BILIN RESIDENTS WILL CONTEST LATEST IDF BARRIER

C O N F I D E N T I A L JERUSALEM 001803

SIPDIS

NEA FOR FRONT OFFICE; NSC FOR ABRAMS/RAMCHAND/PASCUAL

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/26/2018
TAGS: PBTS PHUM KWBG KPAL IS
SUBJECT: BILIN RESIDENTS WILL CONTEST LATEST IDF BARRIER
ROUTING PROPOSAL

REF: A. JERUSALEM 1240

B. JERUSALEM 185

C. 2007 SECSTATE 129800

D. 2007 JERUSALEM 1905

E. 2007 TEL AVIV 2670

F. 2006 JERUSALEM 4270

G. 2006 TEL AVIV 1084

Classified By: Acting Principal Officer Greg Marchese for reasons 1.4 (
b) and (d).


1. (C) Summary. On September 18, in response to an Israeli
High Court of Justice (HCJ) order, the GOI presented a new
plan to re-route the separation barrier between the
Palestinian village of Bilin and the Israeli settlement of
Modiin Illit. Village residents criticized the latest plan
and intend to contest it in court. Bilin's attorney will
recommend the village offer a counter-proposal for the
barrier route that is not based on 1967 lines. This approach
would be a break from previous Palestinian positions on the
separation barrier. End summary.

Village Rejects Latest Re-Route Plan
--------------


2. (C) Abdullah Abu Rahma, coordinator of the Bilin Popular
Committee Against the Wall, told Poloff September 19 that a
GOI plan released on September 18 is better than the initial
version released July 7 (ref A),but it is still "not
enough." He estimated that the plan would return 500 to 600
dunums (125 to 150 acres),whereas full implementation of the
HCJ order would return over 1,000 dunums (250 acres).
Michael Sfard, attorney for the committee, told Poloff
September 23 that he will review the IDF plan with the Bilin
Popular Committee on October 2, and noted that Bilin must
respond to the GOI o/a October 5.


3. (C) Sfard emphasized that the proposed barrier re-routing
is only partially compliant with the HCJ's order because it
bisects the area known as Matityahu East B and returns a
portion of the land to Bilin, while retaining a portion as
buffer surrounding existing and planned construction in
Matityahu East A. He said this provision contradicts the
2007 HCJ instruction that "the territories intended for the
future construction of Stage B of the 'Matityahu East'
neighborhood are to be left on the eastern side of the
Fence." (Note: The GOI proposals of July 7 and September 18
are available on the Consulate General's classified website
at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/jerusalem/ind ex.cfm under
the link for Political Reporting Attachments. End note.)

A New Tactic? Attorney Plans Counter-proposal
--------------


4. (C) Sfard said he is concerned that the HCJ will not
reject the latest GOI plan, because it is closer to complying
with the court's instructions than the July 7, plan which the
court had rejected as non-compliant. If presented with only
the GOI plan, "I expect the court to bargain on 100 meters
here or there," Sfard predicted, but not to order significant
revisions. He added that, after close to four years of
litigation, for the village to have a reasonable chance of
legal victory, the court should have two alternatives from
which to choose.


5. (C) Sfard told Poloff that he will recommend to the Bilin
Popular Committee that the village present a notional map
based on its interpretation of the HCJ,s 2007 decision.
Such a tactic, Sfard said, would be unprecedented, because
Palestinians have refused to present counter-proposals on the
routing of the barrier, instead insisting that no legitimate
routing of the barrier enter the West Bank. UN OCHA contacts
confirmed that Palestinians have not previously employed such
a tactic, and said there is significant political pressure
not to contradict the principle of 1967 lines.
MARCHESE