Editorial - Controversy in the EBU: Challenges surrounding Israel

The broadcaster of Israel (KAN) poses an interesting challenge to the discussions of the EBU. KAN stated from the very start of today’s debates that they feel there is no need for change in the EBU. They have continued to hold  firmly to the stance that the Eurovision Song Contest (ESC)  must remain apolitical. The question is whether they can truly fulfill their own standard.

As is well known at the last ESC the song submission by Israel was deemed to defy the rules of political neutrality of the ESC. After the EBU requested a change of the title “October Rain” which was subsequently changed to “Hurricane.”

The delegate of Israel has called for the ESC to remain apolitical multiple times throughout the debate. They went on to state their representatives at the last ESC felt unsafe due to anti-sematic protests and actions of performers, using the Irish artist as an example. Ireland quickly took offense to the implication that they were associated with anti-semintism and submitted a right of reply that was rejected, as the delegate of Israel did not directly state that Ireland was anti-semetic. However there is the question of whether or not the majority of pro-palestinian protesters at the last ESC can really be classified as anti-semetic? They were protesting the government of Israel, which is not inherently anti-semetic. Especially when keeping in mind that the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, was recently issued, on the grounds of crimes against humanity and war crimes. This ruling further adds to the hazy nature of Israel's recent participation in the ESC.

The largest sponsor of the ESC is also currently an Israeli company, Moroccan Oil. The delegate of the Netherlands (NPO) stated multiple times that sponsors influence the political neutrality of the contest. When questioned on the influence and conflict of interest that could be caused by such large sponsors, Israel stated that they can not comment on any influence. They went on to add that it was in the best interest of the EBU to have large sponsors, regardless of who they are.

As the EBU headed to their first Unmoderated Caucus and began working on putting pen to paper, Armenia (ARMTV) suggested using nonconformity to international norms as a basis for suspension from the EBU and ESC. The delegate of Israel was definitely not in support of this suggestion. When ARMTV further clarified that aggressors in geopolitical conflicts should be suspended, Israel continued their hesitation. This leaves the door open for observers to wonder what Israel’s intentions and goals in this committee are.