Baruch Goldstein

Baruch Kappel Goldstein was born in Brooklyn, New York, in December 1956, and raised in Orthodox Judaism.[2][1] His given name at birth was Benjamin Goldstein.[1] He studied at the Yeshiva of Flatbush and then at Yeshiva University, from which he received his bachelor's and medical degrees.[2][1] He completed his medical training at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, qualifying as a physician.[2]

From an early stage in his adult life, Goldstein was politically aligned with the far-right wing of American Jewish politics. He became associated with the Jewish Defense League (JDL), the organization founded by Rabbi Meir Kahane, and came to be regarded as a disciple of Kahane himself.[2][6] In a 1981 letter to The New York Times, he wrote that Israel “must act decisively to remove the Arab minority from within its borders” — a statement the Counter Extremism Project cites as evidence of his ideological commitments well before his immigration to Israel.[1] The Jewish Defense League would later describe Goldstein as a “charter member” of the organization.[6]

Goldstein immigrated to Israel in 1983 and subsequently served as a physician in the Israel Defense Forces.[2][1] After completing his military service, he settled in Kiryat Arba, the Jewish settlement immediately bordering Hebron in the West Bank — known by its original, indigenous Jewish name of Judea and Samaria — and continued practicing medicine as an emergency physician in the area.[2] He ran as one of Kach's leading candidates for the Knesset in 1984, though Kach was ultimately banned from standing in Israeli elections because of its racist and anti-democratic platform.[1][2]

Within his community, Goldstein was regarded as a respected doctor. He continued working as an emergency physician after settling in Kiryat Arba and served as a first responder to Palestinian shooting attacks targeting Israeli vehicles.[7] Press reports cited in available sources indicate that he had refused to treat non-Jewish patients while serving in Lebanon in the early 1980s, and later as a civilian doctor in Hebron.[2] Those same reports, however, also note that he received two Israeli army citations for medical work in 1993, and in January 1994 he was reportedly recommended for promotion from captain to major.[2]

In the months before the massacre, observers who knew Goldstein described what they characterized as a deterioration in his behavior. A local journalist reported that Goldstein's repeated responsibility for identifying the bodies of victims of Palestinian attacks on Israelis appeared to weigh heavily on him.[7] Among the deaths that affected him was the killing of his friend Mordechai Lapid and Lapid's son Shalom on December 6, 1993.[7] This account is the journalist's interpretation and was not adopted as an official finding of motive by the investigative commission that later examined the attack.

Testimony presented to that commission attributed Goldstein's actions in part to anguish over the Israeli government's transfer of territory to the Palestinian Authority under the Oslo peace process.[1] Some of Goldstein's later defenders, including politician Itamar Ben Gvir, claimed he had acted to preempt an expected Palestinian attack on Jewish settlers in Hebron.[1] The commission itself, however, made no such finding; these remained reported claims about motive rather than established conclusions.

On the morning of February 25, 1994 — the Jewish holiday of Purim, which that year coincided with the Muslim holy month of Ramadan — Goldstein made his way to the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, the ancient site revered by both Jews and Muslims and known to Muslims as the Ibrahimi Mosque.[2][8] He was driven from a local clinic to the cave that morning by Motti Unger, a Kiryat Arba security guard, who later testified before the investigative commission that Goldstein appeared dressed for army reserve duty and carried a small gray bag, a mini-Galil rifle, two attached magazines, and two or three additional magazines.[5] Unger testified that Goldstein said nothing about an attack or revenge against Arabs.[5]

Another settler, Dan Tor, who had been praying at the Tomb of the Patriarchs that morning, also testified that Goldstein arrived wearing an army uniform and carrying what appeared to be a mini-Galil. Tor described Goldstein as agitated and noted that Goldstein questioned why the door separating the Jewish prayer area from the mosque was closed, even though it was Purim; the door had been bolted because of Ramadan.[5]

Goldstein entered the Muslim prayer hall wearing his IDF reserve uniform. He carried what the army identified as a Galil assault rifle, along with approximately 140 rounds of ammunition.[2][5] He opened fire on the worshippers, who were prostrate in prayer.[2] By the time survivors overwhelmed him — striking him with a fire extinguisher, among other means — he had killed 29 people and wounded at least 125.[2][8] Goldstein was beaten to death on the scene.[2]

Witness testimony differed on one detail: while Unger, Tor, and an army officer identified the weapon as a Galil, three Israeli soldiers said they had seen an American-made M-16.[5] The army's official position was that an Israeli-made Galil had been used, and Unger's testimony was reported as reducing speculation about a possible accomplice.[5] The question of how Goldstein entered the mosque — specifically whether he passed through the door separating the two prayer areas — was also a focus of the commission's inquiry.[5]

The Israeli government decided on February 27, 1994 — two days after the massacre — to establish a formal Commission of Inquiry.[9] The commission was constituted on February 28 by Supreme Court President Meir Shamgar, who also chaired it.[9] Its other members were Supreme Court Justice Eliezer Goldberg, Nazareth District Court Justice Abd el-Rachman Zoabi, Open University President Menachem Yaari, and former IDF Chief of Staff Major General Moshe Levi.[9]

