09/12/2025
Eurovision has faced political boycotts before
The decision by four countries to withdraw over Israel’s participation is significant for the contest, though the crisis may not be existential. Political boycotts are nothing new for the world’s largest live music event, despite the organisers’ insistence on its supposedly apolitical nature. Ironically, Spain, whose broadcaster RTVE has been the most outspoken among the four boycotters, was itself the target of the first boycott call in Eurovision history. At the ninth edition of the contest, in Copenhagen in 1964, a young Danish left-wing activist stormed the stage holding a placard that read “Boycott Franco & Salazar,” protesting that Spain and Portugal were allowed to compete despite being ruled by military dictatorships. You could argue that, in light of this, Spain’s activist stance today smacks of hypocrisy; or you could say that the country is uniquely positioned to see through the glitter and haze to what Eurovision is truly about. Spain entered Eurovision at a time when it was being blocked from joining the European Economic Community. It was about ending its isolation and joining an elite club! Its own history in Eurovision has made it acutely aware of how pop culture can function as a form of soft power.
After the EBU’s decision to allow Israel to continue participating, some media outlets are already predicting the collapse of a 70-year tradition. In doing so, they fundamentally misunderstand the nature and purpose of the Eurovision Song Contest – as well as the true background of the current boycott.
The Eurovision Song Contest has never been the cheerful, apolitical music festival that some commentators nostalgically portray it as today. It has always been a forum for international television cooperation, born from the desire to enable technical and organizational collaboration across borders. The real scandal of last Thursday’s events is that certain broadcasters are now attempting to exclude another broadcaster through intense pressure. This would not harm the Israeli government but the public broadcaster KAN, one of the few voices in the country that openly criticizes Netanyahu’s policies. Anyone who takes “United by Music” seriously should be protecting partner broadcasters, not isolating them.
Spain’s, Ireland’s, Slovenia’s, and the Netherlands’ withdrawals are perhaps less a sign of moral conviction than a mix of domestic political reflexes and financial considerations. Ireland’s broadcaster admitted months ago that it would be unable to host the contest in the event of a win. Slovenia has long struggled with the question of whether participation is financially worthwhile at all, in fact, its national selection was scrapped in 2024 due to cost. The Israel narrative now provides a convenient way to withdraw while maintaining an appearance of principle. Most of the countries now boycotting the contest have in any case regularly failed to qualify from the semifinals in recent years. Their absence will hardly break the hearts of the audience. Spain, once part of the “Big Five,” has also not been among the countries that consistently reach the top positions.
One thing is certain: the competition’s financing in Vienna will not be so destabilized by these withdrawals that the future of the ESC is in danger. As host, ORF traditionally covers half the costs, while the remaining participating countries share the other half. Yes, Spain’s contribution is gone but with Romania and Bulgaria returning, the community is growing again. And perhaps the time has come to reconsider the oversized interval acts that have consumed disproportionate amounts of money in recent years.
What remains is a debate that goes far beyond the ESC itself: What is the future of the two-state solution? What is the future of public service broadcasting in Europe? The EBU’s decision was a committee decision, a choice to continue international television cooperation under changed circumstances. The new rule prohibiting state funded campaigns in support of an entry applies to everyone. Making Israel the scapegoat for a practice that has long been common, whether driven by record labels or lobby groups, reveals more about the political sensitivities of the boycotting countries than about any supposed unfairness.
One thing must not be forgotten amid all this: the world cannot close its eyes to the suffering in Gaza and the West Bank. But punishing KAN means targeting precisely those who, within their own country, continue to advocate for reason and democratic principles. “United by Music” does not mean ignoring conflicts, it means strengthening those who continue to seek dialogue despite them. The ESC will survive this crisis too. Its significance does not lie in the illusion of an apolitical celebration, but in its ability to maintain cooperation despite political tension.
