In the aftermath of World War II, some 300,000 Jews found themselves in displaced-persons (DP) camps administered by the Allies in Germany and Italy. The largest of these was located in what had previously been the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Researching the life of the DPs there, Henry Abramson came across a curious and moving document:

[W]ithin months [of liberation, Bergen-Belsen] became the epicenter of a furious revival of the Jewish population, as survivors engaged in what the historian Atina Grossman called “biological revenge”—Jews affirming life in the most elemental manner by marrying and bearing children. By 1948 . . . the DP camps witnessed a birth rate of 36 children per 1,000 Jewish women, approximately seven times the rate for German women. . . .

Many [DPs who were] married before the war could not determine whether their spouses were still among the living. Neither divorced nor widowed, the survivors remained agunot, “chained” to their former husbands (or wives), unable to remarry under Jewish law until the fate of their spouses could be ascertained. . . .

The document I found . . . was something I had never seen before: a sobering prenuptial agreement for a prospective groom who wished to remarry after his wife disappeared in the maelstrom of the Holocaust. Addressed to the “Honorable Court of Justice Established to Address Agunot in the Central Office of the British Zone (in Germany),” the form has the groom agreeing to abide by the dictates of the court should his first wife somehow emerge from the ashes of the Holocaust. The text reads in part: “I, the undersigned, accept upon myself without any duplicity and with good will, without being coerced in any way, that if my first wife returns home . . . I, and the woman that I will marry, will abide by the ruling of the bet din [rabbinic court], whether it requires divorce and the division of assets, or any other matter.” . . .

One can only imagine the tearful conversations between groom and bride, poised on the cusp of their blissful future together, as they reviewed the implications of this painful document. Hope inescapably mixed with tragedy, rebirth entwined with death.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.