The commission's terms of reference were to investigate the massacre at the Tomb of the Patriarchs and to determine findings and conclusions concerning the facts and circumstances surrounding it.[9] Operating under Israel's Commission of Inquiry Law, it held court-like powers: it could investigate, summon and compel witnesses, require the production of documents, and issue warrants.[9] The government described the commission as independent because its members were appointed by the head of the judiciary rather than by the executive branch.[9] Although its recommendations were formally nonbinding, the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted that they were generally expected to be carried out.[9]

The Shamgar Commission concluded that Goldstein had planned and carried out the attack entirely alone, without informing anyone of his intentions.[2] It attributed the failure to prevent the massacre to poor coordination among the IDF, the police, and the Hebron Civil Administration, combined with understaffing and faulty security equipment, including malfunctioning metal detectors and closed-circuit television.[2] The commission found no evidence of a conspiracy, a second shooter, the use of grenades, or collaboration by IDF soldiers.[2]

The reaction within Israel was swift and, across the political mainstream, unequivocally condemnatory. Prime Minister and Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin delivered a formal statement condemning the attack as a religiously motivated act of murder, expressing condolences to the victims' families and the Palestinian people, and declaring that the actions of extremists would not prevent reconciliation or halt the peace process.[10] He addressed Goldstein and those like him directly: “You are a shame on Zionism and an embarrassment to Judaism.”[2] In language that underscored his rejection of any claim that Goldstein represented Israeli society, Rabin also declared: “You did not emerge from us, you are not part of the community of Israel… You are a foreign implant, an errant seed. Sensible Judaism spits you out.”[11]

President Ezer Weizman called the killings “the worst thing that has happened to us in the history of Zionism” and said Israel would “have to toil hard in order to repair the terrible damage and heal the deep rifts caused between ourselves and the Arabs, and among our own people.”[8] The Chief Rabbis of Israel likewise condemned Goldstein's actions.[2] Within twenty-four hours, Jewish communities and organizations worldwide — with the exception of elements of the radical right — issued public condemnations, and Jewish groups in the United States published full-page newspaper advertisements opposing the massacre.[12]

British Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks described the attack as “an obscenity, a travesty of Jewish values, and a blasphemy,” stating that it had been carried out against worshippers in a house of prayer during a holy time, and declaring that “violence is evil, violence committed in God's name is doubly evil, and violence against worshippers is unspeakably evil.”[2]

Palestinian rioting broke out across the West Bank and Gaza in the immediate aftermath. One source reports 26 Palestinians and nine Israelis killed in the unrest, while another reports 26 Palestinians and two Israelis.[2][10] A Jerusalem Post account gives more than 20 additional Palestinians and nearly 10 Jews dead.[8] The Israeli government moved quickly on several institutional fronts: it compensated victims, imposed additional security measures, and outlawed both Kach and Kahane Chai.[2] The U.S. Department of State records that the Israeli Cabinet formally declared both organizations terrorist organizations in March 1994 after they publicly supported the attack and directed hostility at the Israeli government.[3]

The physical and economic consequences for Hebron were severe and long-lasting. Following the massacre, the IDF imposed a two-month curfew on the city.[7] Shuhada Street, Hebron's main thoroughfare and commercial center, was closed to Palestinian traffic, and Palestinian merchants were ordered to shut their shops along it.[7] Years later, B'Tselem counted 1,829 closed Palestinian shops in downtown Hebron — representing 77 percent of the total — and more than 1,000 abandoned Palestinian apartments, representing 42 percent of the homes surveyed, as of the end of 2006.[7]

Kamal Abdeen, a worshiper wounded in the attack, was unconscious for months after a bullet entered his neck. After returning to Hebron in a wheelchair, he initially told his six-year-old brother that his injury had resulted from a car accident because he did not want the child to hate Jews.[7]

On the diplomatic level, the massacre inserted itself forcefully into the Rabin-era peace negotiations. Proposals raised in its wake included joint Israeli-Palestinian patrols in Hebron, International Red Cross observers, accelerated deployment of Palestinian police in Jericho and Gaza, and measures to restrain armed Jewish settlers.[5] The United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 904 on March 31, 1994, calling for measures to protect Palestinian civilians, including a temporary international presence in Hebron.[4] This led to the establishment of the Temporary International Presence in Hebron (TIPH), which began operating in the city following the resolution.[4]

A Congressional Research Service report notes that analysts have cited the massacre as a provocation for the Palestinian suicide-bombing campaign that followed, and The Jerusalem Post reports that Hamas carried out two terrorist attacks while explicitly identifying them as responses to the Hebron massacre.[13][8] One secondary source reports that even settlement supporters did not want to be associated with the atrocity, affecting policy discussions concerning settlements in Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip.[12]

