of many Arab tribes and nations. (Later, after Sarah's death, Abraham married a woman named Keturah and had other children through her. Other people groups, including smaller Arab tribes like the Midianites, came through descendants of these later children, as described in Genesis:25:1-6.)

A new generation of strife

The biblical story doesn't end with Ishmael and Isaac. One generation later there was competition between the sons of Isaac—Jacob and Esau. Before their birth God explained that "the older shall serve the younger" (Genesis:25:23). Genesis 25 goes on to record how the eldest, Esau, sold his birthright to his fraternal twin Jacob.

In Genesis 27 we find the oft-told story of how Jacob tricked his old and blind father Isaac into giving him the birthright blessing. It would be through Jacob's lineage that God would fulfill His covenant with Abraham.

Esau's hatred for what he perceived as a theft of his birthright drove him to plot Jacob's murder. Jacob fled for his life, living estranged from his family for many years.

The descendants of Jacob would become known as the Israelites. Esau, also known as Edom, became the father of the people the Bible calls the Edomites or Idumeans. The relationship between these two peoples has at times been peaceful and at other times bordered on genocide. Some of today's Arabs are evidently of Edomite descent—as are other people in the Middle East.

Islam and the Crusades

By A.D. 610 the Arab peoples of the Middle East were divided into numerous tribes, all steeped in pagan practices of that part of the world. It was in that year, during the month of Ramadan, that Muhammad received the first in a series of what he proclaimed were divine revelations. These eventually became the basis of the Muslim holy book, the Qur'an or Koran.

The Koran contains alternative stories of such biblical notables as Noah, Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Job, Jonah, Saul, David, Solomon, Mary and Jesus. Muhammad claimed that Islam was a return to the religion of Abraham while Judaism and Christianity were corruptions of this true religion. In Islam's interpretation of God's plan, Ishmael takes on the role of the son of promise rather than Jacob.

The Koran presents radical differences from the Bible concerning God's interaction with mankind. These differences are most apparent in the Koran's explanation of the nature of Jesus Christ.

Christians believe that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, the Messiah foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures, who would come to save humanity. While some in Judaism may accept the first-century Jesus of Nazareth as a special rabbi, and Muslims accept Him as a prophet, Christians ascribe to Jesus the remarkable status of divinity in a personal relationship with the Father. To devout Muslims, this is polytheism and heresy.

While Jews believe that the Holy Land was promised to them through God's covenant with Abraham and Isaac, and Muslims believe that Allah promised it to them through Abraham and Ishmael, European Christians of the Middle Ages believed that the Holy Land belonged to them because of God's fulfillment of His promise to Abraham in the person of Jesus.

In 1095, Catholic Europe organized an army for a crusade to wrest Jerusalem from Muslim control. After terrible fighting, Jerusalem fell to the Crusaders in 1099. The Muslims continued to battle for the Holy Land and a second crusade was launched in 1147. Finally, in 1291 the Muslims drove the Europeans from the region. Further crusades failed to recapture the city.

One of the saddest incidents in history took place with the "Children's Crusade." Thousands of children from France and Germany began the difficult journey from Europe to take Jerusalem. Many died from disease and starvation; the rest were captured and sold as slaves.

The area around Jerusalem remained in Muslim hands until it came under British jurisdiction after the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I. In 1948 the United Nations approved the formation of the modern state of Israel, and tens of thousands of Jewish refugees from the Nazi concentration camps rushed to their new home.

Many Arabs felt betrayed by Europe and the United States. Ever since then the Arab world and the West have experienced rocky relations—a situation not helped by a succession of wars in the Middle East.

Mideast history written in advance

During the Babylonian captivity of the Jews in the sixth century B.C., God revealed a historical outline of prophecy to the Jewish prophet Daniel.

In Daniel 2 he recorded a vision concerning four great powers that would dominate the Holy Land—the Babylonian, Persian, Greek and Roman empires. Later, God showed Daniel details concerning these empires. The first 14 verses of Daniel 8 chronicle Daniel's vision of a ram and a goat. Daniel wrote of a two-horned ram attacked by a male goat, arriving from the west, with a large horn between his eyes.

