OKINAWA REPORT;
KEEP PRAYING FOR THE G-8
by Helene Bos.

The G-7 / G-8 summits since 1975.
At the time of the Kyushu Okinawa summit of the G-8 Heads of State, July 2000, this meeting drew attention from many parts of the world. Preceding the summit were several events that raised the awareness about the meeting. The Camp David talks, the urge of the heavy indebted developing nations for debt relief, the dramatic statistics that came out of the Durban-conference on aids, etc. Most of the times when the Heads of State of the G- 7, now G- 8, are having their annual summit, something happens that raises the awareness about their meeting. It reinforces the notion that this group is dealing with serious, global issues. When one reads their statements, before and after the summit, one cannot but conclude that the group is making decisions, instructing institutions and also nations, not just their own but many nations, to take steps in certain directions. They speak as if they are governing huge areas of the world.
And in fact, this is what they do. The G-7 met for the first time in 1975 in Rambouillet, in France, on the invitation of the president Giscard D'Estaing. The purpose was to, as the seven most industrialised nations, stabilize the financial and economic situation in the world. Gradually the number of topics they discussed increased and increased. At the moment there is hardly any area of life that they do not deal with.
These topics are well prepared in advance by their ministers and officials. Among those are the sherpa's, personal representatives of the Heads of State (see below). Each Head of State also brings a huge delegation with him, hundreds of people, probably to work out the agreements, the conclusions etc.

Why meeting at the island of Okinawa?
The G-8 nations rotate the place where their Heads of State have their annual summit. The previous prime minister of Japan chose the island of Okinawa. For many centuries Okinawa was a separate nation, with a culture different of that of Japan. The island was annexed by Japan a hundred and fifty years ago. The island is the poorest province of Japan; the inhabitants feel neglected. At the end of WWII, when the allies invaded the island, many Japanese fought to their utmost and were killed. Was this because the Japanese consider themselves to be a divine people and they could not allow themselves to lose the battle on their own ground? The cities were ruined. Many citizens committed suicide, sometimes after having killed their family. All together there were 230.000 people killed on this tiny island, included the American soldiers.Intercessors know that spilled blood has spiritual consequences.
After WWII the US kept the control over the island.. In the seventies the Americans gave the island back to Japan, but there is still a strong American military presence, the hub of the whole US presence the Pacific region. Both this history and the behaviour of American soldiers cause strong anti-Americanism.
The island is full of idols; many of the inhabitants visit "utahs", the local shamans. The name of the island means "little dragon". Its capital is called Naga. All the words like naga, naha, nawa have meanings associated with "dragon", that we know to be a symbol for the enemy of God. On the Japanese calendar this year is the "Year of the Dragon".
From the time they knew that the summit was coming, intercessors living on the island and in mainland Japan felt a burden to pray for the island. They believed these events were the beginning of a new time for Okinawa. They started to pray for the places where the meetings and events were taking place, as these places had dragon names or were decorated with many demonic images. They started also to pray for each of the Heads of State; several of them were scheduled to visit the "Peace Memorial Park" were the names of everyone who died in the WWII are inscribed, and where a huge Buddha is placed.
Altogether the spiritual aspects of the location Okinawa were specific and heavy, to say the least.

