They are also part of the EEA. Meaning they must abide by several EU regulations and pay membership fees (less than EU members of course, but still substantially) - but have no influence or say in EU issues. The only thing keeping Iceland out of the EU is fears over the fishing sector.
Its a few hundred thousand souls who are mostly integrated in the market and Schengen rules anyway. And as both last world wars show, in case of conflict they would not have much of a choice anyways.
If you ever do videos on Iceland again, i'm here telling you that Icelanders go by their first names, always. You calling her "Frostadóttir" doesn't make any sense when it comes to Iceland, we don't go by last names as they are just an indicator of who our father is, it is not rude to call her by her first name. Edit: Did not foresee the shitstorm a simple clarification would cause. Everyone do as you please, i'm not trying to cause offense nor saying that anyone else is causing offense by not addressing Icelanders in the right way. It was just a FYI for the channel.
@@dabi2k Their names are Icelandic though. You don't refer to Xi Jinping as Mr. Jinping do you, because you know Xi is the family name and can adjust how you refer to him as appropriate. Not hard
@@SeArCh4DrEaMz Ethics? I like their summeries, but they often have clear bias towards left leaning politics and make mistakes like calling certain parties far right when they are Left Conservative
@@teaser6089 they have a slightly liberal bias, but being biased is unavoidable for any news source, since being neutral means different things to different people. What you call neutral is probably just biased towards your views, which is okay. The important part is fact-checking and good-faith.
Just to add to the euro discussion. Many large companies in iceland use the euro for their finances, but those same companies lobby heavily to make sure that the rest of the country does not use the euro. By doing this they can benefit from crashing the krona, making labor cost low, making loans for them cheap (but very expensive for others) and also can use the opportunity to buy up real-estate.
As a pro-EU Scandinavian I would love to see Iceland join the Union. But only if the Icelandic people want to. A majority in favour of joining for several years before joining. Opt-out for the fisheries sounds reasonable, and the EU needs to reform the fisheries anyway to stop over-fishing. Same for Norway.
also probably no Euro adoption seems reasonable. They are geographically too far away from the common market for it to make sense, and the Euro would just hold them back by not allowing them to have their own monetary policy.
Hi, can you just tell me why you are in favour of giving away your sovranity to a distant, corrupt, obscure entity that does literally nothing for citizens interests?
@@buddy1155 as they said in the video, their economy is in large part based on their fishing. And it's already not going too well now. Having to share it with so many other countries, would only make it worse surely?
its a very niche industry, only employing 5% of the pops and its owners are the richest of the country, of course they wont want to open the fisihing zones because they will lose their monopoly. the fishing magnates are fearmongering the citizens, but its not 1779 anymore world is global and fish is not the one and only food source of the country.
Can we talk about how funny it is that on the Inflation graph at 4:48 they had to cut down Turkeys line so it can be shown? In reality their line would be at least twice as long which goes to show how utterly fried their economy is
Way to exaggerated: it is not fried! It's is marinated in butter and Mediterranean herbs, then made to swim in hot olive oil. Then it is dipped in sugar water and shoved down the throat of Turkish people. In a loving way ... of course. Blessed be the visionary, democratically elected 😉, leader of Turkiye. May he reign for all time!
@@tomsriver2838 Well yeah but being half-alive isn't exactly "good". I don't think any regular person in Turkey is benefiting from their life savings losing 50%+ of their value in a year.
While I would be extremely happy to welcome our Icelandic friends into the fold, I must add that: - a 51% versus 49% referendum is undesirable. Ideally they should aim for at least a 65% versus 35% to make sure a REAL majority of Icelanders is on board. - Icelandic politics has some seriously shady corners. Most politicians openly lobby with multinationals, often to obtain results that are actually detrimental for common Icelanders. This could lead to open frictions with the EU. - Fisheries and immigration risk becoming two devastating time bombs. As for the fisheries, Iceland is essentially used to do as it pleases and that won't be possible. Immigration, in particular, is already endangering the Icelandic language, with most people currently employed in the tourism sector unable to utter a single word in Icelandic. With a population so small, the risk is great.
I want to Progressive Party is one of the most conservative parties in Iceland, and the oldest. The name probably made more sense when they started, 100 years ago.
They advocated for more tractor imports for farmers to make them more efficient... back then it was progress... Now they just want toll booths on the roads
Same in Norway (except they are not old and used to have an even sillier name), we also have a center right party called "Left" and the "Center party", who, eh, is single issue focused on the periphery.
I’m from Iceland. For years, the businesses and conservative party have completely fear mongered the EU, suggesting the union would destroy Iceland’s fishing waters. While they completely monopolize every resource on our Very isolated island. Always rubbed me the wrong way.
