This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

120822Z Jul 04

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 AMMAN 005786 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NEA/ARN, NEA/PA, NEA/AIA, INR/NESA, R/MR, 
I/GNEA, B/BXN, B/BRN, NEA/PPD, NEA/IPA FOR ALTERMAN 
USAID/ANE/MEA 
LONDON FOR GOLDRICH 
PARIS FOR O'FRIEL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
 
TAGS: KMDR JO
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION ON THE HAGUE'S VERDICT ON THE 
ISRAELI "SEPARATION WALL" 
 
 
                        Summary 
 
-- Lead story in all papers over the past two days 
focuses on the verdict against the International Court 
of Justice on Israel's "separation wall".  Front-page 
reports highlight worldwide reaction to the verdict, 
including that of the Jordanian government hailing the 
verdict.  In general, editorial commentaries praise 
the verdict as a legal and moral "victory" and one 
that underscores the justice of the Palestinian cause, 
while expressing criticism of the U.S. reaction to the 
verdict. 
 
                 Editorial Commentary 
 
-- Washington as it becomes a stumbling block on the 
road to peace" 
 
Daily columnist Urayb Rintawi writes on the op-ed page 
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(07/11):  "When the United States turns its back to 
the highest judicial authority in the world, it is 
entrenching its commitment to the `Bush principle' in 
foreign policy of bypassing the United Nations, 
international law, adopting unilateral actions away 
from international partnerships and coalitions, and 
preemptive war.  Had the international court's 
advisory opinion been stated in relation to any 
country in the world other than Israel, papers would 
have already been submitted to the Security Council . 
and the U.S. representative would have already started 
making threats of sanctions and preemptive war.  Yet 
the Hague court placed Israel, Washington's pet baby, 
in the box this time, and so the masters of the White 
House came out with provocative and rude statements, 
accusing the court of interference and describing its 
opinion as a stumbling block on the road to peace and 
to the roadmap... One who sees the angry American 
storm towards the Darfour crisis and the suspicious 
American silence towards the racist wall will realize 
that the policy of dual standards is being underscored 
day in and day out.  They will also realize that a 
Washington that claims to be sponsoring the peace 
process is becoming day after day one of the major 
stumbling blocks in the way of that process and a 
detonator of grudges, anger, violence, extremism and 
terrorism in the region." 
 
-- "The axis of evil" 
 
Daily columnist Basem Sakijha writes on the op-ed page 
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(07/11):  "We are afraid that Washington's reaction to 
the international court's verdict will reach the point 
of striking the Hague itself with missiles and 
considering the judges terrorists..  If a question 
about the most important axes of evil were asked all 
around the world, the answer would be one: the axis of 
Washington-Tel Aviv.  It is the only axis that 
considers itself above international legitimacy and 
uses excessive force in the implementation of its 
objectives from Iraq to Afghanistan and Palestine and 
elsewhere, and then does not feel shame to consider 
others the evil ones and turn facts inside out.  The 
advisory nature of the verdict may not have practical 
value, but the moral value is important and historic.. 
Anyhow, the American search for the answer to the 
question `why do they hate us?' should start in 
Washington itself." 
 
-- "No ifs, ands or buts" 
 
Centrist, influential among the elite English daily 
Jordan Times (07/11) editorializes:  "Even though the 
verdict of the International Court of Justice . came 
as no surprise to the international community as a 
whole, it is nevertheless a milestone in the 
development of international law..  While it can be 
taken for granted the U.N. General Assembly will adopt 
the necessary resolution on the Israeli wall, it is 
still uncertain that the U.N. Security Council will 
follow suit.  The United States is expected to veto 
any resolution that aims to order the dismantling of 
the controversial wall, especially in the wake of the 
disclosure that the U.S. judge on the bench of the 
court was the only dissenting judge on the otherwise 
unanimous verdict..  This ruling gives added 
legitimacy to the Palestinian and Arab submissions 
that any encroachment on the Palestinian territories 
occupied in the 1967 war including the construction of 
Jewish settlements thereon is illegal.  This is where 
the court's decision is most far-reaching and with 
considerable impact on the entire peace process in the 
Middle East and the projected resumption of peace 
talks between Israel and the neighboring Arab parties. 
Accordingly with or without any follow-up action by 
the U.N. Security Council, the message is now clearer 
than ever.  Jewish settlements in the West Bank and 
the Gaza Strip as well as the construction of the 
Israeli barrier on Palestinian lands are illegal under 
international law. 
 
-- "There is justice in this world!" 
 
Daily columnist Mahmoud Rimawi writes on the op-ed 
page of semi-official, influential Arabic daily Al-Rai 
(07/11):  "This decisive legal battle has been won 
thanks to the living consciences of the fourteen 
judges (with the exception of the American judge) and 
to the actions of Arab countries like Jordan and Egypt 
in addition to the Palestinian party.  This decision 
proved that there is still justice in our world, and 
that invasion, abuse and lies do not hold before the 
rule of justice and the law, even if there is a 
superpower administration like the Republican 
Administration that collaborates with injustice and 
crime." 
 
-- "The battle of the wall: a Jordanian battle as 
well!" 
 
Daily columnist Sultan Hattab writes on the op-ed page 
of semi-official, influential Arabic daily Al-Rai 
(07/11):  "We have the right to be proud of our 
country's real support for the just cause of the 
Palestinian people, particularly when it comes to the 
aggression represented by the construction of the 
separation wall..  The [Hague] decision is a victory 
as well as an important legal and political verdict 
that could not be diminished by the belittling of it 
by the Americans, who have appointed themselves 
policeman for the defense of Israeli aggression.  The 
verdict spreads terror amidst the ruling Israeli 
institution because it is part of a worldwide counter- 
campaign against Israeli aggression and the fruit of 
an international stand that brings justice to the 
Palestinian people who are suffering from brutality, 
terrorism and injustice.  The verdict expresses the 
world's intolerance for the Israeli aggressive 
measures..  While the court verdict is a victory that 
needs to be translated into mechanisms that rein in 
the aggression, the ball is now in the international 
community's court that must make a move on Arab and 
international levels.  Otherwise the regimes and 
countries' helplessness or lack of neutrality, like 
that of the United States, could open space for 
irregular and illegitimate forces to retaliate in 
their own way, a way that the United States calls 
terrorism and (that it) hunts down without actually 
doing anything to prevent its causes." 
 
-- "Jordan welcomes the International Court's verdict" 
 
Center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(07/11) editorializes:  "Right from the beginning, 
Jordan saw the construction of the Israeli separation 
wall as ruin to the peace process and to the roadmap.. 
[This verdict] involves new activity that places 
Israel face to face with the international community 
and demands for the first time an answer to the big 
question: why does the international community accept 
the presence of a specific state that can reject the 
implementation of international resolutions without 
accountability or punishment?  Even if the answer is 
that the United States wants it, the American people 
then have to ask: for what purpose are we doing this? 
In short, the gains achieved with the international 
court's verdict are very big.  Even when it rejects 
the verdict, Israel knows deep down the difficult 
situation it is about to face before the world.  The 
proof of that is that Israel is now trying to push the 
U.S. administration to prevent the issuance of a 
Security Council resolution." 
HALE