Source : the age
After a year of behind-the-scenes hand-wringing over the withdrawal of Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Slovenia and Iceland from the Eurovision Song Contest 2026, the competition’s organisers have moved to steady the ship. The new rule: any country involved in “an armed conflict [or] a sensitive geopolitical situation” will be unable to host the competition.
Eurovision’s archaic but much-beloved rules hand the hosting of the contest each year to the previous year’s winner. That quirk has turned a win into a diplomatic coup, and the opportunity for more energised countries to engage in a little geopolitical PR.
The new rule is surprisingly loose. It includes this clause: “or any other situation [that] materially affects the security, safety or stability of their state or immediate region”, which means it is open to a wide degree of interpretation.
And while observers cannot fail to see how it immediately applies to Israel, one of the most energised countries in the competition and currently enmeshed in a war in Gaza, it might equally apply to Ukraine, which is defending itself against Russia, or indeed Denmark, should America make good on its promise to invade Greenland.
The rule does not stop a war-affected country from pursuing a Eurovision win, though it might serve as a deterrent if it seems a soft diplomatic victory might never eventuate. After all, participating in Eurovision is costly and being denied the prize after winning would be a substantial penalty.
But the organising body, the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), had a big problem in 2026, with five countries withdrawing over Israel’s participation. One, Spain, is a so-called “big five” country, the moniker given to the five largest financial contributors to the EBU. Even when people are singing songs like Jaja Ding Dong, money talks.
In that sense, the question was never whether the EBU would find a way to manage the situation, as it has struggled to do for several years, but that getting those five countries, and the others murmuring about joining them, was an existential necessity. Lose the “U” – the union – and you have no EBU.
So, what does it all mean? In effect, should Israel, Ukraine or another war-affected country win the contest, the EBU would commission an independent security assessment of the region, and if deemed unsafe, an alternative hosting country would be found.
The thing is, all of that happens already. It’s why, for example, Liverpool hosted on behalf of Ukraine in 2023, and why Brighton hosted in 1974 – the year ABBA won – because the previous year’s winner, Luxembourg, declined citing high costs.
What’s different now is that instead of letting the winning city negotiate its replacement, the EBU will. And any new host city will not be obligated to host “on behalf” of the city it is replacing.
All of this comes as Canada is entering the competition, much as Australia did over a decade ago. But unlike Australia, which must renegotiate each year, Canada – no doubt helped by the fact that French is one of its two national languages – enters as a full EBU member.
It helps, too, that Canada has had de facto competitors previously: Canadians Natasha St-Pier and La Zarra, who competed in 2001 and 2023 respectively, both represented France. And one of Canada’s most successful music exports, Celine Dion, competed and won in 1988, representing Switzerland.
What that tells us is that there is substantial evolutionary change taking place within the EBU, and while the Canada decision and the war-zone eligibility rules do not directly impact one another – unless, again, America makes good on another of its threats, to invade Canada – it’s difficult not to see both of them as part of a wider set of changes within the organisation.
The inclusion of new countries is seen as both commercially necessary to the enterprise, as it draws in more participation fees and greater exposure to a global TV audience, and as vital to the morale of the competition. Some European countries still grumble about Australia’s inclusion, but few deny Australia’s presence has almost universally been welcomed enthusiastically by both fans and national delegations. Canada will only amplify that.
And the tightening of rules is an exercise in smoothing turbulent political waters that were seen as an existential problem. You lose Spain and you lose a fifth of the major players at the table. You lose four more countries this year, you’re negotiating on the backfoot not to lose eight next year. No part of that would be seen by the EBU’s leadership as sustainable.
The broad objection: that Israel, using state-funded marketing and targeted online campaigns, was seen as aggressively ramping up international phone voting to secure higher audience scores.
So what happens now? The truth is, very little in real terms. Next year’s competition will be held in Bulgaria – thankfully, a country with no threat of invasion by America, at least at press time – and plans will proceed to deliver that country the cultural crown of post-war Europe’s pop world.
Four cities – Burgas, Plovdiv, Sofia and Varna – are bidding to host, with Burgas and Sofia seen as the most likely contenders.
At press time, only 19 of the usual 40-plus participating countries had signed on for the 2027 competition, though that is quite usual at this point in the calendar. Most participating national broadcasters will announce their participation in the coming months. Some, like Cyprus and Serbia, have signalled yes, but have not yet made formal announcements.
Israel’s Kan confirmed last month they would participate. But none of this year’s five striking countries – Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Slovenia and Iceland – have signalled their intentions for 2027. And Australian broadcaster SBS has not confirmed its participation either.
Which means the only certain thing is this: Canada is coming to Europe’s musical pot luck next year, though they might just wonder what on earth they have walked into.
Find out the next TV, streaming series and movies to add to your must-sees. Get The Watchlist delivered every Thursday.
