As the middle of May approached, a global spotlight was directed towards Basel for the 69th Eurovision Song Contest. It is evident that life has come full circle, due to the fact that the first Eurovision in 1956 was hosted in Switzerland. What is even more riveting is that the headquarters of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) is located in Swiss Geneva. Besides the annual television show, artistic endeavours and grand festivities, geopolitical nuances or tensions may be observed, even though the ESC is a non-political event. 

Author: Piotr Nowak 

European integration through politics and culture 

Although the process of European integration and the Eurovision Song Contest belong to entirely different worlds (politics and culture) both of them can be considered as a parallel manifestation of a shared ideal: a unified Europe. Evidence of a common identity for the continent, with numerous points of contact in the respective histories, may be observed within the institutional and emotional pathways. A close examination of a history of the two entities reveals that they have evolved in a largely concurrent manner, often serving as mutual sources of inspiration and reflecting the transformative processes occurring within the European continent.

 The context of establishing the European Communities (subsequently the European Union) and the ESC is grounded in post-traumatic events tied to the tragedy of the Second World War. In 1951 the idea of peace and mutual cooperation had led six countries (Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands) to sign the Treaty of Paris, creating the European Coal and Steel Community.  Five years later on May 24, 1956, the very first ESC was inaugurated in the Swiss-Italian city of Lugano, where seven European nations competed: Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the host country – Switzerland. The main purpose of the competition was to foster a sense of unity among European nations through the shared experience of live music broadcasting. 

It is evident that at the core idea of both initiatives, their fundamental objective was to establish a unified community, transcending the prevailing national divisions. However, each one of them had a distinct approach to achieve this ambition. The first initiative was achieved through the medium of international treaties and economic interdependence, while the second relied on the influence of popular culture and emotional resonance.

European vestibule 

Culture frequently constitutes one of the primary elements in the integration processes, facilitating the establishment of relationships and contacts among diverse entities, organizations or just the people. Throughout its history, the ESC has frequently advanced beyond the parameters of international political reality, functioning as a symbolic and informal getaway to the European family. However it has to be underlined clearly that institutionally, neither the ESC is related to the European Communities (the EU) in any way, nor ever has been organized by any European political organization.

 It is worth noticing that certain countries have participated in this event, despite the fact that their internal political system was extremely different or even on the opposite position from those of the founding countries. For instance, Spain and Portugal joined the ESC in the 1960’s, although at that time, both nations were governed under dictatorships and authoritarian regimes. On the other hand, some nations, especially those that formerly belonged to the Eastern Bloc, were unable or unwilling to  participate in this event, in order to avoid provoking the USSR. 

The turn of the 1980s and 1990s, with accompanying historical and political events, such as the unification of Germany, the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the USSR, allowed many Central and Eastern European countries to debut on the Eurovision stage. Participation in the international song contest may not be considered as a grand success, but undoubtedly it could be an important barometer of political change. Furthermore, it serves as a form of soft diplomacy and cultural inclusion and in particular cases, has resulted in accession to the elite club of the EU Member States. However it should be noted that accession to the EU is ultimately determined by concrete political and economic criteria, rather than symbolic gestures. 

Cultural and public diplomacy 

The term “cultural diplomacy” is describing the process of cultural exchange and cooperation in the context of bilateral or multilateral relations. One of its key objectives is  promoting art and the other aspects of broadly understood culture among other nations, and exchanging information on intellectual achievements. The main purpose of “public diplomacy” is to build, promote and nurture a favourable image of a state on the international arena, especially through the utilisation of mass media such as the Internet. 

Moreover, the other identified motives include the following: gaining support of societies and governments of foreign countries to influence the public opinion, battling stereotypes and misinformation. Unfortunately for some states it is an ideal occasion to spread their propaganda, which is not invariably grounded in reality or truth, whitewash their actions with manipulation, and even to share so called ”fake-news”. 

Nowadays, the ESC has become an unabashed instrument of nation branding at the mega-event, which generates global media coverage with the aim of attracting large audiences and achieving widespread international attention. The original purpose of the contest, which was the promotion of European local songs, singers, songwriters, and composers through the international competition, has evolved to become a platform for  the dissemination of soft power politics, diplomacy and ideological messages. The victory in the ESC has the potential to carry political ramifications for the host country. It is frequently regarded as a valuable and unique opportunity for nations to exhibit their culture, promote tourism (especially in the host city), and enhance or rebuild their international reputation. 

