‘Although the Eurovision Song Contest swears to be apolitical, the voting public is not’

“The Eurovision Song Contest is not the platform to actively engage in geopolitics,” writes political science student Danté Basslé in the run-up to the international song competition in Sweden.

As a loyal fan of the Eurovision Song Contest, I have been looking forward to that one week in May for months. However, there is a difficult atmosphere surrounding this edition. The Israeli participation in the Eurovision Song Contest rightly raises questions due to the ongoing conflict in Gaza. For months, people from the cultural sector have been calling for the country’s exclusion. After all, Israel is waging a humanitarian shameful war that causes many civilian casualties and which has already led to a ruling on suspected genocide by the International Court of Justice. The fact that a candidate with an Israeli flag will compete for the votes of 180 million viewers is troubling, to say the least. Nevertheless, the Israeli candidate will participate in this edition, and because the Eurovision Song Contest is an apolitical event, that is the right decision.

Although the organization swears to be apolitical, the voting public is not. In 1990, Italy won with ‘Insieme 1992’. The song captured the hearts with the lyrics ‘Unite unite Europe‘ and the reference to the Maastricht Treaty that further expanded the European Union.

In the editions after the annexation of Crimea, occasional boos could be heard when the Russian points were announced.

However, that was small beer compared to 2022. By voting Ukraine to a landslide victory, European public opinion gave a clear middle finger to Putin’s regime.

That situation could soon repeat itself. Opponents of Israeli participation can already look forward to the moment when presenter Petra Mede announces that Israel received zero points from the audience. Although it would be hard for the artist in question, it would be an unmistakable message.

The EBU, the union of European public broadcasters and the organizer of the Eurovision Song Contest, has had the same mantra for years: the Eurovision Song Contest is an apolitical event where connection through music is central. Due to its apolitical character, the festival has already broken many taboos in the past. For example, the song competition contributed to the unification of a divided Europe after the Second World War and pushed boundaries for the LGTBQ+ community in times when this was not self-evident. For example, Dana International won the competition as a trans woman in 1998.

Beforehand, orthodox voices wanted to stop her participation, but on the evening of her victory, thousands of Israelis took to the streets in euphoria.

In addition, this edition celebrates the tenth anniversary of the groundbreaking victory of Conchita Wurst, the bearded drag queen.

Our country is also sending a queer singer to the festival for the second time in a row and that is still necessary in times of gay bashing and homophobia. Artists such as Dana and Conchita were examples for the queer community and made the subject discussable in an accessible way in countries where this was not evident. That would have been impossible with a political organization.

The power of the event is the fact that music can connect across national borders and political disagreements.

For the slogan “United by Music” and to pursue its unifying goal, the Eurovision Song Contest should therefore stay away from political messages. As long as the Israeli broadcaster adheres to the EBU rules, the country can participate. Since the Russian broadcaster did not adhere to the agreements, the country was excluded in 2022. From an emancipatory point of view, this is unfortunate. A return of Russia to the Eurovision Song Contest via an independent broadcaster should be an avenue the EBU should consider if it arises. After all, you do not have to equate residents, broadcasters and artists with their government.

Should we then ignore the political reality and the daily innocent victims in Gaza? Not at all, but an entertainment program is not the arena where the fight against injustice should take place. After all, the war will not rage less fiercely because an artist is excluded. The focus should be on where real differences can be made.

In March, the UN Security Council finally passed a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire. Meanwhile, Israel is not complying with this text, and international society is taking no measures to enforce it. Taking economic sanctions and denouncing arms deliveries are a much better signal than the exclusion of an artist.

The Eurovision Song Contest can be an opportunity for debate among citizens. In order not to give Israel a free pass, the VRT can choose to show a disclaimer just before the broadcast in which it clarifies a number of things about the war. The event remains apolitical from the organization’s point of view, but the channels do meet the demand to break the silence. In addition to the show, artists can also express their support for a peaceful solution for the Palestinians. For example, our Belgian candidate Mustii endorsed a joint artist position that called for peace and other artists also responded to the issue in a very nuanced way in interviews.

Although Israel commits terrible acts, the Eurovision Song Contest is not the platform for active geopolitics. The event can spark a meaningful debate in different living rooms and the public holds the key to speaking out on the issue.

Let’s hope that there will be a peaceful solution at diplomatic level soon and that everything can proceed safely in Malmö.

Danté Basslé (20) is a Political Science student at Ghent University. He is a member of the Honors Program “Quetelet colleges” at Ghent University.