There have been many attempts to explain these passages. An important rule of Bible study is to let the Bible interpret itself. In this same chapter an angel appeared to Daniel and told him the meaning of the vision. Daniel wrote what the angel said in verses 19-22:

"Look, I am making known to you what shall happen in the latter time of the indignation; for at the appointed time the end shall be. The ram which you saw, having the two horns—they are the kings of Media and Persia. And the male goat is the kingdom of Greece. The large horn that is between its eyes is the first king. As for the broken horn and the four that stood up in its place, four kingdoms shall arise out of that nation, but not with its power."

This incredible prophetic passage concerns events that occurred more than two centuries after the time of Daniel. The Babylonian Empire of Daniel's day was overthrown by the Medo-Persian Empire. Centuries after Daniel received this vision, the Greeks, under Alexander the Great, would invade and conquer Persia.

The "large horn" of the male goat is this "first king" of the Greek Empire, Alexander the Great. At the height of his power Alexander suddenly died and his empire was divided among four of his generals, fulfilling the prophecies of Daniel 8.

But there's more, as we see in the very long prophecy of Daniel 11. By this time Babylon had been conquered by the Persians, and Daniel now served under them. Daniel was once again visited by an angel from God who explained future events.

Notice Daniel:11:2-4: "And now I will tell you the truth: Behold, three more kings will arise in Persia, and the fourth shall be far richer than them all; by his strength, through his riches, he shall stir up all against the realm of Greece. Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.

"And when he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken up and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not among his posterity nor according to his dominion with which he ruled; for his kingdom shall be uprooted, even for others besides these."

After Daniel's time there would be numerous Persian kings, but these three would be prominent in the history of the empire. A fourth king would undertake a war with Greece. This was the famous Xerxes. The Persian Empire would prosper, but it would eventually fall to a Greek monarch whose kingdom would be divided into four parts. Again, the reference here, as in Daniel 8, is to Alexander the Great, whose empire was "broken up and divided" among four of his generals.

It is important to understand that most biblical prophecy is in relationship to Jerusalem. Daniel:11:5-39 records prophecies concerning the "king of the South" and the "king of the North."

History shows that these prophecies were fulfilled in the descendants of two of Alexander's generals, the Ptolemies (who ruled from Egypt, south of Jerusalem, as the kings of the South) and the Seleucids (who ruled from Syria, north of Jerusalem, as the kings of the North). These two dynasties marched in numerous wars for control of the Middle East for a long time, with dominion over the land of Israel passing back and forth between them until the Maccabean resistance led the Jews to independence in the 160s B.C.

The future of the Middle East

In Daniel:11:40 the prophecy skips ahead to the time just prior to Jesus Christ's return. Here the players have shifted.

The northern Seleucid kingdom was ultimately absorbed into the Roman Empire—an empire that has been revived numerous times in the history of Europe, with one final revival remaining, according to other prophecies. Thus, the final king of the North will be head over a new European-centered superpower. Egypt was also absorbed by the Roman Empire but it later became part of a southern power bloc again with the Muslim conquests. So it appears that the final king of the South will be a leader from the Arab world.

Daniel records: "At the time of the end the king of the South shall attack him [the northern ruler]; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter the countries, overwhelm them, and pass through. He shall also enter the Glorious Land [the land of Israel], and many countries shall be overthrown; but these shall escape from his hand: Edom, Moab, and the prominent people of Ammon [these designating the area of modern Jordan].

"He [the northern ruler] shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape. He shall have power over the treasures of gold and silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; also the Libyans and Ethiopians shall follow at his heels. But news from the east and the north shall trouble him; therefore he shall go out with great fury to destroy and annihilate many. And he shall plant the tents of his palace between the seas and [or in] the glorious holy mountain [Jerusalem, between the Dead and Mediterranean Seas]; yet he shall come to his end, and no one will help him" (verses 40-45).

So it appears that an Arab leader of the south will launch an attack against the European superpower of the north, triggering a European invasion and occupation of North Africa and other areas of the Middle East—with Jerusalem set up as the northern leader's new headquarters.

