The Evangelical Pope | A Humane Future Before God

Each week we let Saint Pope John Paul II share meaningful signposts to spark socio-economic resolves through justice and righteousness combined with mercy and compassion; in short, love.

               33 The God of peace be with you all. Amen.

               __ Romans 15: 33

Kavelaer, Germany, 2 May 1987 | Achieving peace in our world, which humankind longs for, requires more than just political conferences, treaties, or détente policies, no matter how important they are.

Above all, our troubled world seeks the peace of Christ, especially when individuals are ready to let go of sin. The root cause of all global discord is abandoning God. People who are not at peace with God find it difficult to live harmoniously with others.

Our hope for humanity's future calls for prayer for peace. In this, our human weakness links with God's omnipotence. Our brokenness also serves as a reminder of God's mercy. (Ephesians 2:17)

We are called peacemakers: to overcome injustice, reject violence, and foster understanding and forgiveness. Each person can thus personally contribute to peace among people. Advocate for international understanding, the gradual abolition of all weapons of mass destruction, and collective efforts by all nations for peace and justice worldwide.

Today we present the request for peace among all peoples and a safe, humane future before God (Romans 15:33).

Excerpted from (translated from German):

Apostolische Reise In Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, LOBPREIS PREDIGT VON JOHANNES PAUL II. «Hülsparkstadion» In Kevelaer - Samstag, 2. Mai 1987

https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/de/homilies/1987/documents/hf_jp-ii_hom_19870502_lodi-kevelaer.html

THINK! | A Way to Getting to Know the OTHER and One ANOTHER

I Think Therefore I am" (a Unique Creation in the Image of God!)

I Think NOT, Therefore I'm WHAT? (A Robot in God's Image?)

By: Abraham A. van Kempen

22 December 2025

The unscrupulous sow seeds of misinformation to feed the mindless with propaganda. It becomes alarming when the misinformed believe in their own publicity. It’s like when the blind lead the blind. Of course, in the land of the blind, the one with one eye is king.

Areopagus of the Modern Age

The media can inform billions about various parts of the world and different cultures. Indeed, they have rightly been called "the first Areopagus of the modern age... and for many, their primary source of information, education, guidance, and inspiration.

Please continue reading …

Have a wonderful week,

Abraham A. van Kempen

Senior Editor

Building – Not Burning – the Bridge Foundation, The Hague
A Way to Get to Know the Other and One Another

JEFFREY SACHS: AN OPEN LETTER TO CHANCELLOR MERZ - SECURITY IS INDIVISIBLE AND HISTORY MATTERS

Professor Glenn Diesen’s discussion with Professor Jeffrey Sachs provides an insightful look at Germany's pivotal role in the Ukraine crisis. It emphasizes Germany’s influence on European security and explores its responsibility concerning NATO's expansion. Professor Sachs offers insights into Germany’s participation in NATO’s eastward expansion, despite previous assurances to Russia. This conversation presents a clear and engaging perspective on these critical issues.

It also emphasizes significant events such as Germany's involvement in the 1999 bombing of Belgrade and its reaction to the United States' withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, asserting that these actions have contributed to the present instability. The analysis advocates that Germany consider its historical decisions, recognize its accountability, and engage in more transparent public discourse.

Germany's recognition of Kosovo in 2008 marks a significant milestone. It underscores the persistent tensions stemming from the United States' refusal to join certain agreements, resulting in multiple geopolitical consequences across Europe.

Watch the Video Here (25 minutes, 57 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
19 December 2025

Germany’s Role in European Security and the Ukraine Conflict

Welcome back to the program. Today, we're joined from the airport lounge in Belgrade by Professor Jeffrey Sachs. Renowned for his advisory work to governments around the world and his close relations with many world leaders, Professor Sachs is here to discuss important issues. We're grateful for his taking time in his busy schedule to be with us.

