US embassy cable - 04AMMAN1260

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