The Icelandic people will decide on 29 August whether their country should resume negotiations on membership in the European Union. The polls do not indicate a clear favourite – the difference between supporters and opponents is within statistical mistake limits. American claims against Greenland and concerns about the safety of the Arctic contributed to the return of the accession debate. In turn, opponents inform against the costs of membership and the inclusion of the common EU policy in Icelandic fisheries.
– The subject of the referendum on the return to Iceland's membership in the European Union has returned for 2 reasons. Firstly, the government coalition entered a referendum in the coalition agreement by the end of 2027. Secondly, at the turn of 2025 and 2026 the American threats and demands regarding Greenland's membership intensified. This raised concerns for Icelanders and concerns about the function of the United States as a safety guarantor in the region. So they started looking for another guarantees, and that could be the European Union said Newseria Tomasz Żornaczuk, EU Enlargement Analyst at the Polish Institute of global Affairs.
Iceland applied for EU membership in July 2009, following the financial crisis which led to the collapse of its banking system. Negotiations began a year later. By the time of their suspension in 2013, 27 of the 35 negotiating chapters had been opened, of which 11 were temporarily closed. In 2015, the Icelandic government asked the Union not to replace the country among the candidate countries, but the application for membership was not formally withdrawn.
In a referendum scheduled for 29 August, the Icelandic people will answer the question whether the country should resume accession negotiations with the European Union. If negotiations are concluded by agreeing on membership terms, The Icelandics will measure them in the next referendum. According to the memorandum of the Icelandic Ministry of abroad Affairs, talks could start in late 2026 and last 18–24 months.
– The result of the referendum cannot be determined on the basis of available surveys of the public, as the difference is within the limits of statistical error. Until late it was precisely equal, in the past there was a somewhat greater advantage of 1 side or the other. As far as the result is concerned, it is so essential to wait for a referendum to be held and to supply authoritative results. – says Tomasz Żornaczuk.
In the survey conducted by Maskín's studio between 21 and 25 August, the resumption of negotiations supported 51.3 percent of the respondents and 48.7 percent were against. On 13 August, the proportions were 52.2 to 47.8%. On 17 August, Gallup's survey pointed to 51.5 percent of supporters and 48.5% of opponents of talks, with an mistake margin of 2.5 points percent.
– Eurosceptics point to a number of different arguments, primarily economical and sovereign. Iceland is simply a richer country than the average European Union country, so joining it would make the country a net contributor, ergo would make a real cost of membership. peculiar attention is paid to fisheries, which is an essential part of Iceland's economy, which, depending on the year, generates between 10 and a twelve percent of income explains PISM analyst.
The fisheries chapter was not opened during the 2010-2013 talks. Fish and fish products presently account for nearly 40% of Icelandic commodity exports, and for many smaller coastal towns fishing and processing are the primary origin of income. The opponents of membership are mainly afraid about limiting Iceland's autonomy in setting fishing quotas and managing marine resources.
– Some arguments concern sovereign and identity issues. To date, Iceland has pursued or continues to prosecute an independent abroad policy and, after joining the European Union, it would gotta conduct it within the framework of EU membership – says Tomasz Żornaczuk.
Iceland is already powerfully connected with the European Union today. Since 1994, it has been part of the European economical Area, making it part of the single marketplace and has been in the Schengen area since 2001. It adopts a large part of the interior marketplace rules, but does not have the right to vote erstwhile adopted in the EU institutions.
– Supporters besides point to the economical argument, saying that since we are already in the European economical Area, we meet many membership conditions and bear any costs of this participation, it would be worth at least sitting at the same table and influencing decisions – says the expert. – In contrast to the discussions that at the beginning of the erstwhile decade were the consequence of the economical crisis, supporters of the return to talks with the Union this time point mainly to safety issues – an increasingly aggressive US policy towards Greenland at the turn of the year, as well as uncertainty about the future of Arctic security.
Full membership would guarantee Iceland’s participation in decisions in the European Union institutions. It would besides mean entering the customs union and beginning the way for the adoption of the euro.
– Iceland is very well prepared in all areas where candidate countries have the biggest problems, namely freedom, justice, security, human rights and justice. On these issues, Icelanders have been close to EU standards for decades, so there would be no major challenges in adapting law and practice to the EU. – says Tomasz Żornaczuk.
Despite the advanced degree of alignment with EU standards, possible accession would require Iceland to change in respective areas. In addition to fisheries, this would include trade policy and revision of certain global agreements.
– While fisheries are crucial for the creation of the country's GDP, tiny towns frequently account for respective twelve percent of the income of these communities and most industries and services are geared towards fisheries. There is another element, namely any global agreements would require revision and revision. 1 is simply a free trade agreement with China, which Iceland would gotta quit before joining the European Union – emphasises the EU Enlargement Analyst at PISM.
