Some individuals were resentful of the fact that geopolitical events could have any bearing on the outcome of the song contest. However, it is rather naïve and unrealistic to assume that a massive competition in which nations are made to vote for one another can have no underlying political powerplay. While it is true that the contest’s non-political objective is one of its stated goals, this is far from the case in practice. The political nature of Eurovision has existed from its inception.

We have witnessed political messages being conveyed through the songs and performances every year on the Eurovision stage. West Germany’s contestant in the inaugural Eurovision, held in 1956, was a Jew. This was a clear indication from West Germany that it was moving away from its Nazi past. In 1993, Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as Croatia made their debuts in the Eurovision Song Contest as independent nations, performing songs with war-related themes.

Armenia sent a song in 2015 that was originally called “Don’t Deny”, but was then renamed “Face the Shadow.” Despite not explicitly mentioning it, it was quite obviously about the 1915 Armenian Genocide.
“Mercy,” France’s submission for 2018, addressed the immigration situation. It told the story of a rescue ship transporting African refugees to safety in the Mediterranean, and a baby being delivered on the ship.

Eurovision has served as a symbol for UK-EU relations throughout the years. The UK finished last in the song contest in 2019, the year that Brexit was officially finalised. One may argue that this was Europe’s way of showing discontent with the UK’s choice to leave.

Even the case of who is allowed to join the Eurovision, and who chooses not to do so, reveals geopolitical dynamics. Due to a Lebanese rule that forbade television stations from airing Israeli content, Lebanon withdrew from the competition in 2005. Georgia’s disco-funk entry “We Don’t Wanna Put In,” which was an obvious jab at President Putin, was rejected from the Moscow 2009 competition because the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) decided that the lyrics were too political. However, to Russia’s dismay, Ukraine won in 2016 with a song that made reference to Joseph Stalin’s deportation of Crimean Tatars in 1944. And of course, following their invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Russia was completely banned from participating. For a competition that professes to be apolitical, this was a very clear political message.

The winner is chosen by a combination of a panel of music industry professionals and viewer televoting. Each country can vote for other countries that they want to win, but they cannot vote for their own. Over here, geopolitics continues to have a big impact on the outcomes. For instance, Balkan or Scandinavian nations frequently vote for one another. From 1997 through 2014, whenever possible, Greece and Cyprus gave each other the maximum of 12 points. This begs the question of whether the competition is more about politics than it is about music.

The expert panel should, in principle, balance this out, and it appears that this does do so to some extent. The televoting mechanism, however, continues to play a significant role in selecting the winner each year. And as voting trends have shown year after year, countries enjoy voting for their neighbours and allies.

Despite its claim to be a non-political event, the Eurovision Song Contest has always had political overtones throughout its existence. The competition has served as a forum for nations to express political messages through their songs and performances, starting with West Germany’s decision to send a Jewish representative as a way to distance itself from its Nazi past, to more recent entries that address issues like war, immigration, and historical events. Additionally, voting trends and international alliances further emphasize how geopolitics affects the result. Since politics have always been woven into the fabric of the Eurovision Song Contest and continue to be a key component of its attraction as an event, it is unrealistic to demand their full separation.

This article was written by an independent writer whose views are not associated with The Third Eye. The Third Eye strives to be the student’s voice, and that entails giving them a platform to voice their opinions.

The post The Politics of Eurovision appeared first on The Third Eye.

The name ‘Marc Edward Pace Portanier‘ resurfaced in recent local news as the young Maltese volunteer headed towards Ukraine again to help victims of this war. Although there are likely millions needing support, Marc has improved the lives of refugees which from their view perceive as immeasurable help.

Following the first-strike in February, in a movement spearheaded by Wojciech Sielechki, Mr Portanier joined up with Fundacja Zmieniami Zycie. Their efforts intended to supply essentials for such victims, mainly comprising of Ukrainians and other residents in the vicinities. Aid varied through a number of methods such as medical supplies and generators for food. Moreover, Marc assisted refugees in migrating to a safer region, given the realisation of needing to depart from their homes due to potential military strikes. Specifically, his expertise stood out in logistics by deiciding the optimal location for refugees to move towards. As a foundation they also worked with Lilliowa 5 through the provision of shelters, meals and showers.