Despite the overwhelming condemnation from Israeli society and government, a segment of the Kahanist far right treated Goldstein as a martyr and hero.[2] His grave in Kiryat Arba became a pilgrimage site; My Jewish Learning reports that more than 10,000 people had visited it by 2000.[2] In 1995, a book titled Baruch Hagever (“Baruch the Man”) was edited by Michael Ben-Horin and published in praise of Goldstein; a Jerusalem court subsequently ruled the book racist, and Ben-Horin was appealing an eight-month prison sentence connected with it.[14]

In March 1998, shortly before Purim, a 56-page booklet titled “Baruch, the Redeemer and Savior” — also written by Ben-Horin — was distributed in the territories. The booklet praised Goldstein as a “savior” who had prevented Arab attacks on Jews and included a photograph captioned “Dr. Baruch Goldstein, may God avenge his blood.”[14] Meretz members and left-wing activists protested, and Meretz MK Ran Cohen requested an investigation into whether the author and publisher should face prosecution for incitement; Peace Now spokeswoman Hagit Yaari also called for charges.[14]

The Israeli Knesset responded by passing legislation prohibiting the establishment of memorials to terrorists.[10] Consistent with that law, the shrine surrounding Goldstein's grave was demolished approximately two years after the 1998 legislation took effect.[10] Annual memorial gatherings for Goldstein and for Kahane, as well as the publication of books extolling them, were cited by observers as evidence of the continuing subculture of Kahane-influenced extremism in Israel.[11] The Anti-Defamation League placed Goldstein's actions within the broader ideological legacy of Kahane's radical Jewish nationalism, which ADL characterizes as promoting anti-Arab racism, violence, and political extremism.[15]

The Cave of the Patriarchs massacre stands as one of the most consequential acts of Jewish terrorism in modern Israeli history. The attack's timing — on Purim, at a site sacred to both Judaism and Islam, during the holiest month of the Muslim calendar — gave it a character of particular sacrilege that amplified its impact far beyond its immediate casualties.[2][8] The U.S. Department of State's official chronology characterizes the event as the Hebron Massacre and identifies Goldstein as a Jewish right-wing extremist.[16] The Anti-Defamation League identifies him as a Jewish extremist and a disciple of Meir Kahane whose actions remain emblematic of the dangers of Kahane-influenced political radicalism.[15]

Academic and religious commentary has interpreted the Purim setting through the biblical category of Amalek. One essay argued that Purim's command to remember and blot out Amalek helped create an ideological frame in which Goldstein turned a religious tradition toward murder; this is an interpretation, not a commission finding of motive.[17] The same publication included a separate commentary arguing that Goldstein's murders should not be equated with the views of all West Bank settlers or with Kahane's entire approach.[17]

The massacre deepened the legal and institutional delegitimization of Kahanism in Israel. Kach had already been barred from Knesset elections; after the massacre, the Israeli Cabinet declared Kach and Kahane Chai terrorist organizations in March 1994 following statements supporting the attack and verbal attacks on the government.[2][3] The decision reinforced Kahanism's exclusion from formal politics even as underground veneration of Goldstein persisted in fringe circles. The Temporary International Presence in Hebron owed its existence directly to the massacre and the international response it generated.[4]

The massacre's shadow over Hebron endured for decades. The closure of Shuhada Street and the associated economic devastation documented by B'Tselem represented a transformation of the city's character that outlasted the event itself by many years.[7] Prime Minister Rabin's condemnation captured the sentiment of the Israeli mainstream: that Goldstein and those who celebrated him were not merely criminals but a profound betrayal of the Zionist enterprise and of Jewish values.[2][11]

Principal sources consistently report 29 Palestinians killed, while estimates of the wounded vary. My Jewish Learning reports 125 wounded, while the U.S. Department of State gives approximately 150.[2][16] Encyclopedia.com reports about 100 wounded, while a commentary in the Berman Jewish Policy Archive gives an outlying figure of 40 killed without an injury count.[10][17]

The question of a possible accomplice was raised during the commission's investigation, prompted in part by conflicting eyewitness testimony about the weapon Goldstein carried: while Unger, Tor, and an army officer said they saw a Galil, three Israeli soldiers described an American-made M-16.[5] The Shamgar Commission ultimately found no evidence of a second shooter or any form of collaboration.[2]

Accounts of Goldstein's motive remain contested. The commission made no formal determination of motive beyond concluding that he acted alone. Testimony cited before the commission pointed to distress over the Oslo process; defenders claimed preemptive self-defense; a local journalist attributed a role to Goldstein's repeated exposure to the bodies of attack victims.[7][1] These remain interpretations and reported claims rather than established findings.

The extent of posthumous praise for Goldstein is also a matter of historical sensitivity. The JDL statement reproduced by the Anti-Defamation League described the attack as “a preventative measure against yet another Arab attack on Jews” and expressed understanding for “his motivation, his grief and his actions.”[6] ADL identifies such statements as evidence of dangerous extremism rather than legitimate political opinion. It has described praise for Goldstein by some rabbis and political figures in Israel and the United States as part of the broader problem of Kahane-influenced normalization.[15] Israel's government and most Israeli and Jewish leaders rejected those characterizations.[2][1]