The same thing will happen under the EU, you're just trading one monopolizer for another. Your waters won't be yours anymore and they will heavily restrict your way of life. That's one reason why the UK left the EU.
Also with Britain out of the EU the main problematic child for iceland is no longer a concern, at this point I think we would all benefit if we worked together to get the most out of iceland resources and to improve the country and the union as a whole.
@@NK-vd8xiReferring to someone by just their father's name is weird - it's similar to calling someone 'Jesse's dad'. That's just not how you address someone in a (semi)formal setting. Boris Johnson has a last name that he shares with his family. His kids are named Johnson, his dad was. In Iceland, his kids would have the patronym Borisson/Borisdaughter. There is no sense of a shared name.
@@Adam-326 not traditionally, they've formalised their name to BinLaden now but it literally means Son of Laden. Almost all Arabic names with Bin/Ibn (=Son) are patronyms as opposed to formalised surnames. English names worked the same, Johnson, Jackson, Thomson etc
@@ifer1280 no, it's not weird, it's actually the norm in many parts of the world and was the norm in English too, which is why we have the name Johnson to begin with in the first place.
Countries with small economies which have their own independent currencies find that it' very costly protecting their currencies against speculators making a run on their currencies in the foreign exchange market. The flipside is that they lose monitory control and are left with only fiscal policy.
As a heavily export driven economy it is likely against Iceland's interest to join the Eurozone. In fact I would argue it was against everyone's interest except the Netherlands and Germany, given the massive structural unemployment it created in Spain and Italy.
Fishery used to be the largest export of Iceland, and so they were extremely sensitive to being able to fish their own fish and not share their fishing quotas with the EU. This is historically what has kept both Iceland and Norway out of the EU (Norway also being protective of their oil). More recently tourism in Iceland has grown to be twice the size of fishery and is still growing, while metal exports have gotten to about the same size and is growing fast too, while fishery is growing slower. So things are changing. But lets not get ahead of ourselves.
As a Norwegian I have never heard anyone in Norway be concerned for our oil in discussion of joining the EU. Agriculture was the biggest issue. If you live as a farmer in the Arctic and have to grow crops in between rocky mountains, there's no way of competing with continental farmers with completely different conditions for production, so it would mean an effective end to Norwegian agriculture beyond milk, potato and sheep.
@@StormCrownSrstill, Iceland and Norway should push for a reform of the EU fisheries. If Iceland has more fish than it can fish, that is great and should be used to keep fish stocks stable.
@@sciencefliestothemoon2305 no-one has more fish than they can fish. that's not how fisheries work. there's no-where on the seven seas where we're not over-fishing right now.
Stop using vikings as a name whenever you get the chance, please :) that was an occupation of a small part of the population over a thousand years ago. You are probably just as much related as any of us are, statistically speaking. Vikings were horrible people. I don't go around calling Americans slave-owners for example 😅
Why do you do that? Vikings were evil people according to the left and the icelandic people would have to agree to multiple thousands islamic immigrants a year or be fined. is that a good and welcomming think for your ''viking'' brotehrs and sisters? xDD
I think there is something really important also that no one here seems to take into consideration : Defence. Trump just won the elections in the US, and we already know his stand about NATO. Iceland is an Army-less nation placed directly in front of Russia's waters whose defence is deeply related to the US. Entering the EU is a way to ensure another way of defending themselves.
Doesn't matter what Trump thinks as Iceland has a special agreement with the US. The United States and Iceland have a longstanding defense relationship, formalized through a bilateral defense agreement signed in 1951. This agreement stipulates that the U.S. will make arrangements for Iceland’s defense on behalf of NATO, given that Iceland does not have its own standing military.
The EU needs to find a way of membership where Island can maintain the important parts of their rights of fishery. Fishery is a vital part of Icelandic economy and Island can make only little concessions on that front. On the other hand the major governing and opposition parties need to agree on membership. It makes no sense to negote something that immeditately gets walked back as soon as the majorities change and a different government gets elected. EU membership is a long term plan that needs one or two decades to process in full.
We could also just keep things the way they are. Contriving a way for Iceland to join without giving up their fishing rights is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Imagine then the whole Scandinavian block looking at Norway. "Bro. It's your turn now. Even Iceland joined." And if Iceland joins as an EEA member to full member and will use Euro instead of Kroná. Then not just Norway won't have any excuses not to want to become full member, but also Sweden and Denmark won't have any excuses to use Euro either. If Iceland fully integrated. It will have an impact on the other scandinavian countries.
@@steinarnielsen8954 even as a pro EU guy. Like even an EU federalist that I am, we need to improve some areas. The rest of the EU states to join the Eurozone, invest more in an EU internal defence and security zone. Meaning no army, but the national armees can be assembled to protect the EU territory internally and the external border. Ramp up the Frontex budget to 2-digit billion sums and increase the GDP of the EU. Less beaurocracy for companies in the EU, create the capital market union and an EU insolvency right. Plus the initiative right for the EU parliament and the QMV in the EU Council. Then you will see how positive thing will change. It's just the national egos of the member states that slow it down.
