Fish, ships and sovereignty: Iceland weighs its European future

Highlights;

• Iceland to hold August 29 vote on whether to reopen EU accession talks
• If the outcome is a yes, any accession treaty would face second referendum
• Fisheries are the most contentious topic
• Foreign minister says NATO and US defence pact remain security foundation regardless of vote

Gylfi Geirsson and Sigurbjorn Svavarsson cut British fishing trawl wires and dodged Royal Navy frigates on board small Icelandic ​coastguard vessels 50 years ago, using guerrilla-like tactics to keep foreign fleets out of their waters.

Iceland won the series of confrontations known as the Cod Wars, and control of those ‌waters became the foundation of the volcanic island's economy.

Half a century later, the fear of losing control is at the heart of an 29 August referendum on whether to reopen membership talks with the European Union.

For many, the vote boils down to a trade-off: whether lower interest rates and a  seat at Europe's table are worth  ceding some control over the fisheries and self-determination that defined Iceland's independence since it broke away from Denmark eight decades ago.

Concerns over Trump and cost of living

Public debate ahead of ​the vote is deeply rooted in fishing rights but now also focusing on the cost of living and President Donald Trump's threats to acquire neighbouring Greenland, which has raised questions over Iceland's own defences.

"The ​situation as I find it today is that it's the fear that we might lose control of what we fought for," said Svavarsson, who served as ⁠a first mate on the coastguard vessel Aegir in 1976 at the height of the Cod Wars and will likely vote against restarting talks.

Iceland had applied to join the EU in 2009, in the wake ​of a banking collapse the previous year, and spent four years negotiating before a new eurosceptic government shelved the process in 2013.

Polling evenly split

"I will definitely say yes," said Geirsson, a radio operator during the confrontations ​with Britain who went on to spend 42 years in the coastguard, later representing Iceland in international fisheries negotiations.

"We cannot be like an isolated island out in the middle of nowhere. We have to have cooperation with neighbouring countries," he said, adding he would at least like to see what deal could be reached before deciding.

But if Iceland were to lose control of its fishing grounds after negotiating a deal with the EU, he would vote against joining.

"I would feel that what ​I did as a young man was for nothing," he said.

The ballot is not a vote on membership and any accession treaty would require a second referendum.

A Gallup poll this month found voters split on ​restarting talks: 46% said they would vote yes and 46% no, with 8% undecided. Polls show a majority against actually joining the bloc.

Fishing as identity

Fisheries remain central to Iceland's economy and identity alike, alongside aluminium and tourism. Much of ‌the cod eaten ⁠in British fish and chip shops today comes from Icelandic waters, a legacy of the very dispute that Geirsson and Svavarsson fought.

"The fishery becomes a symbol of Iceland's sovereignty, as it is the foundation to Iceland's economic independence," said Eirikur Bergmann, professor of politics at Bifrost University.

Heidrun Marteinsdottir, head of industry association Fisheries Iceland, said the sector processed its catch entirely in Iceland rather than exporting it raw — a system she warned joining the EU's Common Fisheries Policy could unravel. "We have 100% of the profit in Iceland and we want to keep it that way," she said.

No foreign minister, Bergmann said, could ever sign a treaty ceding control: "That person ​would be expelled from the country."

For others, the stakes ​have little to do with fish at ⁠all. "We used to be a colony for Denmark," said Floki, a 27-year-old designer in Reykjavik, who declined to give his last name. "I think it revolves around mostly keeping control of our own choices and decisions as a country."

Security and Russia

Iceland sits on a geopolitical bottleneck, straddling the so-called GIUK gap between Greenland, Iceland and ​Britain that NATO has long treated as a crucial doorway for watching Russian naval movements toward the open ocean.

The country has no army of its ​own, and its defence rests on ⁠NATO membership and a bilateral agreement with Washington signed in 1951.

Experts say, however, that Trump's presidency, including his tariffs and threats to acquire Greenland, has forced Icelanders to reassess assumptions once taken for granted — although the decision to hold the referendum predates Trump's second term.

"The whole Greenland thing has made Icelanders pause and re-examine the relationship with the U.S. and asking the question whether the US is a reliable partner ... that has never been a concern in ⁠Iceland until now," ​Bergmann said.

Foreign Minister Thorgerdur Gunnarsdottir told Reuters NATO and the US defence pact would remain the foundation of Iceland's security regardless ​of the vote's outcome, but that membership could still be "a valuable addition", particularly for economic security.

On Trump's threats to Greenland, she said: "We are disappointed with the pressure campaign waged against both Greenlanders and Denmark."

But the bigger worry, she said, lay elsewhere. "Our main concern is ​focused on Russia's activities, in Ukraine primarily but also their maritime activities in our waters and nearby, in the North Atlantic."