Marc is currently working again with the Polish NGO in order to boost the stock of essential supplies. Ukrainian troops regaining certain cities, as well as the supply constraints for Russians due to the Crimea Bridge explosion, meant that Ukraine has faced certain improvements. That being said, there are still shortages of necessities, hence why Marc and Wojciech have recently proceeded back towards Ukraine.

How locals can support this cause

Marc is currently acquiring financial support and utilising such funds, be it through the acquisition of medical inventory or/and food. Fuel is another significant item of expenditure, given the large distances that need to be covered by van. These trips are important mainly for; transporting basic supplies and moving people to the borders which are usually safer regions.

People are encouraged and welcome to contribute in order to help those who are unwillingly facing the burden created by this war. Anyone who wishes to donate can do so by finding the necessary details on this post.

Marc’s most recent post sheds light on how these funds have impacted Ukrainians. Specifically, it gives a breakdown of the lengthy trip to deliver basic items to people residing in Izyum and Kupiansk. However, due to large demand, the finite inventory was entirely allocated amongst those within Izyum.

The post How Financial Support Can Change The Lives Of Those Vulnerable To The War appeared first on The Third Eye.

Ukrainian citizens living in Malta were asked to speak during the vigil. All mentioned that while they are safe in Malta, their families and friends are currently living in bomb shelters or basements. They all pleaded for Russia to stop this war so that families can be re-united again and no more innocent people have to die.

Chants and shouts filled the streets of Valletta as the people who attended the vigil showed their support towards Ukraine by chanting “We stand with Ukraine” and “Make peace, not war”.

If Ukraine puts down their weapons, there will be no more Ukraine. If Russia puts down there weapons, there will be no war

Guest speaker

Furthermore, the guest speakers called on the citizens of Russia to protest against what Vladimir Putin is doing, they pleaded for them to take to the streets and stand up against their president.

Others begged European countries to send supplies and troops to help Ukraine defend its citizens, as they believe that while protesting is needed and effective, actual action needs to be taken to ensure the safety of Ukrainian people.

If you want to do your part and help the people of Ukraine, the Faculty of Social Policy and Social Work will be accepting donations such as: painkillers, bandages, bars of soap, and sanitary towels.

The Third Eye will continue to support Ukraine during this difficult time

The post We Stand With Ukraine appeared first on The Third Eye.

Ukraine, Russia, and neighbouring Belarus were born about 1,200 years ago on the banks of the Dnieper River, rooted as Kievan Rus, a mediaeval superpower that included a large portion of Eastern Europe. However, linguistically, historically, and, most crucially, politically, Russians and Ukrainians diverged.

Moreover, when Putin came to power, he has consistently stated that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people,” part of the “Russian civilization,” which also includes neighbouring Belarus. Ukrainians, on the other hand, are dismissive of his allegations.

Ukraine saw two revolutions in 2005 and 2014, both times refusing Russia’s supremacy and pursuing a path to membership in the European Union and NATO. Putin is particularly angered by the thought of NATO facilities on his borders, claiming that Ukraine joining the US-led transatlantic alliance would be a “red line” crossed.

Following Ukraine’s 2014 Revolution of Dignity, which saw months of protests eventually remove pro-Moscow Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, Putin took advantage of the power vacuum to invade Crimea and support separatists in the southern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The insurgents established two autocratic, economically weak “People’s Republics” in which the death penalty was reinstated. They oversaw a slew of concentration camps where activists were tortured and killed.

The struggle quickly escalated into Europe’s most ferocious conflict. More than 13,000 people have been murdered and millions have been displaced as a result of the disaster.

The Ukrainian military was under-equipped and demoralised in 2014, whereas the insurgents possessed Russian “consultants” and weapons.

However, Ukrainians are considerably stronger militarily and morally these days, and thousands of volunteers who assisted in repelling the separatists are ready to do it all over again.