@@Andy-dg1pjthe best excuse is that the people don’t want it, we’ve voted on EU membership twice, the vote failed horribly twice. We aren’t pressured by our Scandinavian neighbours and after 600 years of foreign rule we won’t be ruled by Brussels. Despite your wishes us Norwegians are more than content with the status quo
Migrant Quotas will be introduces in 2026 If one EU country accepts migrants like Spain pretty much all countries accept them even if they don't want them The EU has many flaws and they don't start here It would be great for example for the EU to have a unified stock market
I hope that the people at Brussel realize that if they continue wanting weak boarders, then European resentment will push people to vote nationalist leaders that in turn are hostile towards the EU. I've been saying this for years, before Brexit was a thing, but still I feel like people have not gotten the message.
I think EU should leave Norway and Iceland sovereignty when it comes to fishing. Already lack of sovereignty is one of the reasons why there is a far-right increase. Such move would gain the EU more support.
All the arguments I hear are opportunistic ones. "It is currently in our benefit to join, because...". And this is not great. The EU doesn't need more countries on board that join when the going is tough, then leave again when things get better or other opportunities present themselves. Brexit was a hard breach of trust, as is the defiance of Hungary and possibly Romania. I think we should add a minimum term for joining, for example 50 years, to prevent these on-and-off-again situations. But most importantly, nations should join because they believe in the things the EU stands for, like democracy and cooperation and solidarity; not because they see it as a currently favorable transaction.
The EU does not stand for democracy. If it did then it would allow European parliament to introduce legislation instead of just veto it. The EU is an anti-democratic organization meant to circumvent democratic opposition to neo-liberal economic policy. Look at the language you use, "defiance". You aren't even pretending there is benefit to the organization.
hell freezes before any other state leaves the EU. people might say shit but support of EU is well above 80% in Hungary. one thing what politicians say and an other thing is what people believe
If Iceland had a (convincing) referendum and would put everything behind it they could meet the basic entry conditions in 2030 or so. Enough time for entry negotiations. No exception to the Euro for new members! With their dependency on fish, some special agreements should be possible there. What during a time of global tensions is a bit problematic - Iceland doesn't even pretend they have any intention to defend itself. No military, no heavy arms for the police forces, nothing. As EUrope tries to ramp up the defence capability, that could be a price they would have to pay.
Iceland would be able to join much sooner than 2030, the security and defence policy has already been Provisionally closed by the EU and we are a founding member of NATO.
@@andriandrason1318 Membership to NATO is utterly irrelevant, though. Neither Ireland nor Austria are. I for one would welcome it if Iceland joined the EU.
@@timolynch149 It's just that not enough people here are sure, so it's likely not going to happen unless it's forced... which means that there is going to be a backlash, which isn't good for anyone.
Well, in all fairness to Iceland, even if it were to try and organize a military, the best it probably can do is a few thousand. That's with zero institutional knowledge on military structure and strategy. Zero experience, zero equipment, it'll be all from scratch. Makes little sense to invest so much into something so useless
I wonder if the EU should be reformed to a federal republic first before accepting new candidates -- even though how well fit Iceland and possible other candidates are. Politically the EU is becoming ungovernable.
The EU is sort of untenable. The Euro currency is a failed experiment that caused massive structural unemployment, and the governing system is not democratic enough. More democracy and less currency control would be difficult.
@@XandateOfHeaven Both the EU and the Euro are huge successes. Unemployment has nothing to do with the euro currency, just like the USD has nothing to do with unemployment in the mid-West states of the US.
@Jurjen. What are you talking about? The Euro is essentially entirely responsible for the unemployment crisis in Southern Europe. This is exactly what happened in the European sovereign debt crisis. You can't just gaslight everyone into pretending this didn't happen. There's actually a good case that parts of the United States should have separate currencies. For the rust belt it is more important for them economically that their exports are competitive than they are able to import at higher prices. But more significantly the inequality in productivity between US states is not as significant as the difference between EU states, at least in part because of a more integrated infrastructure policy.
@@XandateOfHeaven No, the unemployment has everything to do with competitiveness and *that* has everything to do with (labor) productivity. In short, those countries were lazy and everytime shit hits the fan, they deprecated their currency -- in effect stealing sometimes half of the people's money. Now with the Euro their politicians can't do that anymore so they have to face the real economic problems. It's a cultural thing but they'll learn -- like the Greek did in since 2008.
It's a bit easy to blame Southern Europe of "laziness" AND it's a bit silly to blame it all on the Euro. There is no easy one directional answer for complex problems guys.
