As an entertainment journalist, international film festivals have long been part of my professional calendar. In all those years, however, I have never encountered anything quite as troubling as the campaign to boycott Israeli filmmaker Nadav Lapid, targeted not because of his work, but because of his nationality.
Lapid is best known for his acclaimed autobiographical films Synonyms and Ahed's Knee, which established him as one of Israel's most celebrated directors. Yet despite a career built on artistic achievement – and despite being a vocal critic of the Israeli government — he became the target of a campaign demanding his exclusion from the French film festival FID Marseille.
Lapid was initially invited to serve on the jury, but the festival began receiving calls from filmmakers and activists demanding that he be disinvited as part of an all-encompassing cultural boycott of Israel. After about a dozen filmmakers reportedly withdrew their films from the festival, Lapid stepped down from the jury.
At the same time, FID Marseille director Tsveta Dobreva invited Lapid to present one of his films and lead a masterclass, but the calls for his boycott were so severe that he ultimately withdrew from the festival altogether.
Thankfully, the response from many of the film world's leading figures was swift. Major names, including American actress Natalie Portman and French director Justine Triet, signed an open letter in his support, published in Le Monde, condemning what they described as a "campaign of intimidation". The signatories made a simple but powerful point: an artist should not be reduced to a passport.
"Inviting an artist to a festival does not make them a cultural ambassador," the letter stated. "In what way does the presence of a filmmaker on a jury or the screening of one of his films make him a representative of a state?"
The letter concluded with a clear message: "We stand with Nadav Lapid. The cultural boycott is an intellectual dead end that we must collectively overcome."
The implications extend far beyond one filmmaker. The treatment of Nadav Lapid should concern anyone who believes in artistic freedom. Cultural institutions should judge artists on the quality of their work, not the country named on their passport. Film festivals are meant to be places where ideas are exchanged, challenged and debated. Once artists begin to fear exclusion because of their nationality, the very purpose of such events is undermined.
What makes this episode particularly striking is that Lapid's own work is deeply critical of Israel. His latest film, Yes, is a caustic commentary on Israeli society and was described by Variety as "a blistering attack on Israeli nationalism".
Lapid has lived in France since 2021 and has repeatedly criticised both the Israeli government and the war in Gaza. Yet none of this shielded him from demands that he be excluded. His sin was his nationality and, in the eyes of his detractors, there was nothing he could do to redeem himself.
That fact exposes the nastiness at the heart of the boycott campaign. If even one of Israel's most outspoken critics is deemed unacceptable simply because of his nationality, then the issue is no longer political disagreement. It becomes something much darker.
Since October 7, concerns about the treatment not only of Israelis but of Jews more broadly have become impossible to ignore. Rising antisemitism has left many fearing not only for their physical safety but also for their place within cultural and professional life.
That is why this episode matters far beyond one director or one festival. Culture is supposed to expand horizons, encourage debate and foster human understanding across borders. The moment artists are judged not by what they create but by where they were born, culture ceases to be a bridge and becomes a barrier. And when that happens, everyone loses.
Sarah Tetteh is an award-winning journalist and presenter
To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.