The process of hosting a large-scale event in any country is inevitably linked to governmental involvement. It is probable that culture ministries will assume the leading role, however it is unlikely that foreign affairs ministries and the associated strategic narrative campaigns will be indifferent to the public diplomacy opportunities presented by a large-scale event. For instance, in the early 2000s, countries such as Estonia and Latvia utilised the competition as a means of cultural diplomacy, thereby promoting their Western credentials and allocating substantial resources to their entries. Estonia won the ESC in 2001, followed by Latvia’s triumph just one year later. 

The Estonian victory occurred at a pivotal moment in the EU accession negotiations, and the government initiated a nation branding strategy, entitled 'Welcome to Estonia’. It is possible that this was merely a coincidence, or perhaps it was a prelude to the entry of both of these countries into the EU in 2004.

Action and (lack of) reaction

Since 2002, almost each edition of the ESC was branded with the new, different slogan in order to emphasise the pan-European ambition and create a sense of unity, for example, 'Under the same Sky’ (Istanbul, 2004), 'We are one’ (Malmö, 2013) or 'Building Bridges’ (Vienna, 2015). Since 2023 'United By Music’ has been chosen as the permanent motto for all future Eurovision Song Contests. It is intended to express the Contests’s ability to transcend cultural and linguistic boundaries, thereby fostering a sense of shared identity and community among participants from diverse nationalities, backgrounds and sociocultural contexts.

Certainly, it is a more straightforward task to enumerate the occasions on which the ESC organizers remained unresponsive, than to list the appropriate reactions. However, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and the EBU’s response to the situation undoubtedly impacted the ESC directly. The Russian Federation was excluded from participating in the Eurovision 2022, due to concerns that allowing a Russian entry would bring the competition into disrepute and undermine its core values. 

This decision was made after recommendations from the Contest’s Reference Group and was supported by the EBU’s Television Committee. Consequently, the EBU took the measure of suspending representatives from its three Russian member organizations—RTR, Channel One, and Radio House Ostankino. Throughout its statements, the EBU placed particular emphasis on its commitment to apolitical public service values, media freedom, and the importance of independent, fact-based journalism—especially amid the ongoing conflict. While the EBU acted decisively to uphold its principles, its responses remained focused on institutional values rather than political condemnation. 

In the case of Belarus, the EBU adopted a firm stance in response to the country’s deteriorating record on press freedom and human rights. The forced diversion of a Ryanair flight in May 2021 and the arrest of journalist Roman Protasevich were strongly condemned, as they were described as grave violations of journalistic freedom and signs of escalating repression. 

The organization has also issued a condemnation of  reported acts of torture and inhumane treatment of detained journalists. In light of mounting concerns regarding the role of Belarusian state media in disseminating government propaganda and airing coerced confessions, the EBU conducted a thorough examination of the conduct of its Belarusian member – BTRC. Following a series of warnings and monitoring activities, including the review of content that appeared, the EBU took the significant step of suspending BTRC’s membership. This decision was made in response to the observed violations of the Union’s fundamental principles of freedom of expression, independence, and accountability. 

In a related development, earlier that year, Belarus was also disqualified from the Eurovision 2021 after its entries were found to breach the contest’s rules. The EBU determined that the submitted songs sought to politicize the event and did not align with the ESC’s standards of neutrality. Collectively, these decisions indicated a rare and decisive intervention by the EBU in defense of democratic values, thereby establishing a clear precedent for the consequences of undermining press freedom and misusing public service broadcasting.

Lamentably, Eurovision’s noble slogans are not always reflected in reality. In the contemporary era, the global political situation is rapidly evolving, with a blink of an eye, accompanied by the constant flow of news and information. The ESC is not isolated from the tragedy of wars, terrorist attacks, historical sentiments and public opinion is demanding from the EBU not to turn a blind eye to such events. The inconsistency of the EBU’s reactions and responses to occurring affairs, creates among audiences the sense of injustice, unaccountability and unjustified neutrality and apoliticism.  

Summary 

Neither the Eurovision Song Contest nor any other non-political mega-event (i.e. the Olympics, FIFA World Cup etc.) exists in an empty space. They are shaped by the people: voters, citizens, viewers, politicians, artists; by the history: news, events, wars, alliances and other causes like stereotypes, preferences, sympathies and antipathies. Without a doubt every of above mentioned aspects had an impact on every of these entities and left a significant mark on them. The ESC allows each participating country (even the smallest ones like San Marino or Malta) to share the spotlight with musical powerhouses like the United Kingdom or Sweden.

 For some nations, it sure is the largest platform where they have an opportunity to present themselves and showcase their unique and diverse cultures to the worldwide audience. It is inevitable that external factors are going to influence the Eurovision and it cannot simply act just as a microcosm, but indeed it is a melting pot of anxiety and conflict which reflects ’’the outside world”. Notwithstanding the declared apolitical character of the show, it does represent the ongoing changes within the societies, public sentiments and the impact of international relations on it. 