Iceland shouldn't under any circumstance give away their fishing waters and it seems highly unlikely that the EU would give them a concession to stay out of the common fisheries policy.
Bad idea. And this video is a bit premature since they haven't formed a government yet, and they don't look like they would even have enough support in parliament for this.
The UK being out of the EU probably makes the fishing negotiations easier, as they would probably have been the main threat to Icelandic fisheries within the EU and were even responsible for a couple of invasions of Icelandic fisheries known as the "cod wars". It would also be funny to see the UK surrounded in all four cardinal directions by EU member states if Iceland joined.
Being in the EU and on the Euro would probably be beneficial in long term. The fishing issue is not trivial though. It’s likely not just jobs but the cultural link to fishing that makes it such a tough issue
The Euro currency has essentially never benefited anyone. The lack of currency control lead to structural unemployment in much of the Eurozone outside Germany and the Netherlands.
@@XandateOfHeaven I'd disagree with that. Countries only have an issue if they are fiscally irresponsible such as Greece was. Countries such as Ireland have definitely benefited from membership. The biggest advantage is the ease to which it makes it for business/consumers to operate within the Euro zone.
@@keiththoma2559 It's not about fiscal irresponsibility, it's that poor countries with worse infrastructure and a less educated population can't compete with exports from rich countries if they can't make their exports cheaper by devaluing their currency. Greece, Spain and Italy would have had to overspend for their infrastructure to catch up to Germany and the Netherlands. This issue is too widespread to be attributed to individual responsibility. The reason Spain and Greece have structural unemployment and Poland doesn't is currency control. Blaming national governments for the systemic failure of the Euro currency is politically motivated by saving face on the failed Euro experiment.
@@XandateOfHeaven It 100% is around fiscal irresponsibility and bad governance. Greece had crazy laws such as license and resections that limited number of workers in sectors etc such as truck drivers.
@keiththoma2559 That's over regulation not fiscal irresponsibility, but that's another thing the EU doesn't help with by adding an additional layer of government regulations on top of local, subnational and national. Economies can't have 20% unemployment without some sort of currency structural issue. It just isn't natural.
I think Iceland and Norway will join the EU *eventually*, at some point over the next few decades. But I don't know if it will be next year or during this next government's tenure. One thing I'd say is that if they're going to hold a referendum on EU membership they should also really hold a simultaneous referendum on the Euro as well, to settle that questions too.
@@XandateOfHeaven Both Norway and Iceland (and Switzerland as well, btw) are already part of Schengen and EEA; EU citizens can live and work in them and vice versa and they dutifully accept all new EU laws and regulations. Literally the only reason not to join is inertia and fisheries, and those are both solvable and relatively transient.
There are pros and cons joining the EU. The "pro" eu parties did not want to talk about joing the EU before the elections so I think many of the voters where not voting for them to join the EU. The inflation is high but the wages have also risen alot, so to compare the Euro to the ISK is hard, tbere are so many factors
Their polling was atrocious until they stopped talking about joining the EU and adopting the Euro. That kinda talk is considered treasonous by many in Iceland.
Such a small country so dependent of one main sector would be eviscerated when abiding to the EU rule. But hey, at least the EU will be able to make it more 'multicultural'. That will surely enough help the island.
About adopting EUR: in contradiction to what you said in the video, Iceland actually would not(!) seek exemption from EUR. Moreover. in fact even and particularely representatives of the Independence party have propagated to adopt EUR (20 years ago), even without joining EU. They had to learn the EU would not like this. Moreover, the only point the pro-EU group Evrópuhreyfingin is advertising repeatedly IS joining the EUR, to presumingly achieve less inflation and allover lower price levels.
EUs stance on fisheries is crazy. Demanding that Iceland gives up control of their main resource if they join the union is just bizarre. What will Icelanders do when their fishing areas are flooded with huge factory fishing vessels from across Europe?
Infrastructure repairs across the country due to volcanic eruptions? No, just in the localised area of the periodically erupting volcano, specifically around the Blue Lagoon and associated geothermal power plant and the nearby fishing village and only amounts to building lava berms and making good road, hot water and electricity connections over the latest lava field.
In the end it comes down to money. Cultural connections haven't been enough for the better part of the last 50 years. And as a member of NATO, Iceland has no need for the defense aspects of the EU. And being a member of Schengen, there are no Visa issues. So what remains is money, the fiscal protection mechanisms.
Are they DRUNK? LOL Do they not see all the issues in Europe? They are concerned about economics? And what, Germany is booming economically under the EU? NO...
