Mynd: Heiða Helgadóttir

Hatari on the Israeli occupation of Palestine: “A case of the strong preying upon the weak”

The Eurovision Song Contest is political by nat­ure, say mem­bers of the Icelandic leather-clad techno-punk art collective Hatari. The following interview was orig­inally publ­is­hed in Icelandic on February 8, 2019.

It is ridiculous for Iceland to participate in the Eurovision Song Contest when the competition is being held in Israel, a state that tramp­les human rights.

As Iceland is in fact participating, however, it is import­ant that the art­ist repres­ent­ing the Icelandic nation uses his or her agenda-sett­ing power to the utmost in order to criticize the actions of the State of Israel and point out the abs­ur­dity of sing­ing, dancing, and jump­ing around on stage while milli­ons of people in the immedi­ate vicinity live penned-in and oppressed.

This is the position that Hatari's mem­bers, Matthías Tryggvi Har­alds­son, Einar Stef­áns­son, and Klemens Hannigan outlined in conversation with Stundin shortly before they won Iceland's prelimin­ary Eurovision competition in February.

Since then, Hatari have received extensive coverage in the international media, partly due to their harsh criticism of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and emerged as the most controversial act of Eurovision this year. As reported, Hatari have reached the very limit of the European Broadcasting Union’s tolerance for political statem­ents.

The following interview was orig­inally publ­is­hed in Icelandic on February 8, 2019. As the leather-clad techno-punk per­for­mers have advanced to the final of the Eurovision Song Contest, it is fitt­ing that the entire interview be publ­is­hed in English, to help clarify Hatari’s position for the international audience. (Interview translated by Philip Roughton.)

“The criticism of Hatari’s decision to participate is und­er­standa­ble, and a sign that plenty of Icelanders are hig­hly opposed to the way that the Palest­ini­ans are being treated by Israel. We obviously want to respond to that criticism with respect, and without turn­ing our response into a joke, which is what we usu­ally do in our interactions with the media” said Hatari’s mem­bers when asked about the criticism they have received from Icelanders who oppose the Israeli occupation of Palestine.  

“There’s not­hing extreme about advocating a boycott of the song contest.  We agree with the views behind this idea. For instance, Páll Óskar [a respected Icelandic pop-star] did well to boycott the contest publicly.  In doing so, he utilized his influence as a public figure and well-known Eurovision speculator to promote critical dialogue about Israel and a possi­ble boycott of the song contest.

“Plenty of Icelanders are hig­hly opposed to the way that the Palest­ini­ans are being treated by Israel”

“In our opinion, the power that we hold is of a differ­ent sort: that of the court jester.  Much of what Hatari does is either performance art, lies, a conveyance of messa­ges cooked up through unconventional channels, or aesthetic experiments that dance on the border of the captivating and the strange.  The agenda-sett­ing power should, no less, involve directing the eyes of the media in a critical way to the song contest and Israel. Maybe we’ll be kicked out of the competition because of it, but that in itself would be just as reveal­ing as any performance of ours on the Eurovision stage.”

Matthias, Klemens, and Einar say that they have discussed the situation there on the shore of the Mediterra­nean Sea from differ­ent ang­les with differ­ent people, in order to come to a better und­er­stand­ing of its complexities.  They are appalled by the Israeli state’s treat­ment of the Palest­ini­ans.  

“First of all, there’s the Israeli settlem­ent activity in the Occupied Palest­inian Ter­ritory, activity that’s been condemned by the United Nations but app­e­ars to have the tacit app­roval, if not the direct supp­ort of the State of Israel, and which seriously jeopardizes a permanent two-state solution to the Israeli-Palest­inian conflict. In addition, it’s been repeatedly pointed out that the Palest­ini­ans liv­ing in Israel don’t enjoy the same rights as the Israelis, despite supp­os­edly being citizens of the same state.  Among so many other things.  While the disp­ute is certainly complex and there are extremes on both sides, there’s no doubt that the latter-day history of Israel and the Palest­ini­ans is a case of the strong prey­ing upon the weak; of the use of force aga­inst people who, lacking equivalent milit­ary backing, are una­ble to stand up for themselves.”