When does this takeover of Egypt and much of the Arab world—as well as Israel—by the king of the North take place? In Revelation:11:1-2 the apostle John is inspired to write that at the time just before the return of the Messiah the "holy city," Jerusalem, will be occupied by outside forces for 42 months or 3 1⁄2 years.

At the conclusion of those 3 1⁄2 years, the stage is set for the greatest battle in human history. Armies of this prophesied king of the North and hordes from the East, mentioned elsewhere, gather in Israel for what is commonly called the battle of Armageddon, but which the Bible refers to as "the battle of that great day of God Almighty" (Revelation:16:14).

We all need to remain alert. Some Islamic leaders claim that a successor of Muhammad will come and unite the Muslim world in preparation for God's final judgment. Jews wait for the coming of the Messiah to restore their birthright. Many Christians await the return of Jesus as the Messiah to rule from Jerusalem. The irony is that many Muslims, Jews and Christians won't recognize the Messiah when He does come to establish God's Kingdom!

Watch events in the Middle East, for this is the focal point of biblical prophecy!

Turmoil: What's Behind the Unrest Sweeping the Middle East?

Riots and demonstrations have left governments trembling across North Africa and the Middle East. Is democracy about to triumph in the region, or could we see a very different outcome, one indicated by Bible prophecy?

A century ago, writes historian David Fromkin in his landmark book A Peace to End All Peace, "Few Europeans . . . knew or cared what went on in the languid empires of the Ottoman Sultan or the Persian Shah" (1989, p. 25).

It's hard to believe now, but a hundred years ago there was little interest in the Middle East or North Africa. Few "knew or cared what went on" there.

But in the last century everything has changed.

Oil is one reason. This is where most of the world's oil reserves are, so Western countries have gotten themselves involved in the area to guarantee their petroleum supplies.

Another reason is Israel. Before 1948 there had been no Jewish state in the Middle East for almost 2,000 years. All across North Africa and throughout the Middle East, Islam has been the dominant religion for 14 centuries, with scattered Christian and Jewish minorities here and there. The sudden birth of an independent Jewish country brought with it the hostility of hundreds of millions of Arabs across the region and has led to a number of conflicts since.

Without a doubt, the establishment of Israel raised the temperature in the area.

"War to end all wars" gives way to "Peace to end all peace"

World War I was a third cause of today's complex Middle East. Before 1914 the region was ruled by "the Ottoman Sultan or the Persian Shah," as Fromkin put it, but after World War I this vast region was divided into 22 Arab nations, which are hostile to Iran (Persia) as well as Israel—and a number even have serious hostility toward each other!

The inspiration for Fromkin's book title comes from World War I being described as "the war to end all wars." After the peace treaties were signed, Field Marshal Earl Wavell, an officer who served under the victorious British General Edmund Allenby in the Middle East, commented prophetically, "After 'the war to end war' they seem to have been pretty successful in Paris at making a 'Peace to end Peace.'" Almost a century later, the region continues to be the world's main source of war, following centuries of relative peace under the Ottomans.

Desire to reestablish caliphate

A further reason should be added—the desire of Osama bin Laden and others to restore the Islamic caliphate that once covered the entire region and beyond. The caliphate—an Islamic empire ruled by a caliph, or spiritual successor to Muhammad —has not existed for almost a century since it was abolished in the aftermath of Turkey's defeat in World War I.

In the minds of the Islamic extremists like Bin Laden, there will be no peace until the caliphate is restored. Their hope is that the current turmoil is leading in that direction. Their dream is of an ummah, a united Islamic community under one caliph, living under sharia (Islamic law)—encompassing at first all lands that are and have been Muslim, stretching from Spain to Indonesia, and eventually the entire world.

Although Bible prophecy is very clear on the final outcome of the turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa, it does not give a great deal of detail about events between now and then. It does, however, give us an outline to which we should pay close attention.

And clearly, the Middle East is at the center of Bible prophecy.

Coming turmoil centering on the Middle East

When the disciples asked Jesus Christ about the events that would lead to His second coming, He replied, "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near" (Luke:21:20).

