“Israel does not have a more loyal friend than Robert Kraft.”
By Kate Marie
These were the words of Benjamin Netanyahu as he presented Kraft, the Zionist multibillionaire owner of the New England Patriots, with the Genesis Prize in Jerusalem in 2019. Seven years later, that friendship forms the essential background to a controversy now engulfing Ed Sheeran’s Loop tour.
Macklemore was removed from the remaining US dates after telling Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank that they had not been forgotten and declaring “Free Palestine” during Sheeran’s MetLife Stadium concerts. Kraft, whose company owns Gillette Stadium, confirmed that Macklemore would not be permitted to perform there, accusing him of a history of antisemitic rhetoric and imagery. The tour promoter said several venues would refuse to stage the concerts while Macklemore remained on the bill.
Sheeran insists that Macklemore’s removal was the promoter’s decision, “not mine”, and that he tried unsuccessfully to broker a solution. That claim is not credible. Sheeran is one of the world’s most commercially powerful musicians, this is a stadium tour bearing his name, yet he asks the public to believe he has no meaningful power over who shares his stage. He could have refused the ultimatum, relocated or cancelled the affected dates, or publicly stood beside Macklemore. Instead, the consequences of keeping the tour moving were imposed on the artist who said “Free Palestine”.
Connections
Nor are Sheeran and Kraft strangers at opposite ends of an impersonal contract. Sheeran performed at Kraft’s 2022 wedding, singing “Perfect” for the billionaire and Dana Blumberg’s first dance, and afterwards described his relationship with Kraft as “lovely”. This makes Sheeran’s presentation of himself as a bystander to Kraft’s pressure still harder to accept. “Staying out of politics” is itself political when billionaires can veto an artist for expressing solidarity with an oppressed people who are enduring a three-year-long genocide.
Kraft is not a politically neutral venue operator. He has visited Israel more than 100 times, led 27 delegations there and funded Israeli causes, including a Jerusalem sports complex. At the 2019 Genesis Prize ceremony, he pledged $20 million towards a foundation opposing antisemitism and the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement; the prize organisation described him as a major investor in Israel’s economy. Antisemitism must be opposed without qualification, but opposition to Zionism and Israeli Apartheid, and solidarity with Palestine cannot be equated with hatred of Jewish people. In fact, to do so is itself antisemitic.
Kraft’s influence also reaches deep into the American ruling class. He described Donald Trump as a friend dating back to the early 1990s and donated $1 million to Trump’s 2017 inauguration. Although Kraft said he stopped speaking to Trump after 6 January 2021, the pair have since appeared together again during Trump’s second presidency.
Real moral leadership
The claim that this exclusion is about opposing antisemitism is also undermined by the venues’ glaring double standard. Raymond James Stadium, among the venues reported to have rejected Macklemore, hosted two shows by Kanye West, only months earlier, despite his record of explicitly antisemitic and pro-Nazi statements and his release of a song titled “Heil Hitler”. In November 2022, he, alongside Donald Trump, dined with the notorious fascist, Nick Fuentes, in Trump’s Mar-a-Lago mansion. AT&T Stadium, another venue reported to have objected to Macklemore, is meanwhile advertising an upcoming Kanye concert. Apparently “Free Palestine” disqualifies an artist, while open Nazi glorification can be accommodated when the ticket sales are attractive enough.
The clearest moral leadership has come from the artists who refused to carry on as normal. Finneas, Aaron Rowe, Beoga and Lukas Graham all withdrew from Sheeran’s tour in solidarity with Macklemore and Palestine. Rowe said Irish people understand forced famine, occupation and colonialism; Beoga said that playing venues that silence advocacy for a free Palestine was not an option. Their decision meant surrendering major stadium audiences and income. These stances, and the enormous support they received, is a testament to the level of support for the Palestinian people internationally. It sends a clear signal that many ordinary people will no longer tolerate artists who refuse to take a stance in the face of Israel’s monstrous crimes.
No neutrality in face of genocide
Macklemore has pledged his entire $1 million in net tour earnings to six organisations working directly with Palestinians and challenged Kraft to match it. Kraft responded that Sheeran had asked him to commit $2 million to match Sheeran’s own proposed donation for humanitarian aid “in the region”. Yet his statement named neither Palestine nor Gaza, identified no recipient and did not clearly confirm that the money had been transferred.
That evasive phrase – “the region” – captures the politics of the affair. Palestinians can be transformed into anonymous recipients of charity, but an artist who names Palestine and its oppression becomes unacceptable. Aid is welcome, but it cannot purchase silence or substitute for justice during one of the worst crimes against humanity in this century.
The artists who walked away understood what Sheeran and his promoters did not: neutrality under conditions of domination serves the powerful. A stage controlled by billionaires is never politically neutral. The only question is whose politics it permits, and whose humanity it allows to be named.
