The Eurovision Song Contest (ESC) 2026, this week is celebrating the 70th anniversary of the competition, although featuring 35 countries, which is the lowest number of participating countries since 2003.
While Chronicle.lu previously explored Eurovision's history, Luxembourg's participation and broader voting controversies last year, this article takes a closer look at the political tensions and public criticism connected to Israel's participation in Eurovision.
Following the 2025 victory of JJ's operatic ballad, Wasted Love, the song contest took place this year in Vienna, Austria. Luxembourg took part in the contest for the 40th time with the song Mother Nature by Eva Marija, which unfortunately did not qualify for the final.
According to Reuters, last year's contest drew around 166 million viewers, although viewership is likely to be slightly lower this year as some countries have decided not to broadcast the event (not the same as those not participating).
While some are organising collective Eurovision watch parties and discussing predictions for the 2026 winner, others are debating each country's choice of representative both online and offline. At the same time, the contest's less visible side involving political tensions and controversies has also grown alongside Eurovision's anniversary.
Beyond the Eurovision stage
Since the very beginning, Eurovision has been operated by the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), with first programmes in 1954 and its most famous programme becoming the ESC.
Some might think that the contest is limited to European Union (EU) Member States. However, although EU countries make up the majority of participants, non-EU countries such as Australia, Israel, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia also take part in the competition.
The participating countries are not represented directly by governments but through national broadcasters which are members of the EBU. To participate, broadcasters must operate as public service broadcasters and follow EBU rules and standards.
According to Eurovision, the ESC began as a pan-European "technical experiment in television broadcasting". Although the technical experiment turned out not only technical as it has long carried such diverse views.
Over the decades, what originally began as an entertainment programme gradually became connected with national identity, public values and international politics, as each artist performs under the flag of their country.
'United By Music' vs 'United for Palestine'
This year, discussions surrounding whether the Eurovision Song Contest (ESC) can truly remain politically neutral have once again resurfaced. With the slogan 'United by Music', each performer appears on stage representing not only music but also sovereignty, values and national identity.
Further challenging the contest's apolitical image was this year's 'United for Palestine', an alternative music event held in Brussels, Belgium, on the night of the ESC semi-final on Tuesday 12 May 2026. The organisers called for a boycott of the official Eurovision event due to Israel's participation. Ironically, Brussels is widely regarded as the political centre of Europe, while Eurovision has long presented itself as one of the continent's major cultural events.
Organised by several NGOs, including 11.11.11, ABVV-FGTB, ACV-CSC, Intal, SOS Gaza and Vrede vzw, the Brussels event served as both an alternative cultural programme and a protest platform against Israel's inclusion in the contest.
Higher-mentioned organisations accuse Eurovision of applying "double standards", pointing to a different approach against Russia, when banning it from the competition following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
The 2026 boycott crisis
New dimensions of the conflict emerged right before the beginning of this year's contest. National broadcasters from five countries, including Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Slovenia and Iceland, announced a boycott of this year's event. Among them is notably Spain, which belongs to the Eurovision "Big Five" alongside France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom. Those are the countries that contribute the most financially to the EBU and automatically qualify for the final.
The reasoning behind the boycott was protest over Israel's inclusion in the contest. As a result, the 2026 edition has been described by several media outlets as one of the biggest political crisis in Eurovision's history.
Undoubtedly the ESC has lost some central European participants who nevertheless have been present in the contest for decades. Not only they participated with songs but also kept a strong Eurovision culture and audience, with Ireland remaining one of the most successful Eurovision countries in history with its seven victories.
Political tensions are not new to Eurovision
It might sound like the beginning of the end for the contest but history shows that countries leaving and later returning to Eurovision is not unusual. Over the decades, several countries have withdrawn, returned, been suspended or skipped editions for political, financial and organisational reasons.
Italy withdrew from Eurovision in 1998 before returning in 2011. Turkey has not participated since 2012 due to disagreements with the voting system, while Romania missed several contests because of financial and broadcaster-related issues. Armenia withdrew in 2012 amid tensions with Azerbaijan, and Russia was excluded in 2022 following its invasion of Ukraine, after which its broadcasters were suspended from the EBU. Belarus was also suspended after repeated breaches of EBU standards.
Yet throughout the years, the EBU has repeatedly insisted that Eurovision is a non-political contest, despite participation often depending on broadcasters meeting EBU rules as well as broader political realities.
Israel at the centre of Eurovision 2026 controversy
Among other controversies discussed by Eurovision viewers has been the alleged use of crowd-noise balancing (also known as the"anti-boo technology") during politically sensitive performances.
This years semi-finals on Tuesday 12 May, during Israel's performance distant chants of "stop, stop the genocide" and "free, free Palestine" were heard as Noam Bettan began his performance of Michelle.
The EBU and this year's host Austrian national broadcaster ORF issued a statement on what happened at the semi-final and commented that the protestors were later removed for continuing to disturb the audience.
Other issues surrounding Israel's presence in the contest in recent years have included growing mistrust in the tele-voting system, which allows multiple votes per viewer and has raised concerns over transparency and organised voting campaigns.
Last year after the contest, the voting system also came under scrutiny when Yuval Raphael, who represented Israel at the competition last year, jumped to second place in the public vote despite lower jury scores.
Public pressure & cultural solidarity
Firstly, the questions have been raised publicly. In April, more than 1,000 musicians and people working in the cultural sector signed a letter calling on nations to boycott the contest and accused the EBU of hypocrisy over Russia's exclusion following its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, while Israel continues to participate.
The letter was organised by the campaign group No Music for Genocide and signed by internationally known artists and bands including Kneecap, Roger Waters, Paul Weller, Paloma Faith, Macklemore, as well as former Eurovision winners Emmelie de Forest and Charlie McGettigan.
Amnesty International Secretary-General Agnès Callamard argued that Israel's participation in Eurovision helps to divert attention from the war in Gaza and normalise the country's actions towards Palestinians.
The winner of the 2024 contest, Switzerland's Nemo, and Irish artist Charlie McGettigan, who won Eurovision in 1994, also publicly criticised Israel's participation.
Israel's participation amid criticism
One of the biggest questions surrounding this year's contest is why Israel continues to participate despite growing criticism and controversy surrounding its presence in Eurovision.
At the same time, questions have also emerged around why the EBU chose to keep Israel in the competition despite the risk of losing participating broadcasters and audiences.
Many people online describe Israel's Eurovision participation as a form of "soft power" or image diplomacy, arguing that the contest helps the country present a modern, cultural and liberal image to European audiences during a time of political criticism. Through culture, music and LGBTQ+ friendly branding, Eurovision offers Israel significant international visibility.
The discussion has also extended to Eurovision sponsorships and promotional material. In videos shared on YouTube and other platforms, the official ESC accounts display the logo "Presented by Moroccanoil".
Moroccanoil is an Israeli-founded cosmetics company and official Eurovision sponsor. Online critics have symbolically connected the sponsorship with Israel's presence in the contest, although the partnership itself remains commercial.
Can culture & art ever be neutral?
To sum up, artistic work itself might be good, but every cultural product still exists under the umbrella of certain values and national identity.
In comments under Israel's Eurovision entry, many viewers praised the performance as "one of the strongest" and "most professional" this year. The disagreement, however, is usually not about whether certain artists are talented but about whether participation in a major international cultural event indirectly benefits the image of the state they represent.
As many human rights activists and protestors feel that their voices against the ongoing genocide have not been heard through political channels, they have increasingly turned to cultural boycotts and public criticism as some of the few remaining ways to make those voices resonate further.