“Palest­ini­ans liv­ing in Israel don’t enjoy the same rights as the Israelis, despite supp­os­edly being citizens of the same state”

The mem­bers of Hatari say that it is necessary to make a clear distinction between the State of Israel and the Israeli people. It must be kept in mind that many Israelis and Jews speak up for the rights of the Palest­ini­ans. 

Vested inter­ests and imageIsrael has a lot at stake in host­ing the song contest, not least the promotion of its own image, say the mem­bers of Hatari.

But how can Hatari justify its participation in the contest?  Why doesn’t the band follow the other artists who decided to boycott the contest, and thereby send a clear message?  

“We view Eurovision as a political entity; no less so than this year, when the contest is being held in Israel.  The Palest­ini­ans would have been shown supp­ort through action if Iceland and other nations had simply decided to withdraw from the contest. Israel has a lot at stake in host­ing the song contest, not least the promotion of its own image.

It is in fact abs­urd to allow a state that repeatedly violates people’s human rights to take part in such a contest, whether that state is named Israel, Russia, Qatar or anyt­hing else. Now that Iceland has decided to participate without express reservation, it’s import­ant that whoever competes on behalf of Iceland is aware of the political nat­ure of the contest and of the glossy image of itself that Israel will most def­ini­tely pres­ent.  

“It is in fact abs­urd to allow a state that repeatedly violates people’s human rights to take part in such a contest”

If the art­ist sent by Iceland doesn’t use his or her influence to point out the obvious, the abs­ur­dity of sing­ing, dancing, and jump­ing around on stage at the same time as milli­ons who are just a stone’s throw away live with curtailed freedoms and constant uncertainty about their livelihoods and security, then the opportunity to set the agenda is wasted.  If Iceland’s entry ign­ores the fact that the song contest is political by nat­ure, it und­er­values the need for critical dialogue concerning Israel.  

We ourselves are aware of the need for such a dialogue and would like to make responsi­ble use of the agenda-sett­ing opportunity provided by the song contest.  We’re not particularly concerned whether the producers and mana­gement of Eurovision allow us to participate or not, should we be selected to repres­ent Iceland.  They have the power to kick us out of the contest, but not to censor us beyond the borders of Israel.” 

The glossy image is political“If Iceland’s entry ign­ores the fact that the song contest is political by nat­ure, it und­er­values the need for critical dialogue concerning Israel.”

Matthías, Einar, and Klemens say that they do not view themselves as self-appointed advocates of Palestine.  “We’re basically pri­vi­leged kids who have chosen to play the role of court jesters in a ridiculous song contest. We also want to remain conscious of this, and in doing so address aspects that we feel fall within our purview as artists, such as the abs­ur­dity of the contest, Israel’s participation, the boundaries of art and propag­anda, the glossy ima­ges, censorship, and freedom of expression.”  

But can they criticize the policies of the State of Israel without violat­ing the rules of the competition and the agreement with Icelandic State Broadcasting that the competitors sign? 

“The agreement stipulates that prof­anity, political propag­anda or anyt­hing else that could off­end the sensi­bilities of audience mem­bers is prohi­bited on stage,” they say.

 “It would be hig­hly political to deli­ver a performance that was supp­os­edly free of all politics“

“This in itself is a para­dox, as it would be hig­hly political to deli­ver a performance that was supp­os­edly free of all politics, and it’s clear that all of the songs that will be per­for­med on stage in Tel Aviv will in fact off­end the sensi­bilities of many people. The glossy ima­ges drawn up in Eurovision are, in themselves, hig­hly political in the context of the competition and the leg­itimate criticism leveled at it.  Ther­efore, it’s politically impossi­ble to honor such an agreement, and it’s not of particular importance to us whether we do so or not.

If the organizers of the song contest in Iceland decide to withdraw Iceland from Eurovision, that’s great. In light of the current situation, we feel that the most app­ropri­ate response is to send a clear message about the premises for Iceland’s participation in the Song Contest.”

Kjósa
0
Hvernig finnst þér þessi grein? Skráðu þig inn til að kjósa.

Athugasemdir

Allar athugasemdir eru ábyrgð á þeirra sem þær skrifa. Heimildin áskilur sér rétt til að fjarlægja ærumeiðandi og óviðeigandi athugasemdir.

Nýtt efni

Mest lesið undanfarið ár