The 37th edition of the FID Marseille will take place from July 7 to 12, 2026.
The festival has chosen to focus a significant part of its programme on Palestine and the Arab world, against a backdrop marked by nearly three years of genocide in Gaza, the ongoing colonization of Palestine, the scorched-earth policy in Lebanon, and the occupation of new territories in Syria.
And it is in this context that we reject the festivals’ insistence on creating a symmetry, in their invitations and programming, between Palestinian and Israeli productions.
The FID management refused to listen to the arguments of filmmakers, producers, and invited speakers, citing “lack of time.”
Curating a programme reflects a worldview; it is a political act, whether it claims to be or not. Palestinian narratives, the archives of Arab struggles, and the memory of colonized peoples cannot be mobilized as mere tokens of openness that feed a sense of moral superiority.
Political courage is not measured by the number of films programmed, but by the ability to acknowledge power dynamics. It is in the name of this responsibility that we have mobilized and will continue to reject all forms of normalization that place the colonized and the colonizers on the same level.
Placing Palestinian and Israeli narratives side by side in the same representational space, as if they were strictly equivalent, erases the relations of power, the History and the material conditions from which these narratives emerge. This side-by-side presentation affirms a false equality of position.
For decades, European cultural institutions have made it their mission to create spaces for dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis, in the name of coexistence and mutual understanding. Presented as artistic initiatives, these encounters whitewash the bloodshed and do not challenge the colonial relationship. Since then, generations of Palestinian and Arab filmmakers have resisted these mechanisms, which have been widely employed by Euro-Mediterranean policies engaged in the 1995 Barcelona Process (1).
Our refusal at the FID is part of this same resistance.
Our position is based on the clear rules of the cultural boycott led by Palestinian civil society—a boycott that does not judge the content of the works but rather their conditions of production and funding (2).
For years, Israel has pursued an international image strategy, “Brand Israel,” which mobilizes culture as a communication tool.
Funding dissenting voices is part of this strategy: allowing critical filmmakers to circulate in European cultural spaces to maintain the image of a vibrant democracy, as long as these voices do not challenge the Zionist project itself.
When the oppressed refuse to share a space with the representative of a state that oppresses them, it is often the oppressor who is portrayed as the victim of censorship. This reversal of roles is no accident but serves to discredit resistance to normalization.
Once again, the debate shifts from Palestine to freedom of expression, and Palestinians must justify their refusal instead of being heard.
In France, Palestinian voices and acts of solidarity with Palestine have always faced violent repression that continues to intensify: accusations of condoning terrorism, legal proceedings, bans on demonstrations, and marginalization in the media and cultural spheres. At the same time, Israeli artists critical of their own society have enjoyed considerable visibility. Why does France seem more willing to listen to criticism of Israel when it comes from an Israeli than from those who are suffering genocide? French cultural institutions continue to prioritize legitimate voices and define who can speak about Palestine—and from what position.
For European cultural institutions, exchange and freedom of expression are presented as universal values that should prevail in all circumstances, and any refusal to engage in dialogue as a problem. Assuming the power to single-handedly define the rules of the encounter—its timing and conditions—is rooted in a Eurocentric ideology. Today, our priority is not to produce images of coexistence, but to act against an approved colonial and genocidal reality. The cultural boycott is the most concrete tool of solidarity.
Hala Alabdalla, Asmit Amiralay, Aude Fourel, Fatma Cherif, Muhammed Hamdy, Aïda Ka’Adan, Farès Ladjimi, Narimane Mari, Monica Maurer, Nour Sabbagh, Ghassan Salhab, Mohamed Soueid