Hi, for the fact that Iceland's fishery and following externalities contributes for 25% of Iceland's GDP... would you mind sharing source for it ? (I am now writing a thesis on that topic, so just wandering)
@@StormCrownSr😂 are you that dellusional? Go look at paris berlin or london and see the ghettos with your beloved workers spiraling 🎉 also have fun with 80% german/french laws on your island 🎉 democracy? 😅 watering down local opinions to zero 😅😅😅
@@oldbordergeek Currently the EU is not forcing any redistribution of refugees. And it such rules require unanimous votes of the EU Council which won't allow any change to this.
@@listenerobserver7160you are very uninformed wich is evil when you sprout nonsense. My EU country cannot stop immigrants OR send them back because of EU treaties. I hope we can leave the EU fast with their ecological fetishes. This is not what we gained indepence for hundreds of years ago!!!! 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
"50/50" is as far from "consensus" as mathematically possible. What you meant was that there is no current consensus regarding EU membership in Iceland.
Today was the day I learned Iceland is not part of the European Union. I thought they were something like Norway or Switzerland. Not part of European Union fully but integrated enough that there is no issues between each other.
They are. Iceland and Norway, and tiny Liechtenstein are in the EEA and EFTA, which guarantees free trade, aswell as the Schengen area which is what guarantees free movement of goods and people. Fun fact, even some EU members like Ireland, Romania and Bulgaria aren't even in the Schengen area. EEA is basically just the full package of joining the EU in all but name, whereas EFTA is a limited deak with the basics, whereas Schengen is the DLC you can have both as an EU or non EU member, but you don't really need to. Switzerland however is only in the EFTA and Schengen, not EEA. EEA is basically just an expanded EFTA, which means Switzerland has some free trade with its EU neighbours, but can still stop more vehicles and have some more custom barriers. Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein on the other hand are all in the EU's inner market and can only have custom barriers and tariffs like an EU member state, which in practice makes them all a EU member state in all but name. They are not represented in the EU parliament, obviously, and may thus veto most EU bills. Iceland and Liechtenstein does that occasionally whereas Norway hasn't done that a single time since first joining EFTA in 1973, then the EEA in 1995, because Norway is scared of the possible consequences if they were to piss off the EU. Iceland trades alot with the UK and US, whilst Liechtenstein is a tax heavan and has Switzerland, so they both generaly don't care. whereas Switzerland, only in Schengen and EFTA, in general isn't obliged to join most EU bills and thus tends to hold popular referendums on those its government considers to be logical or adventageous to join. Edit: changed EEC to EEA
@@sofiaormbustad7467 EEA, not EEC. The reason Norway and Iceland stay out of the EU is that they'd have to join the Common Fisheries Policy which would be very damaging for both of them.
You were right. They are part of EFTA and the EEA like Norway. So very integrated with the EU, part of the single market, but not actually members of the EU.
They need to pull Iceland closer to Europe so they'll actually be a part of EU. Somewhere close to Spain if they have nice weather we can vacation there.
iceland is welcome to join, but i think they are better off outside the eu. There location is a long way of continental europe, so they don't have the same challenges
now imagine Iceland joining EU, so all these woke Icelanders feel even more support from their European ideological siblings to implement their "superb" ideas @@andriandrason1318
Not really though? Sweden is still a fairly recent member, and they were(and are) rich. The wealthiest countries in the EU have absolutely no plans to leave. Brexit was the best thing that ever happened to the EU.
@@youtubebob123 sweden now has a gangs and armed crime problem the level of latin american countries, all thanks to "diversity". and the economy is stagnant, little to no innovation, living off the hard work of generations past but not new growth.
@@ItzLucky90 the danes are in the eurozone in every way but name, their currency is pegged to the euro. they do not have an independent monetary policy. both will probably join the euro in the not too distant future as the swedish krona just keeps falling and the danes want to signal unity and invest in the european project now that you can't rely on the US anymore.
It’s also important to mention that a social democrat coalition would likely have to cooperate with the people’s party which previously split from the social democrats. The people’s party is a left wing party but it puts more more of an emphasis on internal matters and does not support eu admission
A candidate member nation should have bi-partisan local support. The question cannot depend on which party is in power. That is not a stable foundation for such a structural decision.
@ If you read my comment as intended, you wouldn’t have replied as such. The point stands: a solid, multi-party support is needed as well as a referendum to complete EU candidature on a sustainable basis. Not sure why you’re using my comment as a platform to call the UK and the US ‘third world countries’ either. FYI - I don’t live in either of them. You really need to chill.
@@TurinStark5 Hungary and Poland literally have to fight everyday to beat them back and are fined for doing so. These wonderful peaceful migrants are hellbent on committing crimes to get into countries illegally.
@@TurinStark5 You have to be joking? The political pressure, the financial pressure, the withholding of EU funds? They are trying to force them in every way they can.
