On September 23, 1948, Shafiq Adas, one of Iraq’s wealthiest Jewish businessmen, was hanged for the crimes of aiding Israel and supporting the Communist party, after a hasty trial of dubious legality involving even more dubious evidence. Adi Schwartz tells Adas’s story, and examines its significance for Iraqi Jewry:

Shafiq Adas’s arrest was not a one-off incident, of the sort that might somehow be excused, but part of a widescale anti-Jewish campaign waged by the Iraqi government and public. Since the start of 1948, and even before Iraq had declared war on Israel, the Jewish community had become a target of attacks and harassment. Cries of “Death to the Jews!” blared through protests in the streets. The Iraqi secret police had started persecuting Jews, and merchants were arrested for the purpose of extortion. Undercover officers prowled through streets where Jews lived, waiting for people to snitch on them. Jewish officials, both junior and senior, were fired from government ministries. Every night, increasing numbers of Jews were arrested, and community leaders appealed to anyone they could to intercede on their behalf and save them from their impending fate.

In July 1948, Zionism was officially declared a capital offense. Legally, two witnesses were sufficient to convict a Jew of Zionism. Any two Iraqis who wanted to blackmail a Jew but failed could simply go to a police station, as they did, and accuse him of being a Zionist or a Communist, and the Jew in question would be sent to prison immediately. In the summer of 1948, hundreds of Jews were put on trial; most were fined, while others were sentenced to lengthy terms behind bars.

Adas’s hanging left a tremendous impression on the Jews of [his hometown of] Basra. . . . Muslim children taunted their Jewish peers at school and called them “Adas’s orphans.”

Yesterday, President Biden reportedly met with his advisers to discuss how to achieve a breakthrough in hostage negotiations. Meir Ben Shabbat takes a closer look at what the terrorists themselves are saying:

Khalil al-Hayya, Hamas’s deputy chief in Gaza, reiterated that this issue is merely one of several demands his group has put forward as conditions for a deal. “We stress that any agreement must encompass a full cessation of hostilities, complete withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, including the Philadelphi Corridor and the Rafah crossing [which allow Hamas to smuggle weapons and supplies from Egypt], unimpeded return of displaced persons to their homes, aid and relief for Palestinians, Gaza’s reconstruction, and a prisoner exchange,” al-Hayya stated.

This stance isn’t new. What stood out in its presentation was the self-assurance displayed by the senior Hamas official, during a week when he and his associates were expected to be on edge, fearing repercussions for the killing of six hostages. However, the reaction to this in Israel and the United States prompted an opposite response from them. From their perspective, not only did they avoid consequences for the heinous act, but through it, they managed to escalate tensions and internal disagreements in Israel, while also prompting Washington to consider presenting a framework defined as a “final offer, without room for negotiation.

Hamas assumes that a final American proposal will inevitably come at Israel’s expense. The primary pressure to reach an agreement is already being applied to Israeli leadership. Hamas faces no consequences for prolonging the process, and so long as it holds hostages, it can always resume negotiations from where they left off.