REYKJAVÍK — Pro-EU campaigners have a handy boogeyman to win over Icelandic voters ahead of a crunch referendum on Saturday: U.S. President Donald Trump.
Trump’s threats to annex Greenland — Iceland’s closest neighbor — have added a strong geopolitical dimension to a referendum on resuming membership talks with the EU, which might otherwise have focused on long-standing gripes with Brussels, such as mackerel quotas.
And Trump is not the only security risk in the North Atlantic.
With Russia and China both pushing to secure Arctic resources, questions about global alliances are becoming increasingly vital to the 270,000 Icelandic voters heading to the ballot boxes across the weather-beaten volcanic island.
Reykjavík’s former mayor, Dagur Eggertsson, a prominent figure in the pro-EU “Yes” campaign, said that Trump’s threats to Greenland were weighing on voters’ minds and sparking debate about Iceland’s strategic position.
“This issue is not settled,” the Social Democrat member of parliament said of U.S. ambitions to control Greenland, whose coast is less than 300 kilometers from Iceland. “Trump has been quite outspoken, not only last year, but again and again. This is something that people on the streets think about.”
While Trump has rowed back on some of his more bellicose posturing to seize Greenland at the beginning of the year, he still insisted at a NATO summit in Ankara in July that the territory “should be controlled by the United States, not by Denmark.”
Facing that kind of regional tension, Eggertsson, who also chairs Iceland’s delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, echoed Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in mapping out the stakes: “Small and middle powers need to stick together.”
In the case of Iceland, he insisted this meant closer ties to Europe. “The matter is more urgent now than before,” he said.
A question of sovereignty
The key theme looming over the Icelandic referendum is sovereignty. But it’s an issue that cuts two ways, and polls suggest the referendum is on a knife-edge. A Gallup poll in mid-August gave the “Yes” camp a wafer-thin advantage, with 51.5 percent support.
While “Yes” campaigners like Eggertsson stress the regional implications of threats to Greenland’s sovereignty, the “No” camp argues the EU could impinge on Icelandic sovereignty, particularly within the politically crucial spheres of fisheries and farming policy.
Indeed, it was fisheries quotas that were key to scuppering Iceland’s previous bid to join the EU, which was definitively halted in 2015.
Thirty-five-year-old musician Tumi Árnason says he will vote “yes” in the referendum. He’s worried about the international situation the country finds itself in. | Carlo Martuscelli/POLITICOEiríkur Bergmann, a professor of politics at Bifröst University, explained that national sovereignty has been the core issue animating political debate in Iceland since its independence from Denmark in 1944.
“There are two camps, both tapping into the same heritage,” said Bergmann. “One is arguing that Iceland needs to join the European Union to enhance its sovereignty and guard its heritage of its independence struggle. Another camp, equally vocal, is cautioning against EU membership on the exact same grounds, arguing that it threatens Iceland’s sovereignty.”
Those sentiments on national independence and identity have a long pedigree. Iceland’s parliament, the Althing, is one of the oldest electoral assemblies in the world, dating back more than a millennium.
Strategically, the island is a NATO member and has a bilateral defense agreement with the U.S. dating back to 1951.
At the same time, Iceland is a member of the European Economic Area, and it’s estimated that it already adopts about three-quarters of the EU’s rules through this. It’s also part of the Schengen Area, allowing for passport-free travel with most EU countries.
The core consideration, then, for the referendum is whether it is worth moving beyond that EEA relationship.
Tumi Árnason, a 35-year-old musician living in the capital, said he was planning to vote in favor of entering into talks for EU membership.
“I am for seeing what kind of deal we can get,” said Árnason, citing the economy as his primary concern.
But the international situation did worry him: “I think that at this point siding with the EU would be preferable in this political climate. With the U.S. on one hand, and then Russia on the other, it’s a bit of a precarious situation.”
Hannah Sigurðardóttir, a 68-year-old employee of Iceland’s medicines agency, also raised concerns about the reliability of the U.S. as an ally.
“We can’t count on the U.S., like we did for a long time. I think we should [have] better ties to our friends and allies in Europe. We have a similar history, culture,” she said.
‘Forward Iceland’
Not everyone agrees with the need to gravitate toward Brussels.
A statue of Icelandic independence movement leader Jón Sigurðsson in Reykjavík. Sovereignty is a key concept in Icelandic politics. | Carlo Martuscelli/POLITICOGuðlaugur Þór Þórðarson, an MP with the conservative and pro-“No” Independence Party, thought that EEA membership was sufficient and that any swing closer to the EU would be misguided.
Sporting a pin reading Áfram Ísland, or Forward Iceland, the slogan of the “No” campaign, on the lapel of his gray suit jacket, Þórðarson condemned the U.S. president’s comments on Greenland.
“I think it’s, of course, outrageous what Trump is saying about Greenland,” said Þórðarson, who was Iceland’s foreign minister during Trump’s first term in office.
But he cautioned that U.S. administrations come and go.
“When it comes to defense and security, then the key things are the bilateral defense agreement with the U.S. and also being a member of NATO,” he said.
Former Reykjavík Mayor Eggertsson from the “Yes” campaign stressed that the concerns about Arctic security were not just about Trump.
“The Arctic has traditionally been described as a low-tension area when it comes to defense. This is changing because of climate change and melting ice caps, the possibility of new shipping routes opening up,” he said.
While this newfound perception that Iceland could be more vulnerable than previously thought has entered the public consciousness, it is more prosaic concerns that continue to dominate the debate.
Outside of the Reykjavík area, where about two-thirds of the country lives, voters are more likely to put a “No” on their ballots.
Selfoss is a town of 10,000 people about an hour’s drive southeast of Reykjavík. Farmers cultivating the black volcanic soil along the road to the town adorn their bales of hay with the “No” campaign’s Áfram Ísland slogan.
Ari Hrafn Elíasson, an 18-year-old builder from Selfoss, said he would vote against the accession talks.
“I’m going to vote no because the farmers want to vote no. In my opinion, they are the backbone of this country, farmers and fishermen. I’m going to listen to them,” he said.
Another Selfoss resident, 19-year-old fast food worker Dagmar Isabella, said she was in favor of the EU talks but stressed that foreign policy was not her main concern.
She said she was worried about the cost of living, particularly for rents and mortgages. She thought joining the euro could help get galloping inflation under control. Iceland’s July inflation was running at an annual rate of 5.6 percent, nearly double the euro area’s.
Talking about the euro, she said: “It’s a much more stable currency than the Icelandic krona.”