A bullet entered the child's face, passed through his head, and lodged in his mother's cheek.
On a Friday evening in Hebron, a seven-month-old boy named Sam Fahd Abou Haikal was killed when Israeli soldiers opened fire on the car carrying him and his parents through the Tel Rumeida neighborhood. The family was traveling from Bethlehem to visit relatives when soldiers, believing the vehicle was accelerating toward them, discharged their weapons. The IDF has acknowledged the victims were uninvolved civilians and launched an investigation — a process that cannot restore what was lost, but which now carries the weight of a child's life and the enduring question of where the line between perceived threat and protected innocence must be drawn.
- A single bullet entered a seven-month-old's face, passed through his head, and lodged in his mother's cheek — the family thought the first shots were warnings; they were not.
- Soldiers in one of the West Bank's most contested neighborhoods made a split-second judgment that a slowing car was an accelerating threat, a gap in perception that proved fatal.
- The IDF's own initial inquiry confirmed what the family already knew: the people in that car were civilians with nowhere to be except a relative's home.
- An official military investigation is now underway, its findings destined for review by relevant authorities — but the institutional machinery of accountability moves in a different time than grief.
- The incident sharpens urgent questions about rules of engagement and civilian protection protocols in the West Bank, where operational security and ordinary life share the same narrow roads.
On a Friday evening, Israeli soldiers fired on a car moving through Hebron's Tel Rumeida neighborhood. Inside were a seven-month-old boy, Sam Fahd Abou Haikal, and his parents, who had set out from Bethlehem to visit family. The baby did not survive. His mother was struck in the cheek; his father was grazed on the finger.
According to the child's grandmother, the family had stopped their car upon seeing Israeli military vehicles and soldiers positioned ahead. Then came the gunfire — first mistaken for warning shots. A bullet entered the infant's face, traveled through his head, and came to rest in his mother's cheek.
The IDF stated that soldiers perceived the vehicle accelerating toward them and responded accordingly. After the fact, the military's own initial inquiry found that those harmed were uninvolved civilians, and the IDF issued a statement expressing sorrow and confirming an investigation was underway. The Palestinian Authority corroborated the family's account through its official news agency.
The incident lands at a fault line that has long defined life in the West Bank — the collision between military threat assessment and the unremarkable movements of civilian families. Soldiers believed they faced danger. A family believed they were simply on their way to see relatives. An investigation will now attempt to reconstruct those seconds. For Sam Fahd Abou Haikal, there is no reconstruction — only the fact of his absence, and the wounds his parents will carry forward.
On a Friday evening in Hebron, Israeli soldiers fired on a car traveling through the Tel Rumeida neighborhood. Inside was a seven-month-old boy named Sam Fahd Abou Haikal, his mother, and his father. The baby did not survive. His parents were wounded—his mother struck in the cheek, his father grazed on the finger.
The family had been driving from Bethlehem to visit relatives when they approached a checkpoint. According to the baby's grandmother, they saw Israeli military vehicles and soldiers positioned ahead and stopped their car. Then shots came. The family initially thought they were warning shots. They were not. A single bullet entered the child's face, passed through his head, and lodged in his mother's cheek.
The Israeli Defense Forces said that during operational activity in the area, soldiers perceived the vehicle accelerating toward them and responded with gunfire. In a statement issued after the incident, the military acknowledged that "an initial inquiry found that those injured were uninvolved civilians." The IDF said it "expresses deep sorrow for any harm caused to uninvolved individuals" and that the shooting was under investigation, with findings to be submitted to relevant authorities for review.
The Palestinian Authority identified the infant through its official news agency and confirmed the family's account of the evening's events. The grandmother's description of the bullet's path—entering the child's face, traversing his head, and striking his mother—provides the most precise accounting of what happened in those seconds when the soldiers fired.
This incident sits at the intersection of operational security and civilian protection, questions that have long defined the dynamics of military activity in the West Bank. The soldiers believed they faced a threat. The family believed they were simply driving to see relatives. An investigation is now underway to determine what happened and why, with the findings to be reviewed by military authorities. For now, a seven-month-old boy is dead, and his parents carry wounds both visible and otherwise.
Citas Notables
One bullet struck my grandson, traversed his face and crossed his head, striking his mother's cheek where it lodged— The baby's grandmother
The IDF expresses deep sorrow for any harm caused to uninvolved individuals— Israeli Defense Forces statement
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did the soldiers fire? Was there an actual threat?
According to the IDF, soldiers perceived the vehicle accelerating toward them. But the grandmother's account suggests the family had already stopped their car when the shots came. So the perception and the reality may not have aligned.
How does a bullet do what the grandmother described—enter a baby's face and exit into the mother's cheek?
It speaks to proximity and the angle of fire. They were in a car together. A single round can travel through multiple people depending on trajectory. It's the kind of detail that makes the abstraction of "an incident" suddenly concrete.
What happens now with the investigation?
The IDF will review what occurred, and the findings go to relevant authorities. But investigations into civilian casualties in the West Bank have a long history of producing limited accountability. This one will be watched closely.
Was the family doing anything wrong?
They were traveling between two Palestinian cities to visit family. They stopped when they saw soldiers. By all accounts, they were civilians going about their lives near a checkpoint.
What does "expresses deep sorrow" actually mean in this context?
It's an acknowledgment of harm without necessarily establishing how or why it happened. The military is saying the victims were uninvolved, which is an admission. But sorrow and accountability are not the same thing.