‘Nothing has alienated Ukraine more in the last eight years than Kremlin policies, particularly Russia’s military invasion of Crimea in 2014 and its engagement in the Donbas conflict, which has taken over 13,000 lives’ – Steven Pifer (Standford Scholar)

According to government sources in Western Europe and the United States, Russia has gathered more than 100,000 Russian soldiers on the Ukrainian border and has occupied Crimea in recent weeks. This has raised fears in Kyiv that a new war with its neighbour and former province, which chose to break free from Moscow’s political orbit, is on the horizon.

Russia, on the other hand, rejects any plans for an invasion. Moscow claims that it has the ability to move Russian soldiers wherever it wants and that all of its actions are defensive.

Russian authorities, including President Vladimir Putin, have cautioned NATO not to expand eastward.

Ukraine purchased or acquired advanced equipment from the West and Turkey, including Javelin missiles, which proved fatal to separatist tanks, and Bayraktar drones, which played an important role in last year’s battle between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

The suspension of military aid and arms deliveries to Kyiv precipitated former US President Donald Trump’s first impeachment. In the following weeks, his successor, Joe Biden, may send lethal weaponry and advice.

Because of the modern weaponry being used—mostly nuclear—the horror of this war escalating is greater than that of any previous conflict in recent years. This is in addition to the comments exchanged by Putin and the other European leaders.

“If he launches another invasion, he will force the west to bring about much of what he seeks to prevent.” – Boris Johnson (Prime Minister of the United Kingdom). Wrote this in reference to Russia’s military targeting the border of Ukraine and their State.

Aside from ideological and political considerations, Putin had sorely sought Ukraine’s inclusion in a Moscow-dominated free-trade zone that had been established in 2000. The Eurasian Economic Community (EAEC) brought together various ex-Soviet states and was largely regarded as a first step toward resurrecting the USSR.

Ukraine was planned to be the most important member of the EAEC after Russia, with a population of 43 million and a tremendous agricultural and industrial production, but Kyiv declined to join.

Ukraine’s economy sank after the country cut ties with Russia, its erstwhile primary economic partner. However, seven years into the conflict, the recession has ended, as international prices for Ukraine’s main exports, grain and steel, skyrocket, and Ukrainian businesses and labour migrants find new ways to the West.

Ukraine and Uzbekistan, with a combined population of 34 million, are expected to be included in order for this market to flourish and become self-sufficient. That is why these states are constantly embroiled in geopolitical conflicts with Russia. Further fueling the motivation and development of the current crisis that we are seeing in 2022 between the two Nations.

Putin’s favour ratings are falling as Russians oppose vaccinations and lament the economic hardships caused by the virus.

Following the annexation of Crimea and the emergence of a new war or escalation, it is considered that Putin has done so at an opportune time in order to divert public attention away from domestic concerns and improve Putin’s popularity. He also wants to reestablish contact with the West, particularly the United States, and amassing an army near Ukraine has already been effective.

“Dialogue is necessary because that’s the only thing that will help, in my view, to build a context of security and stability on the European Continent.” – President Macron (The President of France).

Russia’s illegal invasion of Crimea in 2014 was Europe’s largest land grab since World War II, and it violated many of Russia’s obligations to protect Ukraine’s territorial integrity. The Kremlin then incited and supported the fighting in Donbas, in some cases with genuine Russian army formations. These activities had significant negative consequences for Russia’s relations with the West, and the West replied. For example, the US and Europe collaborated on sanctions aimed at the Russian economy. NATO, which had been reducing its military capability since the early 1990s, changed course; member states agreed to raise defence spending, with a target of 2% of GDP by 2024. Furthermore, NATO began deploying ground soldiers on its eastern flank in member states.

Moscow has attempted to portray this crisis as one between Russia and NATO, but still the Kremlin’s principal aim is Ukraine. This has something to do with geopolitics and Moscow’s aim for a sphere of influence in post-Soviet space. It is, nevertheless, very much about Russian domestic politics. A Ukraine that constructs its own path, consolidates its democracy, and implements reforms that unleash the full potential of its economy is a nightmare for the Kremlin: Such a Ukraine would prompt Russians to question why they do not have the same political voice as Ukrainian citizens – and perhaps even contest Putin’s authoritarianism.

The Third Eye stands with and supports Ukraine during this difficult time

The post Russia’s refusal to recognise Ukraine as an independent state has resulted in a huge strategic defeat appeared first on The Third Eye.