Jerusalem has been fought over more than any other single city in the world. In the last century it has been at the center of regional warfare on four separate occasions (1917, 1948, 1967 and 1973), with relatively minor skirmishes even more frequent. The Temple Mount in the heart of Old Jerusalem is the most disputed piece of real estate in the world, sacred to Jews as the site of the temples built by Solomon, Zerubbabel and Herod the Great and to Muslims as the location from which Muhammad is thought to have ascended to heaven.

Old Testament prophecies show that the Jews (the biblical tribe of Judah) would be settled again in the Holy Land prior to Christ's return. And Judah figures prominently in end-time events: "Behold, the day of the Lord is coming . . . For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem . . . Then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations . . . And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east . . . Judah also will fight at Jerusalem" (Zechariah:14:1-4, 14).

Clearly this prophecy is set in the future.

The city is also central to the Christian faith as the site of Jesus Christ's death, burial and resurrection and many other events from His life and ministry. Nations beyond the Middle East have historically had vested interests in the area.

Interestingly, at this present time, hundreds of millions of Christians expect the second coming of the Messiah in their lifetimes, while many Jews expect His first coming, and hundreds of millions of Muslims are expecting their messianic figure, the Mahdi or "Guided One," to come. This of course adds to the Mideast cauldron and further complicates matters.

Demonstrations, riots rock the Middle East

Added to all these are the many recent upheavals in the region.

These were enabled in large part by a problem that's widespread in the region—financial distress leaving many, especially the young, feeling disenfranchised. Demonstrations and riots across the region have been triggered by organizers exploiting growing unemployment among the young and rising food prices.

Of course, the Middle East isn't the only area with this problem. Similar demonstrations and riots have been incited across Europe as austerity measures are being introduced; and demonstrations in some U.S. cities against government cutbacks fall into the same category. Millions of people everywhere feel poor and disadvantaged and are fighting for the basic human needs of food, jobs and housing.

A feeling of despair led Mohamed Bouazizi in Tunisia to set himself alight on Dec. 17, 2010, triggering demonstrations and riots. Exactly four weeks later, Tunisia's president fled to Saudi Arabia after almost 24 years in power, ending one of North Africa's many dictatorships. All Bouazizi wanted to do was provide for his family, but petty officials kept demanding bribes from him to continue his business, a situation all too common across the world.

With Tunisia as a catalyst, unrest spread to Egypt, leading to the same result—the collapse of a dictatorship that had lasted more than 30 years. The unrest rapidly spread to other countries across the region—nations that quickly either announced reforms or chose heavy-handed crackdowns in an attempt to remain in power.

Demonstrations across the Middle East were uniformly stirred up over high unemployment, rising food prices, a lack of basic freedoms, generally poor living conditions and a sense of hopelessness.

In the West, hopes arose for the spread of democracy and freedom, and that this would be another year of liberating revolutions, just as 1989 was across the communist world, leading to freer societies.

Many in North Africa and the Middle East also wanted democracy, but not necessarily Western-style democracy. Democracy is associated with affluence, which is positive. But what about equal rights for women and for all religions? That's not likely to happen anywhere in the Arab world!

Sobering realities behind events in Egypt

Writing in The Wall Street Journal on March 29, 2011, Mideast expert and former editor of The Jerusalem Post Bret Stephens wrote the following in an article titled "Egypt—the Hangover": "'The West seems to be convinced that the revolution was led by secular democratic forces,' says (my Egyptian friend) Mahmoud. 'Now that myth is shattered. Which means that either the old order'—by which he means the military regime—'stays in power, or we're headed for Islamist dominance.'

"Egypt's Copts, some 15% of the population and the largest non-Muslim group anywhere in the Middle East, have good reasons to be worried. Though the protestors at Tahrir made a show of interfaith solidarity, the sense of fellowship is quickly returning to the poisonous pre-Tahrir norm. Earlier this month a Coptic church south of Cairo was burned to the ground, apparently on account of an objectionable Coptic-Muslim romance. The episode would seem almost farcical if it weren't so commonplace in Egypt, and if it didn't so often have fatal results.