Background and Rationale for the Open Letter

Their discussion is based on Professor Sachs’s recent open letter to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. The letter emphasizes Germany’s crucial role in European security, particularly amid the Ukraine conflict.

Sachs was motivated to write due to the Chancellor’s frequent public remarks, which he interprets as favoring escalation with Russia over diplomatic efforts. Sachs warns that Europe’s current political direction is perilously misguided and self-unaware, with Germany at its heart.

Germany’s Historical Commitments and NATO Expansion

Professor Sachs highlights that in 1990, during German reunification negotiations, German officials repeatedly assured Soviet and Russian leaders that NATO would not expand eastward. This promise was key to enabling German reunification and was seen as a safeguard against future instability. Sachs argues that later, both Germany and the U.S. betrayed these commitments, allowing NATO to expand into Eastern Europe and the Baltics, and raising concerns about further expansion into Ukraine and Georgia. He considers this breach a fundamental cause of the current conflict, not just a minor historical detail.

Germany’s Ongoing Role in the Ukraine Crisis

In his letter, Sachs urges Chancellor Merz to evaluate Germany’s actions and responsibilities honestly. He encourages German leaders to consider their country’s role in escalating the Ukraine conflict, instead of sticking to rhetoric that increases tensions. Sachs emphasizes that Germany should recognize its key role in the crisis, understand its historical background, and speak the truth rather than promote a confrontational narrative.

Additional Examples of German Involvement

Professor Sachs offers additional examples of what he considers German misjudgment or a lack of accountability. He highlights Germany’s involvement in the 1999 NATO bombing of Belgrade—an action he deems illegal due to the absence of United Nations approval. He also criticizes Germany’s silence during the US withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002, which Sachs views as significantly destabilizing for nuclear arms control. Furthermore, he cites Germany’s recognition of Kosovo’s independence in 2008 as a factor contributing to the current, fractured, and unstable security situation in Europe.

Germany’s Responsibility and the NATO Enlargement

A senior Biden administration official emphasized that the war in Ukraine would not have occurred if NATO expansion had been rejected. This underscores the argument presented to Chancellor Mertz that Germany must acknowledge its crucial role in the ongoing crisis. The message calls on Germany to reflect on its historical and current involvement, avoid war-related language, and foster honesty in public conversations.

Germany’s Historical Actions and Failures

Several episodes highlight Germany’s lack of reflection and accountability:

• In 1999, Germany, a NATO member, took part in the 78-day bombing of Belgrade, an operation carried out without United Nations approval. This demonstrated significant power and breached international law.
• Germany stayed silent when the United States unilaterally exited the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002, a move that undermined the stability of the nuclear arms control framework.
• The context of NATO expansion should be viewed in light of a fractured nuclear stability, for which the U.S. and its allies are responsible.
• Germany acknowledged Kosovo’s independence in 2008 after NATO's bombing, which contradicts Europe's common stance on inviolable borders.
• Germany participated in the 2008 Bucharest NATO Summit, where the alliance announced its intention to eventually admit Ukraine and Georgia, despite notable public opposition in Ukraine and concerns from Chancellor Angela Merkel regarding the risks associated with this move.

The Maidan Uprising and the Minsk Agreements

Germany’s involvement in the 2014 Maidan uprising is also examined. Alongside Poland and France, the German foreign minister negotiated a deal with Ukraine’s President Yanukovych aimed at restoring stability and scheduling elections later in the year. Yet, within hours, protesters supported by the United States took control of government buildings and established an extra-constitutional government, with Germany neither resisting nor condemning these actions.

The conflict in Donbas erupted when the region opposed the new government, and the regime suppressed the ethnic Russian population. In early 2015, Germany and France endorsed the Minsk II agreement, which proposed granting autonomy to the Donbas region within Ukraine. Although the UN Security Council approved it, Germany was unable to ensure its enforcement. Chancellor Merkel later acknowledged that the agreement was mainly a temporary measure, giving Ukraine time to bolster its military.