Bibliography:

[1] Baker, C., Atkinson, D., Grabher, B., & Howcroft, M. ”Culture, place and partnership: the cultural relations of Eurovision 2023”. British Council, January 2024. doi.org/10.57884/H4BG-FX95.
[2] Carniel, Jessica. ’’Towards a theory of participatory diplomacy via the Eurovision Song Contest.” Media, Culture & Society 46, no. 5 (2024): 925-941. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437231224080.
[3] European Broadcasting Union. “EBU Statement on Russia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022.” EBU, February 25, 2022. https://www.ebu.ch/news/2022/02/ebu-statement-on-russia-in-the-eurovision-song-contest-2022.
[4] European Broadcasting Union. “Statement on Russian Members.” EBU, March 1, 2022. https://www.ebu.ch/news/2022/03/statement-on-russian-members.
[5] European Broadcasting Union. “EBU Statement on Ukraine.” EBU, February 24, 2022. https://www.ebu.ch/news/2022/02/ebu-statement-on-ukraine.
[6] European Broadcasting Union. “EBU Statement on RTR and Channel One Membership.” EBU, February 26, 2022. https://www.ebu.ch/news/2022/02/ebu-statement-on-rtr-and-channel-one-membership.[7] European Broadcasting Union. “EBU Executive Board Agrees to Suspension of Belarus Member BTRC.” EBU, May 28, 2021. https://www.ebu.ch/news/2021/05/ebu-executive-board-agrees-to-suspension-of-belarus-member-btrc.
[8] European Broadcasting Union. “EBU Condemns Detainment in Belarus of Roman Protasevich.” EBU, May 24, 2021. https://www.ebu.ch/news/2021/05/ebu-condemns-detainment-in-belarus-of-roman-protasevich.
[9] Eurovision Song Contest. ”All Aboard! A journey through the slogans of the Eurovision Song Contest”. Published November 16, 2023, at 14:15 (CET). https://eurovision.tv/story/journey-through-eurovision-slogans.
[10] Eurovision Song Contest. “EBU Statement on Belarusian Entry 2021.” Published March 11, 2021, at 20:20 (CET). https://eurovision.tv/story/ebu-statement-on-belarusian-entry-2021.
[11] Eurovision Song Contest. ”Eurovision week: All you need to know about Basel 2025”. Published May 12, 2025, at 09:10 (CEST). https://eurovision.tv/story/eurovision-week-all-you-need-know-about-basel-2025.
[12] Eurovision Song Contest. ”’United By Music’ chosen as permanent Eurovision slogan”. Published November 14, 2023, at 13:00 (CET). https://eurovision.tv/story/united-by-music-permanent-slogan.
[13] Maciejewski, Jan. ”Twelve points to politics: Eurovision is more than it seems.” Cherwell, May 4, 2025. https://cherwell.org/2025/05/04/eurovision-politics/#:~:text=For.
[14] Muradyan, Viktorya. ’’Eurovision’s influence on European politics: More than just music.” PartyParty, May 7, 2024. https://political.party/eurovision-influence-european-politics/.
[15] Papadopoulos, Yiannis Ch. ”The Political Dramas of an ‘Apolitical’ Eurovision”. Tovima.com, May 11, 2025. https://www.tovima.com/culture/the-political-dramas-of-an-apolitical-eurovision/.
[16] Pot, Felix. ’’Mapping favouritism at the Eurovision Song Contest: does it impact the results?” University of Groningen, May 17, 2021. https://www.rug.nl/frw/news/2021/mapping-favouritism-at-the-eurovision-song-contest-does-it-impact-the-results?lang=en.
[17] Sutor, Julian. Prawo dyplomatyczne i konsularne. Wolters Kluwer, 2019.
[18] Talmazan, Yuliya. ”From humble origins to glamorous extravaganza: A history of the Eurovision Song Contest.” NBC News, May 7, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/eurovision-song-contest-history-controversy-russia-ukraine-israel-rcna149490.
[19] Tovima.com. ”Eurovision 2025: United by Music or Divided by Politics?”. Published May 12, 2025. https://www.tovima.com/culture/eurovision-2025-united-by-music-or-divided-by-politics/.
[20] Zahavi, Hila, and Gal Ariely. “The Eurovision Song Contest and the Potential of Unintended Events and Public Diplomacy: How Exposure to an International Mega-Event Shapes External Views of the EU.” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 32, no. 4 (2024): 1148–60. doi:10.1080/14782804.2024.2324289.