lukman-hakim
**Reykjavík, Iceland** – In a surprising turn of events, Iceland has voted against resuming talks on joining the European Union, marking a significant setback for the nation's aspirations to rejoin the bloc 13 years after negotiations were halted. The decision, which came after a heated debate, saw 52.8% of the over 225,000 voters reject the government's proposal, with 47.2% supporting it. The narrow margin of victory for the No campaign, with approximately 12,600 votes separating the two sides, underscores the deep divisions within the Icelandic society.
Prime Minister Kristrún Frostadóttir's centre-left government had initially promised to hold a referendum by 2027 but brought it forward due to international tensions, including US President Donald Trump's threats against Greenland. However, the focal point of the debate in this island nation of nearly 400,000 people was more centered on its fishing industry rather than security concerns.
The high turnout of 82.5% in the referendum, the highest since 2009, reflects the intense interest and engagement of the Icelandic population in the issue. Iceland, already part of the EU's single market and Schengen border-free zone, would have gained full EU membership, including entry into the customs union and the eventual eurozone currency union, if the Yes campaign had succeeded.
Iceland's journey towards EU membership began in 2009, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and the collapse of the nation's banking system. Despite the application being well-advanced when a eurosceptic government took power in 2013, talks were put on hold. The primary obstacle to Icelandic accession has always been fishing rights, a concern that remains unresolved.
The fishing industry, which accounts for nearly 40% of Iceland's exports, has been a cornerstone of the nation's economy. Many voters who opposed EU membership feared that joining the bloc would mean surrendering some control over their lucrative fishing grounds to the EU's policies, which dictate how much a member state can catch.
"The No side was much more skillful in tapping into the political national identity in Iceland, which emphasizes formal independence, coming out of a long independence struggle from Denmark," Eirikur Bergmann, a professor of politics at Bifröst University, told the BBC. He added that the Yes campaign failed to articulate the benefits of EU membership effectively.
The referendum campaign also sparked a broader debate about Iceland's place in the world. Prime Minister Frostadóttir, after casting her ballot, stated that the issue of EU membership would not be revisited while her government was in office. One of her ministers denied that the result was a setback, highlighting the high turnout.
Geographically, the divide was significant, with the capital, Reykjavík, supporting EU accession talks, while rural areas were more opposed. The question on the ballot was straightforward: "Should Iceland resume accession negotiations with the European Union?" A Yes vote would not have been a final decision on joining the EU but a step towards an accession agreement, which would then have to be approved by a second referendum.
While economic concerns were a major factor in the referendum campaigns, security issues also played a role. Iceland, a founder member of NATO but without a military, relies on its allies for defense. EU membership would have granted it full access to the bloc's joint defense infrastructure. The country has backed Ukraine during Russia's full-scale invasion and has been concerned by Russia's increased maritime maneuvers near the island.
Despite these concerns, the debate remained firmly domestic, according to Bergmann. Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the European think tank Bruegel, told RUV that the EU had failed to "sell itself" effectively, despite its desire to be seen as a security actor, particularly in the Arctic. He described the result as a "missed opportunity" for both Iceland and the EU.
An unnamed EU diplomat echoed this sentiment, telling news agency Reuters that the outcome was "a clear setback for Brussels" while acknowledging the importance of fishing and independence issues in the decision.
Comments (0)