much has been made of an agreement between Sweden and Israel on conditions for Israels attendance of the conference, namely that the Middle East conflict was not to be raised. Remember that this exhibition is a part of a broader conference on genocide. This is the only quote on the subject I can find from a Swedish source:
Other reports quoted Israeli officials as saying that with the exhibit, Stockholm had broken a promise to Israel that the conflict in the Middle East would not be raised during the conference. Palestinian representatives have not been invited to the meeting.
However, the secretary general of the conference, Krister Kumlin, said no such agreement existed, and said his government would not pressure the museum to remove the artwork. "The Israelis seem to be under the impression that the government controls the cultural events on the sidelines. We can’t intervene, that’s called censorship," he said.
http://www.hipakistan.com/en/detail.php?newsId=en51253&F_catID=&f_type=sourceMost other references to this agreement come from Israeli sources, presenting the presence of the artwork as a breach of this agreement. The following is typical:
The provocative installation was part of an exhibition related to the conference. Sweden had agreed in advance that the Middle East conflict would not be included in the exhibition so as not to politicize it. That agreement had been violated, said Shalom. Israel has asked the Swedish government to dissociate itself from the exhibit. If this request is met, it will assure Israel's participation in the conference.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1074485518874&p=1008596981749So, perhaps the scenario was that an arrangement existed to have no mention of the the Israel / Palestine conflict as part of the "official" conference, this in order to secure Israeli participation. Meanwhile someone amongst the conference organisers agreed to have this exhibit displayed as a "cultural event on the sidelines" - that is: displayed right outside the chambers the official conference was taking place, to be viewed day in day out. I read in one of the articles that "cultural expression" is protected by the swedish constitution, thus beyond the scope of the conference organisers.
Due to the ambiguous meaning of the artwork and the manner and circumstances of it's exhibition, this episode could be viewed as someone choosing to bait the Israelis, or it could have been intended as a poignant reminder of the ongoing murder of Jews in their homeland.
I find it really hard to answer, personally. Maybe it was a bit of both. I reckon it was an attempt to present an object for contemplation, but it seems to have too easily misinterpreted as an object of bad taste.