Israel at the Eurovision: Double Standards?

The Eurovision Song Contest has long been more than a music competition. What began as a cultural reconciliation project after World War II is today a media spectacle where music, identity, politics, and public opinion constantly collide. 2025 is no different: Israel’s participation in the festival in Switzerland has once again sparked controversy. Activist groups are demanding the country’s exclusion due to the war with Hamas and Israeli military action in Gaza. 

Their call sounds morally outraged and politically engaged, but on closer inspection it appears mainly selective and inconsistent. Israel is being singled out in a way that has little or nothing to do with geography or legal principles — and everything to do with who Israel is. 

Geography as an Excuse 

The first argument opponents often raise is that Israel is not geographically part of Europe and therefore “has no place” in the festival. That is factually correct — Israel is located in the Middle East. But the same applies to other regular participants such as Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, and even — albeit more symbolically — Australia. Turkey, Morocco, and Lebanon have also participated in the past. 

After all, the Eurovision Song Contest is not a geographical project but a production of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU). Membership in the EBU is based on media relations, not on national borders. The Israeli public broadcaster KAN is a full member of the EBU and meets its requirements: independent journalism, freedom of expression, and a pluralistic media offering. That is the real litmus test: not whether a country is “European,” but whether it has a functioning, free public broadcaster. 

Israel: Freedom Under Pressure, But Still Freedom 

Israel is currently a country at war — there is no doubt about that. The conflict with Hamas following the October 7, 2023 attack has left deep scars. Thousands of victims have been reported, including many innocent Palestinian civilians. The international community is closely watching Israel’s military actions. And even within Israel, that policy is the subject of intense debate. 

That is precisely the point: Israel has a vibrant public discourse, a free press, independent courts, and a critical public. Demonstrations against the Netanyahu government’s policies are held weekly — and often broadcast by KAN. Journalists, artists, and activists can speak out without fear of repression. The Israeli media landscape is complex and far from uniform, but it is free. 

Compare that with Azerbaijan, which is also participating in Eurovision 2025. In September 2023, the Azerbaijani army launched a military operation in Nagorno-Karabakh, a region populated for decades by ethnic Armenians. Under international pressure and military threat, over 100,000 Armenians were forced to flee — an ethnic cleansing in all but name. 

And it didn’t stop there. In the months leading up to the attack, Azerbaijan blocked all food, medicine, and aid shipments via the only connection route — the Lachin Corridor — to Nagorno-Karabakh. A full-fledged humanitarian blockade, sharply condemned by international observers. 

And yet: no global wave of protests against Azerbaijan’s Eurovision participation. No street demonstrations in European cities. No petitions to the EBU. No calls for boycott or exclusion. Western opinion leaders remained mostly silent. The protest movement was completely silent. 

Principles or Projections? 

This selective outrage raises fundamental questions. Why is Israel — with its free press and open society — so harshly targeted, while autocratic regimes with blood on their hands are allowed to participate undisturbed? Why is there protest against an Israeli girl singing a song about peace, but not against an Azerbaijani act representing a state that systematically violates human rights and suppresses dissent? 

The only honest conclusion seems to be that the protest against Israel has little to do with principles, and a lot to do with projection. Israel is not the only country at war. Not the only country criticized internationally. But it is the only Jewish state. And the only liberal democracy in a hostile region that is scrutinized like no other country. 

Those who defend freedom of expression, human rights, and democratic values should support Israel’s participation — not because everything in Israel is perfect, far from it, but because Israel still allows for doubt, for criticism, for pluralism. Precisely the kind of space that is absent in so many other participating countries, without raising anyone’s concern. 

Music as a Bridge, Not a Weapon 

Eurovision claims to be a celebration of diversity and unity, a bridge between peoples, not a political tool. By excluding or marginalizing Israel, the festival would not only betray its own values but also erase the distinction between a democracy at war and a dictatorship in peace. 

It is not for the EBU or the public to pass political judgment. But if there must be a criterion, it should be press freedom and societal openness — and in that regard, Israel has nothing to fear. On the contrary: Israel’s participation in Eurovision is an opportunity to show the complexity of the situation, not to condemn it with slogans. 

Anyone who truly believes in peace, equality, and cultural connection should welcome Israel to the Eurovision stage — not despite the war, but because music proves its power most in times of war.