Eurovision 2027 changed the rules: Israel and Ukraine can win, but not host the contest

On August 12, 2026, the organizers of Eurovision announced a change in the contest rules starting in 2027. The most notable innovation concerns the right of the winner to host the next show: now an armed conflict, a “sensitive geopolitical situation,” or other circumstances significantly affecting the safety and stability of the country or its immediate region may leave the winning broadcaster without a home Eurovision.

The official rules do not mention “Israel” or “Ukraine.”

But for Israeli and Ukrainian readers, the new wording does not sound abstract at all. Ukraine has already won the contest and then lost the opportunity to host it at home due to Russian aggression. Israel only came in second place in May 2026 and was once again literally one step away from the situation where the question “where to hold the next Eurovision” could move from theory to practice.

Elena Gunko writes for NANovosti about Israel, Ukraine, and the Ukrainian-Israeli agenda, with experience in media and a deep connection to Ukrainian culture. In this case, the task of the author and the editorial team is not musical criticism or an attempt to guess the political motives of the European Broadcasting Union, but rather to compare the new EBU formulations with what has already happened to Ukraine in 2022–2023 and understand what they might mean for Israel after the 2026 contest results.

Who and when changed the Eurovision 2027 rules

The official Eurovision Song Contest announcement was published on August 12, 2026, at 17:33 Central European Summer Time, which is 18:33 in Israel. It states that the amendments appeared after the annual review of the contest rules and considering feedback from participating broadcasters after Eurovision 2026 in Vienna.

The changes were approved by the Reference Group of the Eurovision Song Contest — the contest’s governing group.

It’s important: this is not about voting by all European countries, all participating national broadcasters, or the EBU General Assembly. The Reference Group is responsible for managing and developing the Eurovision Song Contest, overseeing the preparation of the contest, and making decisions related to its rules and organization.

Since June 2025, the group has been headed by Ana Maria Bordas, a representative of the Spanish RTVE, elected for a two-year term. However, in the August 12 announcement, the EBU did not specify in which city and on what exact day the meeting took place where the amendments were finally approved. Therefore, claiming, for example, that “the rules were adopted at a meeting in Geneva on August 12” is currently unfounded: August 12 is the confirmed date of their public announcement.

What exactly can now deprive the winner of the right to host the contest

The EBU wording is broader than the usual word “war.”

The winning broadcaster will be considered unfit to host the next contest if an armed conflict, sensitive geopolitical situation, or other circumstances significantly affect the safety, security, or stability of its state or immediate region.

The last words here are especially important for Israel. The EBU assesses not only whether hostilities are occurring within the state but also the broader regional context. For a country located in the Middle East, this potentially means that not only events within Israel but also the situation around it, if it truly affects the safety of an international event, can be significant.

But turning this into a formula “Israel is forbidden to host Eurovision” is not possible yet.

The rule does not contain a list of prohibited countries. It does not specifically mention Israel, Ukraine, or any other participant. Moreover, the EBU leaves the procedure for assessing a specific situation: if necessary, the organization can order an independent assessment of the winner’s region’s security and then, together with the Reference Group, determine whether the winning broadcaster can safely host the contest.

There is also an important distinction from some initial retellings of this news: the EBU did not announce that it is now obliged to conduct an independent security assessment of all participating countries before each contest. The official announcement refers to the possibility of ordering such an assessment concerning the winner’s region when necessary.

Winning is possible. Bringing Eurovision home is no longer guaranteed

Thus, a new division arises for the viewer between two things that have been perceived almost as one for decades.

A country can win Eurovision. Its artist remains the winner, the contest result does not disappear. But the right to organize the next show becomes a separate security issue.

If the EBU decides that the winning national broadcaster cannot host the event, another Host Broadcaster will be chosen. It receives the rights, obligations, and responsibility for organizing, producing, and conducting the show.

And this is where one of the most interesting details of the new rules lies.

Ukraine has already gone through this — but the rules were different then

In May 2022, Kalush Orchestra won Eurovision for Ukraine with the song Stefania. According to the usual contest logic, Eurovision 2023 should have been hosted by Ukraine.

But the country was already living under full-scale Russian aggression. The European Broadcasting Union concluded that it was impossible to ensure the necessary level of security, and the contest was transferred to the United Kingdom.

In October 2022, the EBU and BBC announced Liverpool as the host city. It was fundamentally emphasized: the UK was hosting the contest on behalf of Ukraine.

The BBC organized the show together with the EBU and in consultation with the Ukrainian public broadcaster UA:PBC. The Ukrainian victory was consciously made part of the contest itself: Ukrainian motifs appeared in the visual concept and program, and the official logo used the colors of the Ukrainian flag.

Thus, Ukraine did not physically host the contest at home, but politically, culturally, and symbolically remained its host.

Now such a construction is no longer mandatory.

Liverpool 2023 in its previous format may no longer exist

The new rules explicitly clarify: if the winner is deemed unable to host the contest, an alternative Host Broadcaster will organize Eurovision on its own behalf. It is not obliged to host the show on behalf of the broadcaster or state that won the previous year.

This change seems technical only at first glance.

Imagine Ukraine wins Eurovision again, but Russian aggression still does not allow for safely hosting a large-scale international event in Kyiv, Lviv, or another Ukrainian city. The EBU may transfer the contest to another country, but this country is no longer obliged to become a second version of Liverpool and build the entire show around the Ukrainian victory.

The same construction is now possible for Israel.

Why Israel came so close to this situation

On May 16, 2026, in Vienna, one victory was all that was missing for this scenario. Noam Bettan with the song Michelle took second place, receiving 343 points — 123 from professional juries and 220 from viewers. Bulgarian DARA with Bangaranga won with 516 points, so the 2027 contest will go to Bulgaria.