Lack of Accountability and Ongoing Denial

Despite these events, current German leaders, such as Mertz and Ursula von der Leyen, have not taken responsibility for Germany’s role in the crisis. They have avoided discussing NATO expansion, the Maidan coup, or the lack of progress on the Minsk II agreement—topics generally seen as key to the start of the war.

Germany’s reluctance to self-reflect and accept responsibility is viewed as a factor in worsening Europe's security situation. Ironically, Moscow initially supported German reunification but was later sidelined from European security frameworks, reigniting bloc divisions.

Germany’s Role in Breaking Diplomatic Agreements

Germany actively supported NATO’s expansion and played a role in persuading President Bill Clinton to back it, leading to the breaking of significant diplomatic agreements. Many reports now indicate that NATO enlargement was a crucial factor contributing to the ongoing conflict.

There are also reports of private U.S. guarantees that NATO would not expand to Ukraine, promises that were never made public. This has fueled perceptions of deceit and a lack of transparency among Western officials.

European Security and Indivisibility

The letter highlights the idea of indivisible European security, which is not exclusive to Russia but a key part of historical pan-European security agreements. However, today’s German rhetoric dismisses Russia’s legitimate security concerns, marking a clear break from earlier commitments to a shared security framework.

Historical Patterns of Deceit

Over the past two centuries, Germany has repeatedly undermined collective security at key moments. After World War II, the Potsdam Conference called for a neutral and demilitarized Germany, but neither Western powers nor Germany upheld these promises. The 1952 Stalin Note, proposing German neutrality to end the Cold War, was rejected by Chancellor Adenauer, who favored division instead. This pattern of betrayal continues to this day.

The Path Forward: Diplomacy and Truth

The letter urges Germany to acknowledge its commitments made during unification and to pursue peace through diplomacy rather than propaganda. German leaders are advised to honestly confront and recount this history to prevent further disaster in Europe.

Germany has historically played a positive role in European politics, exemplified by Ostpolitik and by leaders such as Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt, and Helmut Kohl. However, there is disappointment that today's leaders are not maintaining these traditions of inclusive and indivisible security.

The Importance of Truth in Ending Hostilities

The letter emphasizes the crucial role of truth in resolving the conflict. It argues that ongoing hostilities are fueled by deceit and propaganda, with leaders acting differently in private and public. True peace can only be achieved if the real causes and fears are confronted and acknowledged.

Conclusion

Germany’s historical and current actions have significantly influenced the course of the Ukraine crisis. German leaders need to demonstrate honesty, responsibility, and a commitment to peaceful diplomacy to avoid further catastrophe in Europe.

Professor Sachs’s open letter to Chancellor Merz urges German leaders to honestly reflect on and take responsibility for their historical and ongoing roles in European security. He highlights the need to remember past promises, especially concerning NATO expansion, and calls for moving from confrontation to greater self-awareness and honesty in European politics.

To move forward, the letter calls for renewed dialogue rooted in mutual respect and adherence to international agreements. It stresses that rebuilding trust will require open communication channels and a willingness from all parties to address security concerns without resorting to escalation or misinformation. Only through sincere negotiation and recognition of shared interests can Europe hope to achieve lasting stability.

Ultimately, the letter highlights that the responsibility for peace in Europe does not rest on any one nation alone, but requires a collective commitment to transparency and good-faith negotiations. By learning from past mistakes and prioritizing genuine dialogue, European countries can work together to address the root causes of conflict and foster an environment of enduring cooperation. In this way, the pursuit of truth and reconciliation becomes not only a moral imperative but also a practical necessity for the continent’s future security and prosperity.

INTERVIEW: EU GOES ROGUE AMID RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR ESCALATION

Trump's Policy Shifts and Putin's Potential Response in a Shifting Geopolitical Landscape

Dive into the latest twists in the Russia-Ukraine war escalation: EU defies laws to seize Russian assets, Trump flip-flops on peace terms, and Putin gears up for escalation. Expert insights from Gilbert Doctorow.

