US embassy cable - 05TELAVIV561

C O N F I D E N T I A L TEL AVIV 000561 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NSC FOR ABRAMS/DANIN 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/30/2015 
TAGS: PREL, PHUM, KWBG, IS, JE, ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS, GOI INTERNAL 
SUBJECT: MFA LEGAL ADVISOR REAFFIRMS GOI POLICY NOT TO 
SEIZE NEIGHBORHOODS IN EAST JERUSALEM THROUGH ABSENTEE LAW 
 
REF: A. (A) TEL AVIV 518 
 
     B. (B) JERUSALEM 299 
 
Classified By: DCM Gene A. Cretz for Reasons 1.4 (b,d) 
 
1. (C) Summary.  Following up on a January 30 Ha'aretz 
article implying that the GOI intended to utilize the amended 
Absentee Property Law (APL) to make large-scale seizures of 
Palestinian property, MFA Legal Advisor Ehud Kanaan restated 
the GOI's intention not to do so.  Unfortunately, the 
additional details Kanaan provided on the GOI decision to 
change application of the law in East Jerusalem, raised more 
questions than they answered.  While Kanaan noted that he was 
a member of the GOI committee responsible for authorizing 
such transfers, he admitted that even he had not known of the 
change in the law.  He was also unable to state unequivocally 
that the GOI had not made a political decision to authorize 
such transfers.  Our conversation with Kanaan reinforces our 
view that Washington should obtain a clear political 
statement from the GOI that it will not use the law to make 
large-scale seizures of Palestinian land.  End Summary. 
 
2.  (C) D/ECON called Kanaan in reaction to a January 30 
article in Ha'aretz that revealed further details of the July 
2004 GOI decision amending the APL.  The article quotes from 
the decision itself, which defines its purpose as removing 
"... all doubt that the Custodian (of Absentee Property) has 
the authority ... to transfer, sell or lease real estate 
property in East Jerusalem to the Development Authority." 
Asked whether this did not imply that the decision was 
explicitly aimed at allowing the GOI to develop significant 
amounts of "absentee land," Kanaan maintained (as he did in a 
January 26 conversation described in Ref a) that the decision 
was not aimed at large-scale expropriations.  Rather, it was 
an effort by the then-Custodian of Absentee Property to take 
off the "bureaucratic handcuffs" that had made his duties 
more complicated than necessary.  "I assure you, the 
Custodian did not have the objective of transferring whole 
neighborhoods..." to the GOI, Kanaan maintained. 
 
3.  (C) Unfortunately, Kanaan was unable to state 
unequivocally that the GOI had not used the amended law to 
seize neighborhoods.  A member of what he called the GOI's 
"Special Committee to Release Property, which he claimed was 
in part responsible for such decisions," Kanaan could only 
say that "To the best of my understanding, no such political 
decision to seize Palestinian neighborhoods has been made." 
Kanaan admitted that there was no clear locus for where such 
a decision would be made, however: "The Custodian does not 
have the power to make such a decision.  It would have to be 
made at a higher level, including by the Special Committee, 
by the Prime Minister, by the Minister of Finance..." 
 
4. (C) Kanaan stressed that the decision was "a headache that 
we (the GOI) don't need.  It's been raised by the U.S, by the 
UN, and by the Europeans."  He said the GOI was now 
considering "freezing" implementation of the amended law, but 
doubted there would be a formal legal decision to that 
effect. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
5. (C)  Kanaan's categorical assertions about the intent of 
the decision to amend the APL need to be put in the context 
of one key fact he revealed in this most recent conversation: 
Although the MFA's Legal Advisor, and although a member of 
the "Special Committee to Release Property," Kanaan admitted 
that even he had not been informed about the decision to 
amend the APL until this year, five months after the decision 
had been taken.  In view of the secretiveness with which this 
decision was taken, the tremendous powers it gives the GOI to 
take land in East Jerusalem from West Bank Palestinians, and 
the murkiness about real GOI intent, Mission believes 
Washington should obtain a clear political statement from the 
GOI that it will not use this law for large-scale seizures of 
Palestinian land. 
 
********************************************* ******************** 
Visit Embassy Tel Aviv's Classified Website: 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/telaviv 
 
You can also access this site through the State Department's 
Classified SIPRNET website. 
********************************************* ******************** 
KURTZER