NANovosti has already thoroughly analyzed the results of Israel and Ukraine at Eurovision 2026. For Israel, this was the second consecutive second place after Yuval Raphael’s result in 2025, meaning the conversation about a possible next victory for the country does not seem like a fantasy.

There is also another layer of the Israeli-Ukrainian history of this contest. During Eurovision 2026, the Israeli broadcast already became a platform for public support of Ukraine, when after LELÉKA’s performance, “Glory to Ukraine!” was heard. Therefore, the new rules connect the two countries not artificially: both Ukraine and Israel are already part of a single political-cultural discussion within modern Eurovision.

What if Israel had won

Imagine the same final in Vienna, but with a different result: Israel scores more than Bulgaria and takes the trophy.

Under the new rules, the victory itself would not automatically guarantee that the next show would take place in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. The EBU would have to consider the real situation with Israel’s security and stability and its immediate region at the time of preparing the contest.

This does not mean an automatic refusal to Israel. But now there is a pre-established mechanism that allows separating the voting result from the decision on the venue.

For Israel, this is a particularly sensitive construction. The country has already hosted Eurovision three times — in Jerusalem in 1979 and 1999 and in Tel Aviv in 2019. Israel’s organizational ability to host an event of this scale has long been proven. The question posed by the new rules concerns not the infrastructure as such, but the changing regional security.

NANovosti — News of Israel considers it essential to draw a line here between an established fact and an assumption. There is no evidence that the new rules are written “against Israel.” But there is an obvious fact: for the first time, the geopolitical position of the winning country has been turned into a formally established criterion for determining the host of the next contest.

Ukraine became a precedent, Israel shows why a permanent rule was needed

In 2022, the EBU already faced a problem that could not be solved by the usual scheme “the winner hosts the next contest.” The organizers had to create a solution for Ukraine almost manually: the victory remained Ukrainian, the show was transferred to the BBC, and the UK hosted it on behalf of Ukraine.

Four years later, the exceptional case turns into a permanent procedure.

In this sense, the Ukrainian experience turned out to be more important than one Eurovision story. The EBU is pre-establishing rules for the next Ukraine — or the next Israel, or any other country that wins the contest during a serious military or regional crisis.

NANovosti — News of Israel sees no grounds to claim that Ukraine and Israel are “crossed off the list of hosts.” It is more correct to say otherwise: now even the victory of these countries does not in itself guarantee them the right to host the next contest.

The geopolitical paradox of the “non-political” Eurovision

There is an obvious paradox in this. Eurovision continues to position itself primarily as a musical competition and emphasizes the need to maintain the integrity and spirit of the contest. But to ensure this model, the EBU has to formalize questions that by their nature cannot be separated from politics: armed conflicts, regional stability, international security, and the position of specific states.

The new rules do not make the EBU a political arbiter in the literal sense. But they give the organizers another area of discretion, and every future decision regarding Israel, Ukraine, or another country will inevitably be compared to previous ones.

If one winner is allowed to host despite ongoing regional tensions, and another is refused, the question will no longer be just about safety. There will be a need to explain why the risk was deemed acceptable in one case and not in another.

That is why the way the new rule is applied may be more important than its current wording.

The EBU changed not only the hosting rules

The package of changes includes two more notable decisions, although they have less political significance for Israel and Ukraine.

From 2027, a Eurovision participant must be at least 18 years old on the day of their first rehearsal. Until now, the lower age limit was 16 years. The EBU explains the age increase by the need to better protect young artists from the pressure that accompanies participation in one of the world’s largest television shows.

The vocal rules have also been clarified. The main performer must sing the main melody of the song live. Backing tracks and pre-recorded elements are allowed within the rules, but they should not replace the main live vocal or excessively assist it.

This is more of a technical part of the reform. The main politically sensitive change is still elsewhere — in the new division between victory and the right to host the next contest.

What we don’t know yet

The public EBU announcement on August 12 does not answer the main practical question: where is the boundary after which the geopolitical situation becomes dangerous enough to deny the winner the hosting.

There is no published scale of missile threat, requirements for airport operations, or acceptable probability of escalation. It is also not explained how the EBU will compare the rapidly changing situation with the need to start preparing for the contest almost immediately after the final.

The location of the Reference Group meeting where the changes were finally approved has not been named. Finally, there is no practice of applying the new rule yet — the first real test will only be the future victory of a country whose security raises questions.

Therefore, we can confidently talk about the mechanism now, but not about its future result for a specific state.

Victory no longer equals a home Eurovision

Ukraine in 2022 created a precedent that Eurovision did not plan. There was a victory, but no safe opportunity to host the contest at home.

In 2023, the EBU solved the problem through Liverpool and the formula “on behalf of Ukraine.” In 2026, Israel once again came very close to victory. And on August 12 of the same year, the exceptional situation finally turned into a permanent rule.

And this is perhaps the main change.

Until now, after the winner was announced, there was almost automatically a debate about which city in their country would host the next Eurovision. Now for Israel, Ukraine, and any other state in an unstable region, there is another question between these two events:

will the situation even allow bringing the victory home?

How the material was verified

NANovosti compared the official Eurovision Song Contest announcement from August 12, 2026, about rule changes with the European Broadcasting Union documents on transferring Eurovision 2023 to the UK after Ukraine’s victory, the official results of the final in Vienna, and NANovosti’s own publications on Israel and Ukraine’s performances in 2026.

The editorial team separately checked whether the new rules directly mention Israel or Ukraine, whether there is a mandatory security check for all participating countries, and whether the new host is obliged to host the contest on behalf of the winner. Israel and Ukraine are not named in the official announcement; there is no mandatory assessment of all participants; and the new Host Broadcaster is explicitly freed from the obligation to host the contest on behalf of the winning broadcaster.