I was so positive about them joining the EU before this video. Now I’m skeptical. Why join the EU and share their fishing waters when they already have most of the important benefits of being in the EU? It feels like Iceland just wants the EU title and give compromises for it.
Imagine then the whole Scandinavian block looking at Norway. "Bro. It's your turn now. Even Iceland joined." And if Iceland joins as an EEA member to full member and will use Euro instead of Kroná. Then not just Norway won't have any excuses not to want to become full member, but also Sweden and Denmark won't have any excuses to use Euro either. If Iceland fully integrated. It will have an impact on the other scandinavian countries.
I'm a pro EU Norwegian, but I honestly don't see us joining any time soon. Yes, the pro EU side has been gaining, but it has been gaining from "insignificant" to "maybe we can use Trump to scare the rest of the country into joining". During the last election the biggest winners were the most Eurosceptic parties on the left, during the next polls show the largest party on the right to be the Eurosceptic populists. Until our economy truly tanks, maybe cause of overinvesting in petroleum in a decade, I don't see us joining.
@msuomtv give it time. The wheel keeps spinning as people say. Pretoleum will not always be an economic boom for every country. Look at the arabians. The Saudis already diversify their economy.
@@Andy-dg1pjThe Norwegian economy is already quite diverse, Norway exports much fish and lumber as well as being a technologically important nation. And to say it’s not diversifying a lot already is just wrong
1) It's so non-negotiable that seven members haven't adopted the euro yet. Where for instance Sweden intentionally doesn't fulfil the criteria required as to avoid having to implement it. Similarly Denmark och Poland doesn't seem too keen on implementing it either. The EU could benefit from being a bit more lenient on certain issues if it means more member states.
@@irispettson Yes, I do think they should either integrate or leave honestly. Also all of the mentioned countries that have those measures have joined in the early days. The EU has made the commitment to not allow any opt outs like that for new members. The reason Sweden and Denmark get away with it is simply historical. Iceland wouldn't have the same benefit. The same way the UK would never be allowed to rejoin the EU under the same deal they had. They'd have to join the EU fully, including adopting the Euro and Schengen.
@@logixthreesome298 Because it's complete nonsense, unnecessary, offers no real benefit to Canada, etc? Canada already has free trade with the EU, it already has visa free travel. Joining the EU would cripplingly insane. It would offer no benefit because we already have the benefit of visa free travel and free trade. It would hurt the county massively because it would impose new and different regulations which would be massively disruptive to industry, housing, agriculture, mining, fishing, etc, and would harm our trade with the US. Would would be giving up our sovereignty to Germany with nothing to show for it but a collapsed agricultural sector. There are also smaller things like the massive spike in food price that would result from being a part of the EU's damaging protectionist agricultural tariffs. The idea that we should be part of the EU is deranged.
@@TheArcticWitch The countries that got special deals, got them because back then they had a bigger negotiation power than the EU. Nowadays, I doubt that Iceland has any kind of leverage to negotiate special opt-outs.
Britain should be rejoining, three years outside of Europe has only hade a decade and a half of Tory incompetence worse, if Starmer truly wants to fix the country he needs to undo the worst catastrophe that Britain has undergone so far this century.
I'd like us to rejoin but at this point we'd have to make major concessions to the EU to prove we're not going to be a troublesome member again, and even then I think it would take decades. We'd almost certainly have to give up on the pound, the discounted membership rate we got before Brexit.
Sadly, a ton of Brits still think they are better off outside the EU and think the crisis has nothing to do with the Brexit Right now only 59% wanna rejoin, so if they hold a referendum there is a big chance the same happens as last time where aggressive campaigning on lies and false promises is enough to tip the scales in favor of staying out, especially since the US election showed how carefully we have to look at polling data. And Starmer's government pushing to rejoin would not go down well with the 40+% of Brits who see rejoining as the worst case scenario for Britain. tldr, this situation is like the US, a lot of people want this outcome and are actively happy to vote against their self interest.
I'd love the UK coming back, but you have to fix problems over there first.. I would even say that the UK should join the EU in these difficult times, but it cannot be rushed.
The promise to introduce the Euro when joining the EU is linked to one important condition: as soon as the requirements are met. As the countries of Sweden, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Romania show, this can take many years.
... we all know these countries dont "meet" the requirements because they still don't want to implement the euro. if they wanted to they'd had the euro a long time ago.
For the Icelandic people here who take issue with the way patronyms were used in this video, respectfully, your rules don't apply here. In English, we treat patronyms just like surnames. For example, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia is Mohammad Bin Salman, Bin Salman is a patronym as his father was Salman Bin Abdulaziz. In English it is completely normal to refer to him as "Bin Salman" for short, even though it's not a surname. In Icelandic you might just call him Mohammad and that would be correct for you, but it's not polite/formal in English.