By Paulo Fernando de Barros
The Dunasteia News
19 December 2025

Russia-Ukraine War Escalation: EU’s Rogue Actions, Trump’s Flip-Flop, Putin’s Imminent Moves

Watch the Video Here (37 minutes, 00 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
17 December 2025

Recent developments in the Russia-Ukraine conflict have increased global tensions. After some indications of easing, new statements and policy changes from major parties have raised concerns that the dispute could escalate again.

The European Union seems to be testing limits by trying to legalize taking frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine’s war efforts. At the same time, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s representatives have backed conditions that reflect Ukraine’s longstanding demands, possibly undermining any real peace negotiations. Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin faces increasing internal pressure to adopt a more aggressive approach. This escalation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict could signal a shift, as diplomatic efforts slow and military options come back into focus.

In the interview, Professor Glenn Diesen and Dr. Gilbert Doctorow, a respected historian and international affairs analyst, explore these developments. Doctorow, who authored “War Diaries: The Russia-Ukraine War, 2022-2023,” offers a detailed perspective on the situation. Drawing on recent meetings and statements, he emphasizes that Western internal conflicts, legal overreaches, and strategic errors drive the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

One of the most surprising points is Trump’s seeming change of stance on Ukraine. Just weeks earlier, there was hope that the new U.S. administration would focus on resolving the issue quickly. Yet, Trump’s representatives—Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff—participated in a coalition meeting in Berlin, led by Friedrich Merz, who strongly supports using Russian resources to fund the conflict.

The meeting, known as the “coalition of the willing,” led to an agreement to restore conditions to those before February 2022. This includes a de facto NATO footprint in Ukraine and security assurances similar to Article 5. Such an arrangement would effectively transform Ukraine into a heavily armed proxy against Russia, supported by an 800,000-strong Western-funded army during peace. This proposal directly challenges Russia’s fundamental security concerns, which initially motivated the invasion.

Doctorow argues that this shift is not just an inconsistency on Trump’s part but reflects deeper conflicts within U.S. politics, potentially a revolt on Capitol Hill regarding national security strategy. By supporting these terms, Trump frames Russia as the aggressor if they refuse the deal, paving the way for a blame game once Ukraine’s stance falls apart.

This escalation tactic in the Russia-Ukraine war might serve to protect Trump from criticism before the midterm elections, suggesting he did his part by meeting Ukraine's demands. At the same time, Europe failed to provide the promised funds. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s recent call for Russia’s surrender reinforces this narrative, pushing for U.S. punishment if Moscow refuses. Reports of upcoming U.S. sanctions suggest a possible alignment with Europe’s combative approach, potentially intensifying the conflict.

In Europe, the EU’s actions signal a bold yet potentially reckless escalation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Under Ursula von der Leyen, the EU has used emergency powers to freeze Russian assets indefinitely, removing the need for repeated six-monthly sanctions renewals. This strategy aims to strengthen Europe's bargaining position and prevent Trump from redirecting the funds. Nonetheless, it bypasses international law, as using these assets for non-repayable loans to Ukraine would infringe on Russian property rights, risking costly legal challenges for Europe.

Belgium has surprisingly become a significant obstacle, as it hosts Euroclear, where most of the €210 billion in frozen Russian assets are stored. The country is concerned about the financial and legal risks involved. Bart De Wever, leader of the Flemish nationalist party, has gained support across different parties, calling for written guarantees from all 27 EU nations to share these risks. With backing from Italy, Malta, Bulgaria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia, a total of seven countries, this opposition complicates von der Leyen's efforts to override. If she cannot succeed, member states would have to approve direct funding to Ukraine through parliamentary processes, which is less likely due to austerity and remilitarization costs affecting Europe.

