but will they move it?

israeli govt admits in court that route of wall was based on factors other than security. so much for the "survival" argument.

State to High Court: Fence route determined not only by security considerations
Last update - 13:27 04/07/2005
By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent

Israel has acknowledged for the first time that not just "security" considerations were instrumental in determining the route of the West Bank separation fence.

Responding to a petition brought to the High Court by the residents of the Palestinian village Azun in the northern West Bank, the state asked for the fence to be left on its original route, previously ruled to be unsuitable, as it would be very expensive to move.

The state's position marks a fundamental change in its legal arguments. Initially, the state claimed security concerns were the sole motivation for erecting the fence, and there were no other considerations.

In its principal ruling on the issue last year, in the Beit Surik affair, the High Court determined that the state has no authority to build a fence for "political" considerations, such as appending land to Israel.

The state's new stance also highlights a major policy change regarding the "temporary" nature of the fence. Until now, the state has claimed that the fence was a short-term measure, and it was possible to move or dismantle the barrier.

The construction of the separation fence has already been completed in the area, and the barrier is fully functional.

In the region north of Qalqilyah, the route creates an "enclave" where it departs from the 1967 Green Line border and moves eastward to encompass the settlement of Tzofin, as well as much land from the villages of Jayyus and Azun.