Concerns and reasons to intercede
Though it seemed urgent to pray for the Heads of State, we need to pray for those in authority anyhow, even when we do not feel attached to the G-8 (or the UN or the EU). We should pray for these institutions and their dignitaries as they have an enormous responsibility and need much wisdom.
It does make sense that important leaders come together to share insights on issues that are global in scope and to debate these things together. But when they decide on issues in such a way that their decisions will have an impact on the life of many people in the world, and this is the case, whether we realize it or not, then in a way they are lording over us. They have not been elected to be our world-government but they are acting as if they are. The people of the nations that they represent have chosen, generally speaking, for their Head of state or government. But the people of France did not elect the English prime minister to rule over them. The Russian people did not elect the president of the US. Yet, in their composition the heads of state co-rule over other then their own nation. This is a concern, and certainly an extra reason to uphold them in prayer, as they need a lot of wisdom.
Of course, the policies of one nation may not correspond with the policies of another nation. This was the case in Okinawa, where the presidents of the US and Russia agreed to disagree on the anti-missile shield. But this is more an exception than the rule. In fact the G-8 tries to impress the world with the suggestion that there is peace and harmony between them. The Heads of State referred regularly to "the spirit of peace", during the Okinawa summit, and one of the main topics on the agenda was "peace of mind". And they urged the people they were addressing to pursue that spirit. This, again, is a reason to pray, as there is no real peace outside the Son of God.
Now comes a third concern. Through the years Heads of State have changed, political situations have changed, situations and conditions have changed in many areas of life, yet it seems as if there is a continuity in the style of influencing more and more areas of people's life. That can be an indication that there is a spiritual power over/behind this group that influences them into certain directions. From the Scriptures we know that there are invisible spiritual powers behind worldly visible kings and rulers, originally specifically assigned to them. In that way it is not too far-fetched to assume that there is a power assigned or attached to the G-8. This, of course, is the third reason to pray for the Heads of State when they meet one another in the G-8 summits. Our prayers should also include the chairman of the European Community in his representation of the European Union in the summit. And as there are ties with the other global institutions, like the UN, the World Bank and the IMF, which are also partaking in the discussions regularly, and whose policies are "instructed" by the G-8, we have to pray for these institutions as well.
Then there are the "sherpa's". Sherpa's in the Himalaya's guide the climbers to the mountain tops (where they believe the gods to live!). Each Head of State has a Sherpa; some of them participated in the press conferences, but there is no information about what Sherpa's do. Can we find summaries of meetings of the different ministers on the G-7/8 websites, no summaries are provided about the regular meetings of these Sherpa's. This construction may be the explanation for the continuity of the G-7/8 proceedings, but it is certainly also a concern for prayer.

Where is the power really?
We need revelation for how we should pray. Ask the Lord: what do worldly rulers need?
How does this development of the G-8 fit or not fit in God's plans for this world in this period of history? The (not verbalized) assumption of being a world-government is not without competition from others. Also within the United Nations there is an ambition to receive a much bigger mandate, and to become, in due time, the one-world government. Yet it seems, that of these two power groups, at this moment the real power is still with the G-8. In a Canadian press- conference at Lyon, 1996, the (Canadian) spokesman, flippantly, declared: "We are the most exclusive club in the world. So it is only fair when that comes with privileges". In Istanbul, during the UN world conference on the problems of mega-cities, the Dutch minister of development, who is a committed supporter of the UN, said in an interview that he hoped that the G-7 would become part of the UN, "in order to have the real power back in the UN".
There may be other groups who carry the ambition for becoming the world-government, but at this moment the G-8 seems to be in the position of being it practically.

Another concern: lack of transparency
One thing that we need to pray for is that this group of leaders will have the courage and commitment to speak the truth, and to be really transparent. Not all the details of debates can be published, be it alone for practical reasons. But when we read the statements that are issued over the years, we read the jargon that has been developed at the United Nations since the population conference in Bucharest in 1974. In that conference the delegates of the developing nations protested against what they sensed to be a new form of imperialism exerted by the western nations in their, western, plans for the developing world.
Since then controversial items in the "Plans of Action" coming out of the conferences, were formulated in a special, like concealing, language. Over the years new words have been invented, like sustainability and governance, other words received a special, sometimes new, meaning, like democracy and civil society. The content of the charter on human rights was stretched and in part re-defined. The language that we hear and read at the UN we also hear and read from the G-8. This language is not transparent at all. It suggests openness, but this is indeed suggestion except, of course, for "the in-crowd".
As no nation has elected the G-8 as the rulers over them, it is very important that they are accountable. But to whom can they account for their rulership? It may be that each head of state is held accountable by its own government or parliament for his part in the corporate decisions and statements, but can any government or parliament outside the G-8 call the G-8 to account for their decisions? Combined with the veiled language, this causes a situation that is in its nature undemocratic.

A discrepancy regarding democratic values
One of the topics on the agenda of the summit, and receiving attention from the media, was the possibility of speeding up the debt relief of heavily indebted nations. However there are conditions attached to that process of debt relief, formulated by the IMF. Over the years the World Bank and the IMF have adopted a policy, routine in UN-circles, that no loans and grants are given as long as the government does not control the growth of their population. Sometimes the excluding factor is that democratic and/or human rights are not observed. That policy on respecting human rights, unjustly includes "respecting women's rights", which, in turn, includes that governments provide for the possibilities of abortion on demand. That is a condition that many poor nations cannot meet. In a number of cases it is because it is against their Islamic values. (Nations with a growing number of Christians do not yet seem to be aware of these conditions). If the conditions that are attached to the debt-relief include the demand of provisions for abortion, does this not need to be be exposed as an "undemocratic" (and evil) attitude?
When a body on the one hand stresses a value and on the other hand violates that value, in this case the value of democracy, it makes itself vulnerable for attacks of the spiritual power over them.

