Israel’s Plan to Artwash Genocide at the Venice Biennale by Adam Broomberg

Since the beginning of the full-scale genocide in Gaza, which has galvanized resistance worldwide, the Israeli pavilion of the Venice Biennale has been mobilizing to art-wash the nation’s brand.  

Two months before the opening of the 2024 Venice Biennale, a petition written by the Art Not Genocide Alliance (ANGA) and signed by thousands of artists and curators called for the exclusion of the “Genocide Pavilion” and claimed that it represented a state “engaged in ongoing atrocities against Palestinians.” Large demonstrations accompanied the call, which echoed Palestine solidarity campaigns launched by artists at the 2015 Venice Biennale.

…For this year’s pavilion, ANGA reiterated its call for the exclusion of the Israeli pavilion. Still, both the framework and the outcome have been predetermined. To avoid a repeat of the 2024 controversy, the Israeli government introduced a contractual clause requiring the artist to ensure that the pavilion remains open regardless of protest. Art here no longer operates even symbolically as a cover; it functions as a procedural mechanism, carried out through an artist selected for compliance rather than merit. Israel’s participation in this year’s Venice Biennale has thus been reduced to a single objective: to insist on visibility at any cost, asserting presence in defiance of a boycott.

This happened in active collaboration with the Venice Biennale management. As the Israeli pavilion is being renovated, the Biennale management offered to host it within the Arsenale — instead of asking Israel to rent a space on the private market, as the other national representations without permanent pavilions do. According to ANGA, instead of responding to calls by artists to exclude Israel, the Biennale management insists its hands are bound while going to great lengths to accommodate the pavilion.

…Within this context, the Venice Biennale’s current posture lays bare the cynicism of the art world. Where it once acted decisively, it now bends over backward to avoid offending Israel and the United States. In doing so, it becomes complicit in ongoing genocide — despite the outcry of tens of thousands of artists and of the 40% of announced national pavilions that have signed ANGA’s letter calling for the Israeli pavilion’s exclusion. What remains is not resistance, but the aesthetic window-dressing of violence.