"The threat to the Coptic community is also a reminder that beyond the Muslim Brotherhood there are Egypt's still more extreme Salafis [Islamic originalists, so to speak]. 'The issue is not that they have gotten stronger since the revolution,' Mahmoud explains. 'It is that they are getting bolder. There is no counterbalance to their street dominance in certain poor neighborhoods. They're not scared of the government. They're not scared of being prosecuted.'

"Ahmed, another friend of Mahmoud, stops by to say hello. A graphic designer, Ahmed got a coveted job at an ad agency two days before the protests began in Tahrir, was laid off just a few days later, and remains unemployed today. Though it's now generally forgotten, the past seven years were economically good for Egypt thanks to the liberalizing program of former Prime Minister Ahmed Nafiz—a classic case, in hindsight, of revolutions being the product of rising expectations.

"But now that's in the past. Foreign investors are wary of Egypt, as are tourists, and the military junta currently ruling the state has embarked on a witch hunt against people who belonged to the 'businessmen's cabinet' that gave Egypt its fleeting years of growth but now serve as convenient bogeymen for a military eager to affirm its populist bona fides [with a populace favoring Islamic fundamentalism].

"Later I return to the hotel to listen to U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Ambassador Margaret Scobey deliver upbeat assessments about developments in the country. Who are you going to believe: Secular Egyptians themselves or the crew who, just a few weeks ago, was saying the Mubarak regime was in no danger of collapse?"

Certainly, the current turmoil could lead to the triumph of Islamic extremists, which would give the United States more enemies like Iran. But there the similarity to Iran ends. Iran is overwhelmingly Shia Islam, while Arab countries are mostly Sunni Islam, and historically the two have rarely gotten along. About 85 percent of Muslims are Sunnis. Shiites are a minority and have felt persecuted for almost 14 centuries. A clash between the two would be a major conflict, disrupting oil supplies and making the world a much more dangerous place.

U.S. intervention constrained

Also writing in The Wall Street Journal, Robert Kaplan, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, wrote in his March 26, 2011, article titled "The Middle East Crisis Has Just Begun": "The United States may be a democracy, but it is also a status quo power, whose position in the world depends on the world staying as it is. In the Middle East, the status quo is unsustainable because populations are no longer afraid of their rulers.

"Every country is now in play. Even in Syria, with its grisly security services, widespread demonstrations have been reported and protesters killed. There will be no way to appease the region's rival sects, ethnicities and other interest groups except through some form of democratic representation, but anarchic quasi-democracy will satisfy no one. Other groups will emerge, and they may be distinctly illiberal.

"Whatever happens in Libya, it is not necessarily a bellwether for the Middle East. The Iranian green movement [calling for democratic reform in Iran] knows that Western air forces and navies are not about to bomb Iran in the event of a popular uprising, so it is unclear what lesson we are providing to the region. Because outside of Iran, and with the arguable exceptions of Syria and Libya itself, there is no short-term benefit for the U.S. in democratic revolts in the region. In fact, they could be quite destructive to our interests, even as they prove to be unstoppable."

While Western media is focused primarily on Libya's growing conflict and Western imposition of a no-fly zone, we should remember that other conflicts have not gone away. As Robert Kaplan puts it:

"Our most important national-security resource is the time that our top policy makers can devote to a problem, so it is crucial to avoid distractions. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the fragility of Pakistan, Iran's rush to nuclear power, a possible Israeli military response—these are all major challenges that have not gone away. This is to say nothing of rising Chinese naval power and Beijing's ongoing attempt to Finlandize much of East Asia.

"We should not kid ourselves. In foreign policy, all moral questions are really questions of power. We intervened twice in the Balkans in the 1990s only because Yugoslav dictator Slobodan Milosevic had no nuclear weapons and could not retaliate against us, unlike the Russians, whose destruction of Chechnya prompted no thought of intervention on our part (nor did ethnic cleansing elsewhere in the Caucasus, because it was in Russia's sphere of influence).

"At present, helping the embattled Libyan rebels does not affect our interests, so we stand up for human rights there. But helping Bahrain's embattled Shia, or Yemen's anti-regime protesters, would undermine key allies, so we do nothing as demonstrators are killed in the streets" (ibid).