Doctorow observes that leaders like Viktor Orban of Hungary, who are often lauded for their sovereignty rhetoric, have generally sided with the majority on sanctions, obtaining concessions but not opposing them outright. Conversely, Belgium’s position might trigger a significant shift, possibly causing Ukraine to go bankrupt by early 2026. In this event, the existing Kyiv government could collapse, opening the door for capitulation and a reconfigured order.

Putin’s Response to the Escalation in the Russia-Ukraine War

In Russia, these events have revealed weaknesses in Putin’s approach. His gamble on Trump as a pragmatic ally has failed, as he has supported hardliners like Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, who claimed diplomacy was exhausted. With Trump showing himself unreliable because of domestic issues, Putin is now urged to escalate military efforts to settle the conflict through force.

Recent actions by Russia indicate an escalation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure have grown more severe, nearing collapse, though Russia has avoided destruction. Doctorow anticipates Putin might “take the low road,” possibly bombing Kyiv or hitting key locations like Odessa to block Ukraine's access to the Black Sea. In retaliation for Ukrainian attacks on Russian commercial ships and energy facilities—often supported by Western nations—Russia has increased its military activity around Odessa, causing widespread power outages.

Additionally, intercepting UK spy planes over the Black Sea might send a message to London, which is considered a leader in anti-Russian actions. Although such steps are escalatory, they require less manpower than full-scale attacks and could also disrupt data transfers to Ukraine. Putin’s recent remarks highlight his readiness to achieve goals “by diplomacy or war,” indicating he is prepared for confrontation if peace negotiations fail.

This stage of the Russia-Ukraine conflict escalation is especially perilous. As Russia approaches victory, its assertiveness intensifies, and Europe’s crossing of red lines—such as publicly discussing the possibility of expanding the war into Russia—triggers retaliatory threats. However, Doctorow contends that Europe lacks the military strength for a substantial response, as its arsenals have been drained by years of underfunding. Unlike the balanced powers of World War I, the current imbalance discourages full-scale warfare.

European Leadership and Strategic Missteps

To understand Europe’s role in the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, it's essential to examine its leadership. Doctorow criticizes the relatively low quality of many EU prime ministers, which he links to reduced national sovereignty within the Union. These positions often serve as stepping stones to Brussels, encouraging deference to von der Leyen instead of fostering independent strategies.

Multiple examples abound: France’s Emmanuel Macron maintains his grip on power amid internal chaos, disregarding strategic considerations. Denmark’s prime minister has even warned that seeking peace could be riskier than continuing conflict, due to fears of Russian retaliation afterward. Despite the apparent goal of ending the war, ideological inflexibility takes precedence over practical solutions.

While advisors may suggest cutting losses and negotiating with Moscow to salvage what remains, Europe’s resolve continues to strengthen. By engaging in proxy warfare and causing thousands of Russian casualties, Ukraine now faces the danger of retaliation as its situation deteriorates. Despite this, no significant change in strategy occurs, leaving Europe uncertain and directionless.

Prognosis and Implications

If the EU’s December 18-19 summit does not secure funding—especially with Belgium’s firm opposition—Ukraine’s decline will quicken. Doctorow remains optimistic, predicting the war will end by the first quarter of 2026 through bankruptcy and regime change. Russia might seize large territories, leading to significant changes in Eastern Europe.

The escalation of the Russia-Ukraine war highlights how fragile diplomacy can be. Western unity is breaking down under increasing pressure, while Russia demonstrates resilience. As Putin activates systems such as the Oreshnik missile, the risks grow higher. The global community observes, hoping that cooler heads will prevail before the situation escalates out of control.

The upcoming months will challenge everyone involved. With assets frozen, armies reconstructed, and boundaries becoming unclear, the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict requires quick reassessment. Not adapting could extend suffering and undermine global stability.

