How Eurovision can address the controversy over Israel

Metro

15-05-2025

There's nothing quite like Eurovision, is there?
As a lifelong fan and annual party host, I love the contest for more than its spectacle. It embodies the belief that Europe should never again be divided.
Like the European Union, Eurovision was born in the aftermath of the Second World War. It was partially designed to reunite a fractured continent through the shared language of song.
Over the decades, some have criticised Eurovision as tabloid trash or overly political, particularly regarding bloc voting. But beyond these critiques, it remains a cultural institution watched by hundreds of millions, united by a mission to bring Europe together.
Today, however, the contest faces a critical crossroads far graver than any of that. Sparked by Russia's illegal war in Ukraine – and subsequent exile, a move that prompted Putin to start his own contest – and followed by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there is a swelling of debate that risks overshadowing its founding ethos.
Fans are, once again, fiercely debating Israel's participation in Eurovision, and this year, I believe I have a solution.
Despite the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) banning Russia after its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, Israel remained in the line-up, leading many to boycott the competition.
In the run-up, organisers declared Israel's entry politically charged and forced a rename and rewrite from October Rain to Hurricane.
Protests in the host city of Malmö, Sweden, became so unmanageable that a ban on any country's flag that wasn't participating – including Palestine's – was introduced, a move they publicly rowed back on this week.
Meanwhile, backstage friction reached boiling point when, just minutes before one of the world's most-watched shows was due to begin, Dutch artist Joost Klein – an outspoken critic of Israel – was inexplicably disqualified.
It should come as no surprise, then, that introducing this year's Israeli artist as a 'Hamas survivor' has sparked yet another fierce debate.
Israel's entrant this year is 24-year-old Yuval Raphael, the winner of a talent show that doubles as the country's Eurovision selection.
Raphael was at the Nova music festival on October 7 when Hamas gunmen stormed the site; she spent eight hours crammed into a shelter with more than 50 others as grenades reined in.
Only 11 people made it out alive. Raphael dedicated her competition performance to the victims of that day.
No one questions the unspeakable horror Raphael endured.
The debate is whether her very presence on the Eurovision stage – chosen because she survived that attack – crosses from performance into politics.
Some insist it doesn't; surviving terrorism shouldn't make anyone a political figure. Others argue that, in this context, it inevitably does – and that's where this year's dilemma lies.
Since the announcement, fans have shared their thoughts on social media.
'What next?' one response read, 'UK has an IRA survivor? Ireland has a survivor of the British military?'
Another scathing comment suggested that 'her recognition lies in surviving a terrible attack, not her musical quality.'
All of this is against the backdrop of Israel being allowed to compete in the first place, along with the contest's major sponsors, which includes the Israeli company Moroccanoil.
Excluding Russia but not Israel – who recommenced ground operations in Gaza despite an agreed ceasefire – feels inconsistent with Eurovision's aim of uniting people across borders and cultures.
Of course, nothing about global conflicts is simple, and comparing Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine with Israel's longstanding tensions in Gaza is difficult.
On October 7, 2023, Hamas – designated a terrorist organisation by many countries, including the United Kingdom – launched a large-scale assault on southern Israel, killing civilians and taking hostages.
Israel responded with a major bombing campaign in Gaza, escalating a humanitarian crisis that dates back generations, when it took control of the Palestinian territories.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Israel's record on Ukraine isn't blemish-free either. In a key United Nations vote, Israel opposed a resolution condemning Russia's unprovoked invasion and calling for Ukraine's territorial integrity.
Russia's unprovoked invasion and Israel's role in Gaza are not identical situations, but if both clash with Eurovision's ideals of peace and international cooperation, then either both should be excluded, or Israel's presence must be placed in context.
The complexities have left fans torn.
It's a delicate situation, but I think I have a delicate solution.
It rests on the contest's tradition of postcard videos – short features shown before each live performance that showcases the country's culture and performer's story.
Each nation gets one – this year, it's time to add one more.
There must be a postcard from Palestine – a voice from Gaza, adding crucial context and exposing the humanitarian crisis.
More than 50,000 Palestinians have been reported killed; food is scarce, and doctors say they are running out of basic supplies, blood, and even workable operating theatres. The Red Cross now warns Gaza is on the edge of a complete medical shutdown.
This isn't about deciding who suffers more; it's about honouring Eurovision's founding goal: Bringing people together through music, even if that means confronting uncomfortable truths.
Over many years, Eurovision has united people in ways few events can, but this row risks eroding its soul. Wherever you look, Eurovision has a remarkable ability to kickstart global conversations, transcending any barrier when we truly embrace it.
Dana International's 1998 victory as the first trans artist sparked a vital discussion; 2014 winner Conchita Wurst influenced a United Nations debate on human rights, and Serbia's 2007 triumph marked its first international recognition as an independent nation.
In 2022, we saw the contest at its best: Sam Ryder's unforgettable second-place performance renewed British optimism as Ukraine claimed victory despite unimaginable adversity.
The following year, the UK hosted the contest in Liverpool on Ukraine's behalf. It was the first time a winning country could not host for security reasons, and though far from ideal, it was a profound and powerful show of pan-European solidarity.
Every detail – from the stage design and half-time performers to the merchandise and on-screen graphics – was an unapologetically proud tribute to Ukrainian culture and resilience. It was Britain at its absolute best.
The point is that, throughout its history, Eurovision has been the glittering backdrop for a deeper mission: Healing our continent and uniting our nations.
However, the EBU's current stance is inconsistent, unjustifiable, and unsustainable.
If one nation's pain is spotlighted, the other's must also be recognised. Otherwise, the contest risks becoming a forum for selective political storytelling to hundreds of millions amid a full-scale war. More Trending
Eurovision's noble origins almost 70 years ago were to give hope to a continent rebuilding itself after half a decade of war and ensure those horrors never happen again.
Since then, it has introduced the world to some of the biggest artists of all time – perhaps you've heard of Céline Dion? Or ABBA, Cliff Richard, and Lordi? Loreen, Julio Iglesias (yes, father to Enrique!) or Olivia Newton-John?
But the contest's true power goes beyond spine-tingling voices, jaw-dropping pyrotechnics, or dazzling costumes; it lies in its ability to unite our continent.
As Europe faces its greatest threat since the Second World War, we need that unity more than ever.
Do you have a story you'd like to share? Get in touch by emailing [e-mail].
Share your views in the comments below.
MORE: Why are countries not in Europe allowed to compete at Eurovision?
MORE: Eurovision stars Remember Monday: 'We're not everyone's cup of tea – that's fine'
MORE: I'm a Eurovision superfan – here's how to sound like a pro at your watch party