‘It’s all political!’ The classic British response to Eurovision. Usually an explanation of our poor performance at the competition. Like most international competitions, the Eurovision Song Contest is meant to be apolitical. Eurovision aims to bring together different nations, giving them an opportunity to share their culture with one another in a weird and wonderful manner, free from the strains of the political system. In fact, being apolitical is a stated aim of the contest, with both participants and broadcasters alike being prohibited from political engagement in the course of the competition. So, does the competition really achieve its apolitical goals or does the classic British excuse for Eurovision failure have a foot in reality? I’ll skip to it, yes, Eurovision is very much political.
First, a bit of background. Eurovision is an annual international music competition that brings together the nations of Europe, and for some reason Israel and Australia, in weird and wonderful competition. Participating countries submit an original song which must be performed live as they advance through the competition and the winner is determined through a system of voting. This system has evolved over the years. In 2023 final, there were three systems of voting. First, the traditional jury vote, where a pre-assembled panel of music professionals award points on behalf of their country. Secondly, the viewers of competing countries get to vote and their country awards points accordingly. Thirdly, a new feature of the 2023 competition, the Rest of World vote. This saw viewers from non-competing nations -like the US- getting to vote, with overall votes from the rest of the world being treated as the votes of one competing country.
The background of Eurovision is important as the jury vote is at the heart of accusations of politicism. A general rule of the contest is that countries vote overwhelmingly in favour of their geographical neighbours. As a nation of islands, we have only one neighbour, the Republic of Ireland. Historically, we have relied greatly on their support in the competition. Countries also tend to vote for the nations they are allied or ‘friends’ with. We may be ‘friendly’ with much of Europe but kind of like Boris Johnson, as a country we’re that irritating and self-assured weirdo who people exchange pleasantries with and try their hardest to escape. And let’s face it, we are hardly beloved internationally, especially by the rest of Europe. It must be said that our poor performances did seem to correlate with ongoing Brexit tensions and negotiations with the EU, whilst the UK’s poor performance in 2003 (0 points) was attributed to international discontent following the invasion of Iraq.
The international reach of the competition, demonstrated by the new Rest of World vote, makes it an important vector for change. The Eurovision stage allows countries to highlight the problems they face to the international community, gaining their support. All non-political international events, like Eurovision, have a role to play in international relations. Eurovision’s role in international politics has been demonstrated throughout its existence.
Banning a country from participating in an international event is a way for nations to show their disapproval and even punishing their foreign counterparts. Russia has faced this recourse many times. Following their 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Russia was banned from participating in both the 2022 and 2023 editions of Eurovision. Initially both countries were allowed to compete as Eurovision asserted their non-political nature but following complaints from other nations, the competition U-turned. Prior to this, Russia’s act was prohibited from entering Ukraine to compete after she entered Crimea, following her countries illegal occupation.
Even at its inception it was a western idea and a divisive issue among certain European nations. Following the second world war Germany was split into two opposing countries, East and West Germany. Whilst West Germany participated in Eurovision, East Germany did not. Instead, it took part in the highly politicised InterVision song contest. The InterVision song contest was the communist alternative to the Eurovision song contest servicing the Eastern bloc countries. Entries were very promotive of their political ideologies with songs promoting communist ideology.
Eurovision’s claiming political neutrality, but the contest has repeatedly acted as a political arena, an opportunity for the international community to share their support and disapproval. Eurovision is not actively political, it just fails completely in its aim to maintain apolitical competition, allowing performance politics provided that the competition can retain plausible deniability and that the politics is in line with the current views and values of the Western European collective. Essentially, Eurovision allows countries to use it as a political tool; Nations use the competition to promote not just their culture but their agenda. Eurovision may take an apolitical stance, but as soon as its members dissent, it cracks under pressure and falls into line.
[By Natasha Galbraith, she/her]
qmunicatemagazine.co.uk 