               Please share your thoughts in the comments, and explore more insights in our Journal and Magazine. Please consider becoming a subscriber. Thank you: https://dunapress.org/subscriptions– Follow The Dunasteia News on social media. Join the Oslo Meet by connecting experiences and uniting solutions: https://oslomeet.org

References:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSjJbXqyLeY(Interview with Gilbert Doctorow on Glenn Diesen’s channel)

https://www.amazon.com/War-Diaries-Russia-Ukraine-2022-2023/dp/B0F9VK1WM2(Gilbert Doctorow’s book)

https://www.npr.org/2025/12/14/g-s1-102218/us-envoys-arrive-in-berlin-for-more-ukraine-peace-talks

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/12/15/trump-says-deal-to-end-ukraine-war-closer-than-ever-after-berlin-talks

https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/16/europe/trump-ukraine-russia-peace-deal-berlin-intl

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/12/16/tentative-progress-toward-ukraine-peace-deal-but-no-decisive-breakthrough_6748551_4.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/ukraine/ukraine-us-conclude-new-talks-trump-seeks-swift-peace-rcna249302

https://www.dw.com/en/eu-summit-russian-frozen-assets-for-ukraine-top-agenda/live-75211191

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/eu-set-indefinitely-freeze-russian-assets-removing-obstacle-ukraine-loan-2025-12-12/

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2025/12/18/russia-ukraine-war-live-eu-holds-key-summit-to-strengthen-kyivs-hand

https://www.wglt.org/2025-12-17/eu-leaders-decide-on-whether-to-use-frozen-russian-assets-for-ukraines-war-effort

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/12/17/russia-europe-belgium-frozen-assets-intimidation/

https://www.law.com/international-edition/2025/12/18/eu-plan-to-fund-ukraine-with-frozen-russian-assets-sets-stage-for-legal-battle/

https://www.fairobserver.com/economics/the-battle-over-euroclear-and-russias-frozen-billions/

https://www.politico.eu/article/belgium-shoots-down-eu-commission-offer-unblock-russia-assets-plan-ukraine/

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/12/18/eu-convenes-for-high-stakes-summit-on-tapping-russian-funds-for-ukraine-a91472

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ukraine-donetsk-russia-negotiations-9.7018008

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/putin-says-2025-marked-important-stage-in-ukrainian-conflict/3773700

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/12/17/putin-says-oreshnik-missile-will-be-deployed-by-end-of-2025-a91462

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/world/3924770/putin-warns-military-escalation-ukraine-gain-more-land-if-no-peace-deal/

https://thecradle.co/articles-id/34901

https://time.com/7338115/putin-issues-warning-to-europe-russia-ukraine-peace-talks/

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/12/6/ukraine-peace-talks-stall-as-russia-unleashes-huge-waves-of-attacks

BUILDING THE BRIDGE! | A WAY TO GET TO KNOW THE OTHER AND ONE ANOTHER

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Photo Credit: Abraham A. van Kempen, our home away from home on the Dead Sea

By Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor

Updated 19 January 2024

Those who commit to 'healing our broken humanity' build intercultural bridges to learn to know and understand one another and others. Readers who thumb through the Building the Bridge (BTB) pages are not mindless sheep following other mindless sheep.

They THINK!

• They want to be at the forefront of making a difference.
• They're seeking the bigger picture to expand their horizons.
• They don't need BTB or anyone else to confirm their biases.

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Accurate knowledge fosters understanding, dispels prejudice, and sparks a desire to learn more about the subject. Words have an extraordinary power to bring people together, divide them, forge bonds of friendship, or provoke hostility. Modern technology offers unprecedented possibilities for good, fostering harmony and reconciliation. Yet, its misuse can cause untold harm, leading to misunderstandings, prejudices, and conflicts.

Continue reading

A Free Trial for Life – SUBSCRIBE NOW!

• It's quick and straightforward.
• We won’t ask for your credit card number.
• Just enter your e-mail address to receive your complimentary free-for-life subscription to our newsletter.
• Please include your First and Last Name.
• We won’t share or sell your e-mail address.
_________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS
OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of the Building the Bridge Foundation