Sure, you can do whatever the F you want. However, this is like if I called you by only your middle name. Yes it is part of your name, but it's not how you would identify yourself. I could refer to Donald J. Trump as John and yes it is part of his name, but it is not an identifier that he would connect with at all. And yes we know foreigners don't usually understand or give a F , but referring to someone how they want to be referred will always be the more polite thing to do.
This is not quite correct. Iceland doesn't have a standing army, true, but it has a defense force, the country has experience with the logistics of annual NATO exercises and the small IRCU haa been deployed as part of peacekeeping missions. Yes, this is not the same as a standard military operated by other countries, but there are structures and institutional knowledge to build on.
They are already members when it comes to the vast majority of things they just do not have a voice on how EU rules are made so it makes sense for them to join and get a voice in Brussels
@@StormCrownSr historically the Euro was literally one of the reasons Iceland wanted to Join the Union given the crash the Icelandic Krona experienced after the 2008 financial crisis
@@paullarne that's probably the only argument they have for maintaining the status quo considering how significant the fishing industry is for them, still will that continue to be the case? I do not know
To understand the graph at 1:28 I had to google both Euro vs Usd and Krona vs Usd, as the Euro values now for example 1.05 USD. So very far from the 0.008 Usd on the Y graph. Maybe add the Euro value on the opposite Y axe and add labels? Otherwise very interesting as usual. Thanks for the work.
As an Icelandic man I do not want to join the eu. The eu immgration policy is top tier garbage. I am quite sure it would destroy this country. Also the sharing of our fishing zone one of our few resources on this isolated rock and for what just to be able to switch to the euro not worth it.
@@forsakenvoidz6828 Their saving grace is being miles away by sea but if they introduced higher migrant quotas they would replace the population is only a few years.
Iceland is one of those countries that everyone just assumes is part of the eu anyways
It's already a part of the Schengen Zone. So, freedom of movement exists anyways. 😅
The same goes for Norway.
They are also part of the EEA. Meaning they must abide by several EU regulations and pay membership fees (less than EU members of course, but still substantially) - but have no influence or say in EU issues. The only thing keeping Iceland out of the EU is fears over the fishing sector.
Its a few hundred thousand souls who are mostly integrated in the market and Schengen rules anyway.
And as both last world wars show, in case of conflict they would not have much of a choice anyways.
@@FischerNilsA Iceland has fewer population than my city district 😮
just wish shipping/postal companies thought that too, we are rarely counted in Europe -usually just "rest of world" which gets real expensive
If you ever do videos on Iceland again, i'm here telling you that Icelanders go by their first names, always. You calling her "Frostadóttir" doesn't make any sense when it comes to Iceland, we don't go by last names as they are just an indicator of who our father is, it is not rude to call her by her first name.
Edit: Did not foresee the shitstorm a simple clarification would cause. Everyone do as you please, i'm not trying to cause offense nor saying that anyone else is causing offense by not addressing Icelanders in the right way. It was just a FYI for the channel.
Not sure if you noticed but the video is in English, not in Icelandic.
Já mér finnst það vera skrítið þegar fólk kallar mig Björnsson
@@dabi2k and? The op just gave some useful information in a cordial manner, what's wrong with it?
@@dabi2k Their names are Icelandic though. You don't refer to Xi Jinping as Mr. Jinping do you, because you know Xi is the family name and can adjust how you refer to him as appropriate. Not hard
Ok buddy
This newsreader has improved a lot and now gives correct emphasis to words. Better than many TV news anchors.
its actually embarrassing that this small amateur channel has much higher standards and ethics than GB news...
@@SeArCh4DrEaMz It’s not very hard to do better than GB(ullshit) “News”, to be fair
@@SeArCh4DrEaMz Ethics?
I like their summeries, but they often have clear bias towards left leaning politics and make mistakes like calling certain parties far right when they are Left Conservative
@@teaser6089 they’re definitely not left-wing biased. The parties they call far-right are very much far-right
@@teaser6089 they have a slightly liberal bias, but being biased is unavoidable for any news source, since being neutral means different things to different people. What you call neutral is probably just biased towards your views, which is okay. The important part is fact-checking and good-faith.
Just to add to the euro discussion. Many large companies in iceland use the euro for their finances, but those same companies lobby heavily to make sure that the rest of the country does not use the euro. By doing this they can benefit from crashing the krona, making labor cost low, making loans for them cheap (but very expensive for others) and also can use the opportunity to buy up real-estate.
The same in Czechia, actually. Big business operates in EUR.
As a pro-EU Scandinavian I would love to see Iceland join the Union.
But only if the Icelandic people want to. A majority in favour of joining for several years before joining.
Opt-out for the fisheries sounds reasonable, and the EU needs to reform the fisheries anyway to stop over-fishing.