The simple fact is that America cannot be consistent in supporting democracy in the Middle East and maintain its dominance of the region.

Support for democratic movements could easily backfire and lead to anti-Western governments coming to power, including Islamic extremists. If the United States is to maintain its superpower status in the world, it must continue to dominate the Middle East, the major source of the world's energy supply, as well as a strategically located region at the crossroads of three continents—Europe, Asia and Africa. A great deal is at stake for the Western world in the region.

Daniel's prophecy of conflict between two empires

Bible prophecy shows that two new major powers will soon be players in the Middle East. New, that is, in the modern world. But they are reborn or resurrected powers from the past in the same sense that Israel is.

Following two Jewish revolts that were crushed by the Romans in A.D. 70 and A.D. 135, the Jews were dispersed throughout the world until the birth of a new Jewish nation-state in 1948. God revealed to the biblical prophet Daniel events that would befall the Jewish people in the centuries ahead.

Daniel was a captive in Babylon during the time of King Nebuchadnezzar and his successors on the Babylonian throne. He survived the fall of Babylon in October 539 B.C. and lived into the time of the Persian conquest under Cyrus the Great, when Babylon was put under the rule of Darius the Mede.

Daniel 11 contains a most astounding prophecy, so detailed it can only have been revealed by God. In the time of Darius the Mede (verse 1), Daniel prophesied about the coming conflict between Persia and Greece, revealing that "a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion"—a prophecy about Alexander the Great, who was to live two centuries after these words were written.

"And when he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken up and divided toward the four winds of heaven"—a reference to the fact that Alexander's death in 323 B.C. at age 32 led to the division of his empire among four of his generals.

Two of these generals are of particular importance biblically.

One was Seleucus who took possession of vast territories to the east of Antioch, north of Jerusalem. The empire, established in 312 B.C., stretched across to India and Afghanistan and included all of what had been Persia and most of Babylon. Seleucus and his successors are referred to in the chapter as the king of the North. Their empire was to last until the Romans conquered it nearly 250 years later, making it a province in 63 B.C.

To the south of Jerusalem was the dynasty of another of Alexander's generals, Ptolemy. This dynasty lasted three centuries, until the death of the famous Queen Cleopatra in 30 B.C., after which her empire was annexed by Rome. This empire is referred to as the king of the South.

Whenever the kings of the North and South went to war, they at times trampled on the Jews who were caught in the middle. Details of the constant conflict between these rulers and their impact on the Holy Land are the substance of chapter 11, encompassing more than 150 years from the time of Alexander until the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who desecrated the temple in Jerusalem in about 168 B.C.

At this point the prophecy ceases to relate the interaction between the two dynasties and the Jews. However, that's not the end of the king of the North or the king of the South.

Biblical end-time prophecies that must come to pass

In verse 40 we see them both back again, now "at the time of the end," when "the king of the South shall attack him"—the king of the North.

Why suddenly "at the time of the end," a term used to describe end-time events that lead into the Second Coming of the Messiah, are these two kings mentioned again?

One reason is because of the restoration of a Jewish nation in the Middle East. For almost 2,000 years there was no Jewish nation there to be impacted by any events, and the whole prophecy was about the Jews and how they would be affected by these powers. Now that the Jewish state (officially called Israel but actually made up of descendants of the ancient Israelite kingdom of Judah, which was distinct from the kingdom of Israel) is back, events in the Middle East are once again relevant to the Jews.

But another reason is that there will once again be major powers to the north and the south of Jerusalem that will come into conflict, a major conflagration that will affect the Jewish people.

The ancient king of the South ruled from Egypt. Out of 22 Arab countries, Egypt is the most populous and has long been the most influential. When King Farouk was overthrown by the military in 1952, the young revolutionaries who came to power influenced similar revolutions throughout the Arab world.

Similarly, the revolution this year (influenced by events in Tunisia) has inspired demonstrations, riots and the fall of governments elsewhere in the Middle East. The latest nation to be convulsed by riots and demonstrations is Syria, which was in a national union with Egypt during the 1960s.

