10 ISSUE IV
MARCH 2025
MARCH 2025
Branding a Nation
Israel uses Eurovision for cultural diplomacy, projecting peace, but Palestinians and their supporters use it to highlight the occupation, increasing pressure for a ban.
.
.
By Roni Zahavi-Brunner
While celebrating its 50th year, in 2024, the ratings for Eurovision, the European song contest, suddenly plummeted by millions of views. The usual headlines covering the competition’s queer representation, extravagant outfits, and peculiar lyrics were replaced by headlines about mass protests outside the arena, censored artists, and a sweeping anti-apartheid boycott movement. As Israel, which has competed since 1973, escalated its genocidal campaign in Gaza, viewers were outraged at the double standard of the organizers, European Broadcasting Union (EBU): While the EBU banned Russia from participating in the Eurovision contest only one day after it invaded Ukraine, they have made it abundantly clear they will go to great lengths to ensure Israel's participation, regardless of its ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
Established in 1956 to foster European unity in the aftermath of World War II, the annual televised singing competition quickly evolved into an important cultural event for the continent. Despite the EBU’s insistence that the competition is apolitical, Eurovision has always been a site of political meaning-making. From queerness and Pan-Europeanism to countries’ voting patterns, there is a large body of academic literature on how Eurovision relates to national identities and political struggles. Scholars like Julie Kalman, Dean Vuletic, Catherine Baker, and Christina Kiel, claimed Eurovision is “a space in which the soft power politics of nation branding, cultural relations, and cultural diplomacy can be exercised.”
After Israel joined in 1973, Eurovision quickly gained an enthusiastic Israeli fan base. Since then, Israel's cultural identity and political ideas have been reflected in its Eurovision entries. In 1983 in Munich, for example, Israel competed with the song “Chai” (Alive) as a celebration of Jewish life after the Holocaust and the Munich massacre. In 1998, an Israeli transgender woman won Eurovision, inspiring Israel’s inaugural pride parade a few weeks later. However, as the BDS movement has gained traction in recent years, activists and advocates across Europe have been demanding the removal of Israel from Eurovision in solidarity with Palestinians living under the violent reality of Israel’s occupation.
Historian Daniel Mahla, who studies Israel’s history with Eurovision, suggests Israel’s approach to Eurovision varies over time from attempting to define Israel as a European society to distancing Israel from so-called antisemitism in Europe (defined in Israel as anti-Zionism). For example, just a few days before Israel hosted the Eurovision Contest in 1979, it signed a peace agreement with Egypt which was applauded across Europe. Consequently, Israel chose to brand Eurovision 1979 as the “peace Eurovision,” attempting to generate European support and present a peaceful, progressive image. Similarly, Israel’s participation in Eurovision has often served pinkwashing and pairing LGBTQI rights with a nationalist ideology to appeal to a progressive European audience. For example, Israel’s win in the 1998 Eurovision contest by transgender singer Dana International with the song “Diva,” was quickly framed by Israeli officials as a celebration of Israel’s liberalism and democracy in contrast with the homophobia in neighboring Arab countries; an LGBTQ-friendly, “modern” space in an otherwise hostile region. It was also meant to counter perceptions of Israel as “a state of wars and terror” and an inherent part of the Western world and of the European cultural sphere. The win was foregrounded in state-made publicity materials abroad.
However, Israel’s liberal nationalist narrative goes beyond pinkwashing to include feminist imagery in order to wash its image and distract from, or even justify, the occupation. In 2018, Netta won Eurovision with the song “Toy,” celebrated as a feminist celebration of body positivity and autonomy; it coincided with #MeToo, which enhanced its appeal. To capitalize on her win, Israel quickly appointed her as a cultural ambassador. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was quick to meet with Netta and celebrate the win publicly.
Israel’s cultural diplomacy, however, is not always received globally without criticism. Eurovision 2019, hosted by Israel, was an attempt at public diplomacy that backfired. Many artists called for a boycott, and some contestants found creative ways to protest on stage. While Israel had hoped to use it as a branding opportunity, highlighting queer culture and supposed tolerance and modernity, hosting the competition also strengthened the European BDS movement and brought attention to the occupation. Even non-political coverage included information about the claims made by BDS supporters. Increasingly since 2019, the BDS movement has been pointing out Israel’s pinkwashing propaganda as a reason to boycott Eurovision. If Israel uses Eurovision to push an agenda of “peace,” diversity and modernity, Palestinians and their supporters utilize the show to shed light on the occupation and Israeli violence in front of a wide European audience.
A few performers, like the Swedish Erin Saade and the Icelandic Hatari, have broken Eurovision rules to display Palestinian flags on stage, including on the 2019 Tel Aviv stage. In 2024, nine contestants released a joint statement calling for “an immediate and lasting ceasefire” in Gaza, while thousands protested outside the Arena and across Europe against Israel’s participation.
The growing influence of the BDS movement and its ability to harness Eurovision as a site of resistance demonstrates the contest’s dual function as a platform for both hegemonic narratives and grassroots dissent, offering a stage to fight back against the occupation. Looking ahead to Eurovision 2025, some European countries like Slovenia and Spain have already called to disqualify Israel’s participation – in clearer and bolder moves than ever before. Banning Israel seems within reach, which would mark a big step to de-normalizing occupation.
roni zahavi-brunner is completing an MA in International Affairs at The New School.