JORDAN SUBMITS STATEMENT ON ISRAEL'S SEPARATION

C O N F I D E N T I A L AMMAN 001260

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/19/2014
TAGS: PREL KPAL JO IS
SUBJECT: JORDAN SUBMITS STATEMENT ON ISRAEL'S SEPARATION
BARRIER TO THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE


Classified By: DCM David Hale for reasons 1.5 (b and d)


1. (SBU) Foreign Minister Muasher's Office Director Ali
al-Ayed on February 17 presented the DCM with a copy of
Jordan's written argument to the International Court of
Justice on the legality of Israel's separation barrier. He
was doing so separately with many members of the diplomatic
corps.


2. (SBU) The 155-page English-language document (plus
annexes) argues that the ICJ enjoys jurisdiction over the
matter and that there are no compelling reasons that preclude
the court from providing an advisory judgment as the UNGA
requested in November 2003.


3. (SBU) The statement outlines legal principles supporting
Jordan's argument that Israel's construction of the barrier
-- especially as it impinges on West Bank territory --
violates its obligations not to annex occupied territory or
otherwise alter its status. It also challenges the legality
of Israeli settlements, adding that Israel "does not have the
right to alter the population balance in the occupied
territory by establishing alien settlements," nor is it
entitled to build a barrier to protect them.


4. (SBU) The GOJ calls on the ICJ to acknowledge that
Israel's construction of the wall "breaches its international
obligations" as an occupying power. It argues that Israel is
not "entitled to build a wall which serves to establish,
underpin, or increase its unlawful control over and de facto
annexation of that territory or any part thereof." Moreover,
the GOJ argues that international law precludes Israel from
constructing a wall which "seriously and disproportionately
impairs the rights of the inhabitants of that territory to
the effective ownership of their land and property."


5. (SBU) The GOJ argues that Israel's breaches of
international law "are not justified by considerations of
self-defense or by regarding the wall as a security measure
adopted as a military necessity." It concludes that such
breaches require Israel to pay reparations for losses
resulting from construction of the barrier.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


6. (C) MFA Legal Department head Samer Naber told PolCouns
separately February 18 that FonMin Muasher had excised
several sections of the Legal Department's original draft
that he felt would be overly sensitive to Israel -- including
individual criminal liability of Israeli officials. The
Jordanian document does appear to have been toned down to
avoid unnecessary friction with Israel.
GNEHM