4 ms·
In Iceland rn with Icelandic family- polling them and their reasoning for wanting to join the EU has ZERO to do with Putin/Russia/Ukraine etc and everything to
by imaginationra 2y ago
In Iceland rn with Icelandic family- polling them and their reasoning for wanting to join the EU has ZERO to do with Putin/Russia/Ukraine etc and everything to do with gaining access to the Euro for economic stability and the fact that they already abide by EU rules/regs but don't have the ability to vote.
- declan_roberts 2y agoDon't they already have a market agreement with the EU? Seems to me like they have a nice side deal.
- ChocolateGod 2y agoIceland is part of the EEA, where you accept most the rules of the single market being sent over by a fax machine from Brussels. But this excludes things such as farming and fishing, the latter of which has been very important for Iceland because the EU has never always got that right in a painful attempt to make all member states equally unhappy, and representation of where those rules are decided (Council, Parliament) or proposed (Commission). Even outside the EEA, the size of the EU on the continent means European countries who want to do large amounts of frictional-less trading end up importing the EUs rules (e.g. Switzerland, post-Brexit UK) with no say on them.
- Ekaros 2y agoBeing inside offers more effective place to lobby and do horse-trading. Iceland is in position with rather specific interest so they could easily give up many things that don't really matter to them greatly for concessions from others.
- GeoAtreides 2y agoIt's more than lobby and horse-trading, being inside gives veto powers...
- toyg 2y agoVero powers don't exist anymore on almost anything; but if you're vehemently opposed to something you have no chance to actually stop, it's better to be inside so you can trade your nominal opposition for something, anything. If you know you're going to lose 10 no matter what, you might as well trade your opposition for something worth 2 or 3, so you lose less.
- GeoAtreides 2y ago>Vero powers don't exist anymore on almost anything that is blatantly false
- toyg 2y agoVetoes are limited to very specific areas, and are often bypassed already even in those areas (because most practical decisions are actually not taken by the organisms where vetoes exist). Even the Hungarian government, which has stretched the interpretation of such definitions to the most awkward limit over the last decades, in practice falls in line pretty much all the time, using it as a bargain chip to ensure this or that subsidy keeps flowing. It's a desperate strategy anyway: like the Visegrad bloc's actions effectively prompted reforms to reduce their leverage, so will Hungary bring about new ways to further diminish even the current simulacra of veto.
- Oarch 2y agoIt's interesting to wonder what they'd gain from it. Given just the geographic distance, would it really affect things like trade, movement of people or security cooperation. My understanding is that they're stable since the financial crisis.
- spiderfarmer 2y ago"Stable since the last crisis" is not very convincing. In the EU they would enjoy lower interest rates, a more stable currency and voting rights. The last bit will help negotiations about trade a lot. Simply put, they want an inverse Brexit.
- bluGill 2y agoNothing stops them from just adopting the euro or dollar. It isn't common but some countries have adopted an external currancy.
- Symbiote 2y agoWhat do you think about the suggestions in the article for why this isn't ideal?
- bluGill 2y agoI'll admit to skiphing section that discuss details that don't interest me but I did't find them. in any case nothing is ideal anyway. The question is what set of pros and cons are the best compromise. That is something for the people of Iceland to answer not outsiders like me (and perhaps you)
- notahacker 2y agoIf you're going to adopt the Euro to get the benefits of improved trade with the rest of Europe, you might as well join its trading bloc and get votes on its regulatory bodies at the same time...
- coliveira 2y agoAnd what would they gain with this? It seems they already have plenty of agreements with EU, by joining they will just lose their sovereignty.
- dkjaudyeqooe 2y agoActually the opposite is true. By joining the EU they have voting power and influence over their own destiny which they lack under those agreements. Currently they must accept EU rules without being able to influence them.
- coliveira 2y ago> they must accept EU rules without being able to influence them No, they don't really must accept all rules. Only the ones that will benefit them. This will cease once they join the EU.
- dkjaudyeqooe 2y agoThey have negotiated exceptions, but they can also do that as EU members.
- realityking 2y agoYou might be confusing this with the Switzerland situation. The EEA states (Norway, Lichtenstein, and Iceland) indeed must take all legislation that’s part of the EEA into their domestic law. Sometimes directives and regulations have cave outs for countries but they’re rare. Implementation is overseen by the EFTA Surveillance Authority who can sue members in the EFTA court.
- mrweasel 2y agoInfluence on the rules that they are practically forced to follow. Like Norway Iceland has plenty of agreements with the EU, but that translate to copying EU regulations as if they where an EU country already, except they have no say in the making of those rules.
- dagurp 2y agoI would also like to be able to use European banks and insurance companies. People here will say that we will lose control of our fishing rights but we already lost them to a handful of filthy rich families.
- ucha 2y agoMaybe you're polling the people that wanted to join before 2022? Otherwise, how would the jump in support in 2022 be explained?