In 70 CE, the Romans expelled the Jews from the land of Israel, destroyed Jerusalem and burned the holy Temple to the ground. Although 2 million Jews died during that war, the Romans failed in their primary objective: Rupturing the people of Israel’s attachment to the land of Israel. Despite Rome’s best efforts, the Jews retained their spiritual and physical connection to the land of their ancient patrimony.

From the 1st to the 20th century of the Christian era, the land of Israel suffered a host of alien occupations. And each and every one of those occupiers was determined to succeed precisely where Rome had failed: They would erase the connection between the people of Israel and the land of Israel.

Such was the objective of Israel’s Muslim conquerors, whose spiritual leaders imagined, by building a mosque on the Temple Mount and transforming Judaism’s holiest site into an Islamic shrine, that they would succeed where Rome failed. Such was the objective of the British mandatory power designing the pro-Arab White Book policy. Such was the motivation of the Hashemite King Abdullah I when he rejected David Ben-Gurion’s call for peace, although Israel delivered the heartland of its Biblical homeland directly into his hands.

In addition to keeping the Jews away from Israel as much as possible, tolerating them as “dhimmis” under Muslim laws, an additional process was implemented by the Ottoman and Hashemite occupiers: the “importation” of Muslims into the land, for economic and military reasons. This is a classic practice in Islam newly occupied lands, and examples of such population transfers have been documented, among others, in Constantinople (now Istanbul) which Mehmet II occupied from the Byzantine Empire, and more recently, in Turkish-occupied Northern Cyprus, where thousands of civilians and 20,000 soldiers were sent.

The Arabs currently living in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem and Israel in general stem from those Muslim immigration waves from the Islamic world. Reversing the tables by calling the Jews occupiers of their formerly invaded country is absurd. And demanding that those areas remain “judenfrei” is despicable. Yet, instead of rejecting this jihadi allegation, Western nations have adopted it. On December 23rd, they proposed, supported or tolerated a resolution in full collusion with the contemporary Arab chieftains promoting a Dar-al-Islam ideology.

Resolution 2334 is a pure act of antisemitism, a direct punch delivered at Jewish sovereignty. But for the West, that public spanking of Israel — empowered by the former Obama administration — carries a double danger.

First, European Christians, locked in a battle with Islam, start seeing Islam’s appeals for religious and political autonomy within neighborhoods of some cities, a first step before demanding extraterritorial status in order to apply Sharia law. Resolution 2334 supports the request to change the status of “Dar al-Dawa” territories (where Islam was recently introduced) to this of “Dar al-Amn,” in which Sharia is practiced instead of national or federal laws. Hence, based on its ruling, resolution 2334 might become an obstacle to Christian security forces entering Muslim-populated neighborhoods, for instance to the British Army trying to keep Bradford under the UK crown; a stumbling block for the French military struggling to keep Marseilles within the Republic; and a spur for some German states willing to fight in order to re-define their political status within the German federation.

Second, this spiral of claims could escalate further. Indeed, while the Jews have a legitimate and historical claim to their lands, modern nation states, including those that let 2334 pass, have actually occupied territories, expelled their indigenous populations and “imported” settlers. Thus, the resolution is a direct impetus for the Native Americans to increase their struggle in Northern America, the Māoris in New Zealand; the Basques, currently under sharp surveillance from specialized units of the French Intelligence, might now add a legal tool in their warfare against the Spaniards and the French; further east, same goes for the Huis, supported by some Western organizations in their rebellion against the Han Chinese.

Indeed, Resolution 2334 is potentially the engine that could lead to the erasure of the current UK borders and reduce the sovereignty of the Queen to the District of London. In France, it heralds the return a pre-Napoleonic map without Corsica, the Basque country and Brittany.

Hence, originally conceived by the Arabs to strike the Jews with the complicity of antisemitic liberals, UNSC Resolution 2334 encourages the use of threats and blackmail against a liberal West perceived as submitting to an intolerant jihadi narrative, fueling the progression of Sharia law within Christian cities. Secondly, it provides indigenous people, who might have some historical legitimacy to protesting the “colonization” of their lands with an international legal tool.

It is not a stone that was thrown at the Jewish state; it is a dangerous double-bladed boomerang projected from a fragile organization of states.

The opinions presented by Algemeiner bloggers are solely theirs and do not represent those of The Algemeiner, its publishers or editors. If you would like to share your views with a blog post on The Algemeiner, please be in touch through our Contact page.