Alexandra Day shows up the sham of the ‘apolitical’ Eurovision song contest.
‘United by Music’ is the slogan of Eurovision this year, the final to be held in Malmö on Saturday. Taking place just four days before the 76th anniversary of the Nakba, the real ‘unity’ of the competition is in its acceptance of a genocidal, apartheid state. Accepting the presence of Israel in Eurovision, which extends to competing against them, normalises not only the Israeli state, but also its brutal killing of over 34,000 people and the displacement of countless more.
Participating under the guise of ‘representing’ Palestine fundamentally misunderstands what it is to show solidarity and tokenises a vital movement.
Political Foundations
Eurovision has always been a political event. This reaches much deeper than traditional ‘bloc voting’. Founded in 1956 by the European Broadcast Union (EBU) to foster post-WWII ‘European unity’, the boundaries of what exactly constitutes ‘Europe’ have been shaky from the start. Israel was first accepted to the competition in 1973 and Australia in 2015. Their belonging to the EBU is clearly based on extending the idea of being ‘European’ enough, rather than geography.
Moreover, the question of who is excluded further underscores the political priorities of the competition. On 25 February 2022, the day after its invasion of Ukraine, Russia was banned from participating, as well as Belarus. Eurovision’s executive supervisor Martin Österdahl claimedthat although the competition was apolitical, “what we always should stand up for are the basic and ultimate values of democracy. Everyone is right to be who they are… This will be a Eurovision Song Contest that really shows the values that we talk about – solidarity, reaching out, uniting through music”.
Banning Solidarity
If this is the case, the question of where the solidarity or unity is to be found in the barbaric actions of the Israeli state against the people of Gaza is impossible to ignore.
Furthermore, the banning of Palestinian cultural symbols this year, not matter how subtle, speak to the political priorities of the competition. During the 2024 Tuesday semi-final, Eric Saade (an artist of Palestinian descent and guest performer) was reprimanded by the EBU for wearing a small keffiyeh armband during his performance.
The targeting of this cultural symbolic has strongly racist undertones, as other politicised cultural symbols have a precedent in the competition. The EBU’s ham-fisted attempts to take action on certain political issues, whilst remaining blithely silent on others, has revealed how political it truly is.
Legitimising Israel
No-one is more aware of this reality than the Israeli state. After their 2018 entrant won the competition, Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that the act was Israel’s “greatest ambassador”. In her victory speech, Netta Barzilai made the statement, “…next year in Jerusalem”. The political intent of this was clear; present Jerusalem as an undivided ‘Israeli’ city, and give the occupation a progressive face. At an event celebrating her win, on 14 May 2018, Barzilai said Israelis “had a reason to be happy”. That same day, 58 Palestinians were murdered.
This year’s entry was even more explicit, originally titled ‘October Rain’ and subsequently changed to ‘Hurricane’ at the behest of the EBU. Performer Eden Golan has expressed the hope that audiences “…can disconnect from what they believe and just focus on the music”.
In short, ignore the actions of the Israeli state and accept its presence in the cultural sphere against the backdrop of genocide. The motivation for this is obvious. Participating in an ‘apolitical’ competition like Eurovision legitimises Israel as a normal state.
Israeli Pink-Washing
There is absolutely nothing normal about a state which is premised on the expulsion and ethnic cleansing of native Palestinians from their homes, and the ongoing apartheid of Gaza and the West Bank. Even prior to October 2023, this has been very good grounds to exclude Israel from the competition. As well, given the historic significance of Eurovision for the LGBT community, this competition gives Israel further opportunity to claim the mantle as the only safe place for queer people in the Middle East. Though a repeated talking point in Zionist propaganda, this is not only untrue but deeply insidious, simultaneously damning Palestinian LGBT people and attaching queerness to Zionism.
Why We Say Boycott
The question of how to resist this facet of the Zionist machine is at the forefront of many activists’ minds. Much like the call to boycott the Whitehouse for St Patrick’s Day, activists and Palestinian groups have emphasised the need to boycott any events and institutions which uphold ties with Israel, including Eurovision. This is why many have been disappointed by the refusal of Bambie Thug to boycott the competition.
In an interview on the Late Late Show, the artist stated that they “…stand with anyone doing the boycott… if [they weren’t] in the competition, [they] would also be boycotting”. Bambie Thug also emphasised their intent to be a voice for Palestinians in the competition. This misses the reality that Palestinians do not require a ‘voice’ in an event which tacitly supports their oppression.
Moreover, in the Tuesday semi-final, Bambie Thug wore makeup spelling ‘Ceasefire’ and ‘Freedom for Palestine’ in Ogham. Despite the fact that very few would appreciate what these characters mean, Bambie Thug immediately changed them to ‘Crown the Witch’ at the request of the EBU. At best, this reveals the fundamental emptiness and ineffectiveness of such symbolic gestures. At worst, they can be seen as making an accessory of Palestine solidarity, to be put on and taken off as the moment requires.
Though unlikely, there is still time for Bambie Thug and the eight other artists who signed a letter criticising the participation of Israel to take a principled stance and boycott the competition. Singing and dancing alongside the representative of a nation currently carrying out a brutal genocide is not solidarity. The Zionist state cannot be given any opportunity to legitimise itself in any arena. To truly stand in solidarity with Palestine is to stand against normalising apartheid, even when it comes with a professional cost.
