|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
While the world watched the Gaza conflict, a quiet legislative battle threatens to dismantle Kan, the Israeli broadcaster. If successful, it could end Israel’s Eurovision participation – perhaps permanently. The irony is that the EBU’s hard-won victory in December could be worthless within two years.
When the European Broadcasting Union held its General Assembly in early December, delegates faced weeks of pressure, petitions, and emotional pleas. Activists argued that Israel should be banned from Eurovision 2026. Artists threatened to withdraw. Member broadcasters from Spain to Ireland questioned whether hosting a song contest could be morally compatible with the current conflict in Gaza.
But the EBU held firm. On 3 December, it cleared Israel’s broadcaster, Kan, to compete in Vienna in May 2026. Only a handful of member organisations had formally demanded a vote on Israel’s participation, and that challenge failed overwhelmingly.
Yet there is an uncomfortable irony buried in that victory. The EBU may have just thrown away hard-to-win-back credibility defending a broadcaster that its own government is intent on destroying. And if that destruction proceeds as planned, Israel could be forced out of Eurovision anyway – not by international pressure, not by fans signing petitions or announcing personal boycotts… but by its own legislation.
Eurovision is for broadcasters, not countries
This is the key detail that most casual Eurovision followers do not fully grasp. The contest is not organised by the United Nations or FIFA. It is run by a membership body for public service broadcasters called the European Broadcasting Union. Countries do not enter Eurovision. Broadcasters do.
To qualify for EBU membership, an organisation must meet specific criteria. It must be a public service broadcaster – meaning it serves the entire population, not just paying subscribers. It must produce news and current affairs programming. And it must maintain editorial independence from political control.
The Israeli EBU member Kan currently meets all three requirements. That is why the EBU has repeatedly insisted that Israel remains eligible to take part, regardless of the political controversy surrounding the conflict.
“Eurovision is a contest between broadcasters,” the EBU stated in early December, in a carefully worded response to calls for exclusion. “As long as that broadcaster meets the criteria, they can compete.”
It was a defensible position. And it stood.
But it came with an unspoken caveat: it applies to Kan as the organisation exists right now. And Kan may not exist in this form for much longer.
The quiet dismantling of Israeli public broadcasting
While international attention was fixed on Gaza and the Eurovision controversy, a different battle has been playing out inside Israel’s Knesset.
Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi, a Likud politician, has been advancing sweeping legislation designed to fundamentally restructure – and potentially eliminate – public broadcasting in Israel.
There are two parallel bills moving through parliament simultaneously. One would overhaul media regulation in ways that critics argue allow direct political interference in broadcasting decisions. The other is more direct. It would force the privatisation of Kan, and specifically target its news and current affairs division.
Under the law, Kan would have up to two years to find a private buyer for its news operation. If no buyer is found within that window, the news division would be shut down entirely.
Either outcome creates a non-negotiable barrier to ongoing EBU membership.
A broadcaster without news output does not qualify as a public service broadcaster. A broadcaster without editorial independence – because its news has been sold to a private owner or government-allied entity – also does not qualify. In either case, Kan would cease to meet the EBU’s membership criteria.
The EBU itself has made this crystal clear. In a formal statement issued in late November 2024, it warned that the proposed Israeli reforms “threaten the future of public service media in Israel” and could result in Kan losing its membership altogether.
“If these changes proceed as drafted, Kan would no longer be able to meet the membership requirements of the EBU,” the statement read, in carefully diplomatic language.
What the EBU did not explicitly say, but what the subtext made clear, is this: if Kan loses its news division, Israel loses access to Eurovision.
The timeline: Israel in 2026, but what about 2027?
The timing of all this matters enormously.
The Karhi bills are currently being fast-tracked through a special Knesset committee. If they pass second and third readings – which is expected in early 2026 – they would likely take effect in spring 2026. A two-year privatisation window would then begin, during which Kan’s news division would be marketed to potential buyers.
This is why Israel’s participation in Eurovision 2026 looks secure. Even if the legislation passes before May, Kan would still technically exist as a broadcaster during the contest. It would still technically meet the membership criteria. The window for exclusion would not fully open until later.
But look one year further ahead and the picture becomes far more troubling.
If Israel were to win Eurovision in 2026 – a real possibility, given that Kan has had multiple entries reach the final in recent years – the country would be scheduled to host the following year, in 2027.
By May 2027, Kan’s situation would be fundamentally different. The two-year privatisation clock would be ticking. Kan’s news division would either be in active negotiations with potential buyers, already sold, or in the process of being shut down. The broadcaster would be in chaos – or ceasing to exist altogether.
The EBU cannot entrust the Eurovision Song Contest – one of the world’s most complex live television productions, involving 35+ countries and hundreds of millions of viewers – to a broadcaster in that position. Even if the technical infrastructure remained, Kan would lack the editorial independence required to sign the EBU’s hosting agreements.
What would almost certainly happen is this: the EBU would invoke its contingency rules (as it did with Ukraine in 2022, when Russia’s invasion made hosting impossible) and ask another country to host on Israel’s behalf. Israel could still theoretically compete, but it could not host.
The permanent exit
The consequences become even more severe if you look beyond 2027.
From that moment onward, Israel would not just be unable to host Eurovision. It would be unable to take part at all.
According to the current legislation, this process could be complete by late 2027 or early 2028. At that point, unless something dramatically changes – either the Israeli Supreme Court strikes down the law, or a new government repeals it – Israel’s place in the Eurovision family would end.
Not because of international pressure. Not because of politics. But because it no longer has a qualifying broadcaster.
The uncomfortable irony for the EBU
This creates a genuinely uncomfortable position for the European Broadcasting Union.
Over the past two years, EBU leadership has weathered sustained criticism from fans, artists, and activist groups. They have defended their position against boycott calls and emotional pleas. Several broadcasters have already withdrawn from the 2026 Contest in protest after the December vote – including Spain’s RTVE, the Netherlands’ AVROTROS, and Ireland’s RTÉ.
All of this damage has been justified, in the EBU’s view, by defending a principle: that Eurovision operates according to broadcaster criteria, not geopolitical judgment. That the contest transcends politics. That media independence matters.
For Eurovision fans, this creates a particularly frustrating picture. A broadcaster is being allowed to compete because it meets the rules today, even as those same rules are being actively dismantled tomorrow by its own government.
For the EBU, it raises an awkward question about institutional credibility. How meaningfully can an organisation defend its standards if it knows they are about to be breached?
What happens next
The immediate future depends heavily on Israel’s Supreme Court.
Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara has already signalled that the broadcasting reform bills are unconstitutional. Legal challenges are expected within days or weeks of passage. The Court could grant an emergency injunction freezing implementation, or it could strike down the legislation entirely.
If that happens, Kan’s future – and Israel’s Eurovision future – would look a little more secure. The broadcaster’s news division might remain intact, and its EBU membership safe.
If the laws pass unimpeded, however, the countdown begins.
Israel will almost certainly appear on the Eurovision stage in Vienna in May 2026. The delegates will wave their flags. The entry will compete. And if the audience boos – as they almost surely will – in theory the audience at home will get to hear this. But unless something changes at home, Israel may be heading towards a quieter, more anticlimactic exit from the contest soon after.
In a competition that prides itself on institutional longevity and democratic principles, that would be an oddly fitting end to one of Eurovision’s most divisive chapters: not a dramatic exclusion, but a slow fade to black as the broadcaster itself ceases to exist.
The EBU fought hard to keep Israel in the contest. But it may not be able to save Israel from itself. Not to mention restore its reputation with fans of the Eurovision Song Contest.