The press ruled out
On Okinawa the media have been forced, manipulated it seemed, into a position where they were not able to ask the penetrating questions that could expose policies that should not be kept secret, like the above-mentioned. Though the Japanese had built a huge press-centre, well equipped with all sorts of facilities, there were hardly any press conferences given for the media as a whole. Each nation was assigned a well-equipped press conference room, but some were never used. On the numerous t-v screens the media people could watch the arrival of the presidents Clinton and Putin over and over. The US never used the press centre; the screens did not inform that US press conferences were held, nor where: "No information available". The US press conferences, for a large "White House press only" of previous G-7 meetings, were no where to be found. There was only one French and Canadian press conference in the press centre, and for the only UK press conference the information was put on the screens just before the press conference started. For the only Russian and the only Italian press conference no translators were available. By coincidence I discovered that the White House press had a wing in a far away hotel, as had the Canadian and French press, with all the usual facilities. Of course the responsible Japanese media people must have known this, as they had provided these groups with all the necessary facilities, but it was not announced. The press that was allowed to " shoot" the Heads of State before their meetings or their dinners were not really asking hard questions; they were the privileged among the press and came to provide the public at home with some shots of smiling politicians.
This orchestration revealed that in fact there was deception operating, if not a spirit of deception. The "openness" was fake. The deceptive behaviour was not just on the Japanese side. Everything in such a summit is so well prepared, that it is hard to believe that the Heads of State were not involved in this policy. The media were hardly or not able to penetrate through the secrecy. This means that these world leaders were making decisions on a global scale, but that their policy was covered up, veiled. Besides this operating in a deceptive way, this orchestration also showed contempt for the media, and not just for the media, but also for the people at home, for the nations that will be effected, but are dependent for information regarding the G-8 on the media.
Did this deceptive secrecy and contempt the character of the dragon? Does it show the character of the spiritual power behind the G-8?

Conclusion
We must conclude that the meeting of the G-8 is not an event that Christians can ignore. A number of decisions that were made over the last years will have a deep-going influence on our personal lives, but also on the life of the Body of Christ. E.g. in 1996, at the G-7 summit in Lyon, it was shared by the Canadian spokesman, that pensions will have to go in the future, that unemployed people will be assigned to a job where there is one available, also when that job means that one partner of a couple has to move. The "Actions against abuse of the global financial system", that were designed during the Okinawa summit, seem unavoidable in the battle against money laundering now, but they carry in them the possibilities to be applied to other situations as well, easily excluding whole communities out of an economic system. The newly IT- possibilities push humanity into the direction of a society that can observe its inhabitants from moment to moment.
The apostle Peter, 1Peter 4:7, warns us to become "clear minded and self controlled", or "serious and watchful" so that we can pray. Clarity of mind is a condition for prayer, it includes that we face reality. Let us be clear minded about what is happening in the world, so that we can pray for God's will to be fulfilled. And let us consider how the Body of Christ can react to the changes in the societal and political world, that unavoidably will have an impact on its functioning.
A beautiful example of how the Lord uses things of the world for His own purposes, is how Christians living on Okinawa and in mainland of Japan, received the challenge to pray, as soon as they heard that this island was chosen for the 2000 G-8 summit. They organized a prayer-summit, to be held at the same time as the G-8 summit. They prepared it very well. Quite a number of churches took part in the preparations and were joining in their own cities in prayer meetings. The prayer-summit went on, day and night.
During the "prayer summit" the intercessors prayed in two ways: for the G-8 leaders and the issues they were dealing with, and in response to what they sensed God was wanting to do on a global level.
Is not this what it is all about? What was sown in Okinawa before and during the prayer-summit will bear fruit. May it also bear the fruit that many intercessors will receive the burden to pray for those leaders in the world that have such a far-reaching influence? Whether they know what spiritual forces try to influence them or not, whether we like them or not. The Lord of lords abducts kings, and He appoints them, according to His plan and to His will.
Proverbs 21:1 says: The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord like the rivers of water. He turns it wherever He wishes. Let us be faithful to bring also these "kings" before the Lord.