As Bret Stephens explained, the most likely outcome of the current crisis in Egypt is either a victory on the part of Islamic fundamentalists or the continuation of military rule. As the military has been in charge for almost 60 years and has failed to deliver, it seems quite possible that Islamic extremists will eventually triumph, headed by either the Muslim Brotherhood or the Salafis. This also could spread throughout the region.

Could we see a new caliphate?

One possible outcome of events in Egypt and other Arab nations is a partial caliphate of the kind that Osama bin Laden and others envision. It would not stretch from Spain to Indonesia, but it could certainly include many of the countries of North Africa and the Middle East.

Bin Laden himself is a Wahhabi, a member of an extremist and violent sect centered in Saudi Arabia. If the turmoil in the region spreads to Saudi Arabia, the world's major oil producer, the end could be a region very hostile to the West—with devastating results.

It would also likely lead to conflict between Sunnis and Shiites, a conflict that is already taking place in Bahrain, where a Sunni monarch rules over a majority Shia nation. Bahrain is also the site of a major U.S. military base, so the United States is not likely to side with those demanding democracy, as it would be against U.S. interests for the majority to come to power.

To fulfill biblical prophecy, a possible scenario in today's climate is that a powerful "king of the South" will unite various nations of Sunni Islam against a revived "king of the North."

What about the king of the North?

The king of the North in the ancient world was conquered and his territory absorbed by the Romans in the first century B.C.—thus Rome now became, prophetically speaking, the king of the North. The Bible shows that a revival of the Roman Empire will be the next superpower to appear on the world scene, supplanting the United States.

Centered in Europe, this "Beast" power will be a union of 10 "kings" or leaders (Revelation:17:12). "The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast" (verses 12-13).

When the king of the South attacks the king of the North, "the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships" (Daniel:11:40).

It is quite possible that current developments in North Africa and the Middle East may help drive the rise of the final European superpower foretold here. Current events show the urgent need for a stronger Europe, particularly now that the United States is badly overcommitted, financially overstretched and weary of further commitments.

What is happening now may well be a foretaste of events foretold in the last few verses of Daniel 11. Right now, some European nations are involved in NATO's no-fly zone and naval arms blockade against the Libyan regime of Muammar Gaddafi, who has been provoking them for the best part of 40 years.

Britain and France are cooperating against Libya. The United States, already fighting in two major conflicts in the region, is reluctantly providing the largest share of military assets to the NATO effort. Tellingly, Germany is staying out of it. The most powerful European nation seems to be set on a go-it-alone foreign policy. As Germany will almost certainly be one of the 10 nations forming the final Beast power, this is an interesting development in itself.

Whether or not the current turmoil brings us right into events foretold in Daniel 11, the prophesied events are sure to come in the not-too-distant future. We certainly need to keep our eyes focused on the Middle East and these developments!

The End of Empires

History proves all nations and empires eventually collapse and fail. But a government is coming that will never fail! Learn more!

Why does the Middle East dominate the headlines so often?

One obvious answer is oil, the lifeblood of modern economies. Without oil to run factories, heat homes, fuel transportation and provide energy and raw materials for thousands of uses, the economies of many nations would grind to a halt. The crucial importance of oil alone ensures that the Middle East will remain in the headlines for years.

But there's more that keeps the Middle East in the news. It is the birthplace of the world's three great monotheistic religions—Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Too often it has not been just their birthplace, but their battlefield, with adherents warring against each other for control of territory they consider holy.

Nowhere are these conflicts more obvious than in Israel, and specifically in Jerusalem. It's hard to imagine how so much history, religion and culture can collide and stand in literal heaps. Nowhere is this more evident than at the Temple Mount, flash point for many a conflict over the centuries.

Today one can watch Muslims praying at the Dome of the Rock atop the Temple Mount, Jews praying at the Western Wall barely a stone's throw below and Christians praying along the Via Dolorosa and at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher a few hundred yards to the north and west. And all around one sees the rubble of the centuries of conflict over this holy place.

Who will write the next chapter in the history of this troubled city? Believe it or not, the final chapters are already written—prophesied centuries ago in the pages of the Bible. Ominously, they mesh remarkably well with today's headlines.