Subscribe
The Icelandic Foreign Minister, Thorgerdur Katrín Gunnarsdóttir, is the most prominent supporter of renewing Iceland’s 2009 application to join the European Union, shelved in 2013. A referendum on the issue will be held on 29 August. Thorgerdur (most Icelanders have no family name; Gunnarsdóttir only means that she is the daughter of Gunnar) asserts that Iceland would receive a special deal in which her special circumstances would be taken into account. Iceland’s prosperity is largely based on her sustainable and profitable fisheries, while agriculture is protected by tariffs. Iceland also has ample green energy, hydroelectric and geothermal, as well as plenty of clean water. In the last few decades, tourism and high tech have been welcome additions to the economy.
Two Problems: Fisheries and Agriculture
The gravest problem for Iceland as a potential EU member is that fisheries are the EU’s exclusive competence, part of the acquis communautaire, the EU’s body of law. Control over fisheries would therefore inevitably be transferred from Iceland to the European Commission, even though the Common Fisheries Policy (CPF) has largely failed to conserve fish stocks and ensure profitability. This was the main reason why Norway twice rejected membership. Another problem is that agriculture in Iceland’s subarctic climate will most likely collapse if protection is removed. About half of the food consumed in Iceland is produced locally (meat, dairy, and eggs), while the other half is imported.
Implausible Suggestions
Thorgerdur suggests that the EU principle of relative stability in fisheries implies that Icelanders would retain their exclusive access to Icelandic waters. However, the principle of relative stability is not part of the EU acquis and could be changed at will. Moreover, it would not apply to straddling stocks, long a source of conflict between Iceland and the EU. Thorgerdur also says that the EU would accept generous subsidies to Icelandic agriculture to prevent its collapse after the removal of protective tariffs. But as in Finland, those subsidies would be paid for by the Icelanders, not the EU. While the Icelanders would enjoy lower prices on imported food, they would face higher taxes to finance the subsidies.
Responses by Other EU Members
The commissioners in Brussels are eager to lure Iceland into the EU, not least because they see it as opening the way for oil-rich Norway to join. In late April 2026, Costas Kadis, the EU fisheries commissioner, said there was room for flexibility in accession talks with Iceland. The EU would be prepared to offer exemptions from the CFP (although he was careful not to promise permanent exemptions) and be accommodating on straddling stocks. However, this has not been well received in EU countries. The Danish environment minister, Maria Reumert Gjerding, when asked in the Danish parliament, replied that she was unaware of any permanent exemptions from the CFP. The Dutch prime minister, Rob Jetten, stated in response to a question in the Dutch parliament that all new member states had to accept the CFP without exemptions. Subsequently, the Dutch parliament passed a resolution calling for the CFP to remain part of the EU acquis. Ciarán Mullooly, EMP from Ireland, stated that Irish fishermen would never accept any exemptions for Iceland that would not be extended to Ireland.
A Blind Alley and a Red Herring
Any exemption from the EU acquis, including the CFP, requires the unanimous approval of the member states. It therefore seems that Icelandic Foreign Minister Thorgerdur K. Gunnarsdóttir is heading down a blind alley. She has also thrown a red herring into the debate, arguing that the prices of several goods and services (excluding locally produced food) would fall if Iceland joined. But Iceland is already a member of the European Economic Area (EEA) and therefore has full access to the European internal market. Prices are set in this market (and by local circumstances) and would therefore not change if Iceland were to become an EU member.