The European Broadcasting Union, the organiser of the Eurovision Song Contest, feebly attempts to enforce a ‘no politics’ rule. The EBU sifts through the lyrics of all submitted entries to ensure that no ‘political content’, however subtle, makes its way on the stage on the final night.
This rule is somewhat nonsensical. Indeed, it cannot be applied convincingly since the very idea of the contest is political. The contest celebrates the idea of a Pax Europaea through a camp show replete with kitsch music, awful costumes, cheesy lyrics and clichéd farcical references to peace and unity.
Every year, the contest indirectly showcases various causes célèbres. Gay marriage, anti-war activism and ‘gender identity’ have all prominently made it onto the stage. The quality of this not-so-subtle activism is of the standard that one would expect of a contest where artistic talent is the exception and not the rule.
The first prize is also a much-coveted spot for several countries. In this regard, the efforts of the Russian and Azeri governments must be noted.
When Azerbaijan won the contest in 2011, it staged a grand show to presenta respectable image of a rotten regime.
On that occasion, only one participant requested to meet human rights activists. The others chose to stay clear of such controversies for fear of meddling in politics.
For individuals interested in the relationship between politics and popular culture, the contest is an interesting case study. Despite the endless references to love, peace, happiness and all the other foolish mantras some people use to make their existence more tolerable, there are occasions when the contest makes a political impact.
Jamala, the stage name of Susana Jamaladinova, succeeded in making such an impact. The 32-year old singer of Crimean Tartar origins represented the Ukraine with a song titled 1944. The song makes veiled references to some of the events experienced by the singers’ great-grandparents.
On May 18, 1944, about 240,000 Crimean Tartars were forcibly deported on the orders of Josef Stalin from their home in the Crimea to different parts of Central Asia for allegedly aiding the Nazis during their occupation of the peninsula. On closer inspection, the deportees also included a number of civilians and members of the military who served in the Red Army.
The quality of not-so-subtle activism is of the standard that one would expect of a contest where artistic talent is the exception and not the rule
In the ensuing years, about 45 per cent of deportees died from malnutrition, starvation and disease. Stalin’s attempts at ethnic cleansing went further. He wanted to destroy every trace of the Crimean Tartars. The deportees were not allowed to speak of the Crimea, a number of buildings were destroyed and a campaign attempted to depict the Tartars as criminals and Nazis.
Following Stalin’s death in 1953, Nikita Khrushchev tried to rehabilitate the Crimean Tartars. Nonetheless, they were not allowed to return home until the late 1980s, following Mikhail Gorbachev’s reforms of the Soviet Union. The horrors of the Stalin era undoubtedly continue to haunt ethnic Crimean Tartars.
Some opined that Jamaladinova’s song was also referring to the current situation in Crimea. Since the Russian occupation of the peninsula in 2014, a number of families have been displaced. Crimean Tartars and ethnic Ukrainians face increasing pressures by the occupying Russian forces.
In an interview with The Guardian, Jamaladinova referred to her own situation. Her 90-year-old grandfather is in the Crimea and their only way of communicating is through Skype conversations. Twenty acquaintances of hers disappeared since the Russian annexation of the peninsula. She said: “What am I supposed to do, just sing nice songs and forget about it?”
Such sentiments are not appreciated in Russia. Indeed, some Russian pundits have called for a boycott of the 2017 edition that will be hosted by Ukraine.
Undoubtedly, for two weeks in May 2017, there will be an increased focus on the situation in Ukraine. Russia’s attempts to destabilise the Ukrainian government and encroach on its national sovereign territory will be remarked upon. However, Russia will weather the storm.
The Ukrainian government will also be under scrutiny. President Petro Poroshenko was recently named in the Panama Papers leaks. The leaks reveal that, at the height of the skirmishes in Eastern Ukraine, Poroshenko was setting up a company in the British Virgin Islands.
Various international partners are also disillusioned with the lack of reforms in Ukraine. There is a widespread perception that Ukrainian society is still dominated by oligarchs and corruption which, in turn, weaken the rule of law. Moreover, the benefits of Euromaidan are yet to be quantified.
The international community seems willing to offer its sympathy to Ukraine and Crimea. However, support seems less forthcoming and the current political predicament does little to elicit this.
During those two weeks in 2017, the Ukrainian government will be able to showcase an image of itself to the wider world. This image will not focus exclusively on Ukrainian politics but will serve to either enhance or devalue Ukraine’s international standing. The failure to improve this image will mean that Jamaladinova’s success will be nothing but a pyrrhic victory.
andre.deb@gmail.com
André DeBattista is graduated in public policy and international relations.