Next Year in Jerusalem: How Israel Can Break the Cultural Boycott

Most Israelis are understandably outraged by the near-universal cultural boycott of this year’s Israel Festival. The festival is intended to celebrate Israeli creativity while bringing artists, musicians, and performers from around the world to Jerusalem. Instead, many international participants refused to come.

Once again, Israelis are confronted with a disturbing reality: following October 7 and the atrocities committed against Israeli civilians, it is Israel, not Hamas, that increasingly finds itself isolated and boycotted in cultural circles around the world.

One explanation is obvious. Antisemitism, increasingly disguised and legitimized as fashionable anti-Zionism, has become deeply embedded within parts of the international cultural establishment. For many artists, intellectuals and cultural institutions, boycotting Israel has become a demonstration of ideological virtue. Yet simply complaining about this hypocrisy will accomplish extraordinarily little.

Israel must also ask itself a more difficult and important question: why does it continue seeking cultural validation from the very people and institutions that have already made their hostility toward Israel abundantly clear?

The failure of this year’s festival should therefore be treated not simply as a disappointment, but as an opportunity to fundamentally rethink the way Israel approaches international cultural programming. For too long, Israeli institutions have looked primarily toward the same Western European and North American artistic circles for legitimacy and participation.

Yet many of these circles have become ideological echo chambers where hostility toward Israel is increasingly accepted and, in some cases, actively encouraged. The world, however, is much larger than the radicalized sections of the Western cultural establishment.

Israel has friends, allies and communities around the world that do not view the country as a colonial villain or a political embarrassment. There are millions of people who admire Israel, support its right to exist and would welcome the opportunity to engage with its cultural life. The question is whether Israeli cultural institutions have made a serious enough effort to find them and invite them to participate.

Take Nashville and Memphis in Tennessee for example. These cities are home to extraordinary musicians, gospel choirs, bluegrass bands, and Christian artists, many of whom come from communities with deep and longstanding connections to Israel. Surely there are performers who would be honoured to travel to Jerusalem and participate in an international festival. With proper outreach and support from Jewish and Christian organizations, there is no reason why Israel could not attract talented performers from these communities.

Then there is the rest of the world. Argentina, India, Taiwan, Japan, Southeast Asia, and Africa represent some of the richest and most diverse artistic traditions on earth. India alone offers extraordinary classical musicians, dancers, and performers. Taiwan has preserved essential elements of traditional Chinese culture. Southeast Asia possesses centuries-old musical and dance traditions, while Africa contains an astonishing diversity of music, dance, sculpture, and visual art. Why should an international Israel Festival be dependent primarily on artists from London, Paris, Berlin, Toronto and New York?

Imagine instead a festival in Jerusalem featuring Indian classical musicians, Taiwanese traditional ensembles, Vietnamese instrumentalists, Cambodian dancers, African musicians, gospel choirs, and artists from Jewish communities throughout the diaspora. Such a festival would not be a second-rate substitute for European artists who have chosen to boycott Israel. It could potentially become something far more diverse, interesting, and genuinely international than the festival that exists today.

We should also not ignore the millions of Christians around the world who openly support Israel. Christian Zionists have stood beside Israel politically, morally, and financially for decades. Their communities include musicians, artists, writers, and performers who may well welcome an opportunity to participate in Israeli cultural life.

There is no reason why Israel should not actively build relationships with these artistic communities and invite them to become part of a genuinely international cultural exchange.

The fundamental problem, therefore, is not simply that artists refused to come to Israel. The deeper question is whether enough imagination and effort were invested in finding artists who wanted to come. There is a vast world beyond the ideological bubble of the contemporary Western arts scene, and Israel should be actively engaging with it rather than repeatedly chasing the approval of people who have already demonstrated their hostility.

No country should have to beg artists to visit it. Israel certainly should not. Instead of pleading with those who boycott it, Israel should build new cultural relationships with countries and communities that are open to engagement. It should actively seek musicians, artists, dancers, and performers who see Jerusalem not as a political liability but as one of the world’s great cultural and spiritual centres.

The failure of this year’s Israel Festival should therefore not lead to despair. It should lead to reinvention. Israel has an opportunity to rethink its cultural relationships and create something more ambitious than simply replicating the same networks and tastes that have dominated international festivals for decades. Rather than chasing those who reject Israel, cultural leaders should begin building meaningful partnerships with those who genuinely want to participate.

Next year in Jerusalem, I would like to hear bluegrass bands and gospel choirs alongside Israeli musicians. I would like to see Cambodian dancers and Vietnamese musicians, experience Indian classical music, and traditional Taiwanese arts, and hear the extraordinary musical traditions of Africa.

I would like to see artists from throughout the Jewish diaspora participate alongside performers from countries and communities that have chosen friendship and engagement over boycotts and ideological conformity.

An international Israel Festival should reflect the diversity of the entire world, not merely the increasingly narrow worldview of a Western cultural establishment that has decided Israel is beyond the pale. If certain artists choose to boycott Israel, that is their decision. Israel should not respond by begging for their approval or allowing their absence to define its cultural life.

The most effective response to a cultural boycott is to build something so vibrant, ambitious, and internationally diverse that the boycott itself becomes increasingly irrelevant. That is the unexpected opportunity hidden within this year’s failure.

Next year in Jerusalem, Israel should stop asking those who reject it for permission to celebrate its culture and instead open its doors wider to the world that wants to come.