Same for Norway.
also probably no Euro adoption seems reasonable. They are geographically too far away from the common market for it to make sense, and the Euro would just hold them back by not allowing them to have their own monetary policy.
Hi, can you just tell me why you are in favour of giving away your sovranity to a distant, corrupt, obscure entity that does literally nothing for citizens interests?
Yeah, Norway and Iceland are as prosperous as they are because they're not in the EU.
Bcs its based@@federikus2928
@@federikus2928
"sovranity"
I don't think Iceland can afford to share it's fishing areas.
Their population is so small and their fishing grounds so large, they are not even able to take full advantage of the fishing opportunities.
Well since the UK isn’t part of the EU anymore their biggest competitor is gone
Then negotiate an exemption.
@@buddy1155 as they said in the video, their economy is in large part based on their fishing. And it's already not going too well now. Having to share it with so many other countries, would only make it worse surely?
Cod War 4 Age of European Union
Losing one island, gaining another island…
More mouths for Europeans to feed. Especially considering illegal mass immigration.
A better one
Better one, not by economy
its a very niche industry, only employing 5% of the pops and its owners are the richest of the country, of course they wont want to open the fisihing zones because they will lose their monopoly. the fishing magnates are fearmongering the citizens, but its not 1779 anymore world is global and fish is not the one and only food source of the country.
Getting the best cod for sure!
Please always share your sources in the videos when showing graphs
This
Yep. Otherwise she is presenting fake news.
@@Ganymede559 Not presenting sources doesn't entail fake news, but it does make it less reliable for the audience.
You don't have to always show sources for graphs...
Can we talk about how funny it is that on the Inflation graph at 4:48 they had to cut down Turkeys line so it can be shown? In reality their line would be at least twice as long which goes to show how utterly fried their economy is
Way to exaggerated: it is not fried! It's is marinated in butter and Mediterranean herbs, then made to swim in hot olive oil. Then it is dipped in sugar water and shoved down the throat of Turkish people. In a loving way ... of course. Blessed be the visionary, democratically elected 😉, leader of Turkiye. May he reign for all time!
Yeah but Erdogan prefers to bomb Syria instead of fixing the economy
I mean...somehow, they're still alive 🤷♂️
@@tomsriver2838 Well yeah but being half-alive isn't exactly "good". I don't think any regular person in Turkey is benefiting from their life savings losing 50%+ of their value in a year.
european turks are happy, cheap vacation !
While I would be extremely happy to welcome our Icelandic friends into the fold, I must add that:
- a 51% versus 49% referendum is undesirable.
Ideally they should aim for at least a 65% versus 35% to make sure a REAL majority of Icelanders is on board.
- Icelandic politics has some seriously shady corners. Most politicians openly lobby with multinationals, often to obtain results that are actually detrimental for common Icelanders. This could lead to open frictions with the EU.
- Fisheries and immigration risk becoming two devastating time bombs.
As for the fisheries, Iceland is essentially used to do as it pleases and that won't be possible.
Immigration, in particular, is already endangering the Icelandic language, with most people currently employed in the tourism sector unable to utter a single word in Icelandic. With a population so small, the risk is great.
@idreota:Finally someone with sense in this discussion thread.
@idraote:Greetings btw from Iceland.
well that is a bit extrem but yeah 55% with a minimum of 60& participation or 60% should be the norm
Iceland is already part of Schengen and Dublin agreement, so there would be little impact on immigration.
"Support for the EU has increased"
Literally shows a graph of it stagnant for 10 years
I want to Progressive Party is one of the most conservative parties in Iceland, and the oldest. The name probably made more sense when they started, 100 years ago.
They advocated for more tractor imports for farmers to make them more efficient... back then it was progress... Now they just want toll booths on the roads
Same in Norway (except they are not old and used to have an even sillier name), we also have a center right party called "Left" and the "Center party", who, eh, is single issue focused on the periphery.
"The fishing industry employs some 9000 people" Oh, that's not that many
"Or 5.3% of the population" HOLY
I’m from Iceland. For years, the businesses and conservative party have completely fear mongered the EU, suggesting the union would destroy Iceland’s fishing waters. While they completely monopolize every resource on our Very isolated island. Always rubbed me the wrong way.
The same thing will happen under the EU, you're just trading one monopolizer for another. Your waters won't be yours anymore and they will heavily restrict your way of life. That's one reason why the UK left the EU.
Also with Britain out of the EU the main problematic child for iceland is no longer a concern, at this point I think we would all benefit if we worked together to get the most out of iceland resources and to improve the country and the union as a whole.
I have no idea if this is gonna be the case for Iceland but With Greenland it kinda happened thou, that’s why they left
They'll for sure take all your fish. This is offset by other benefits though
@@skydragon5555 you know, Germany is possibly leaving eu. If that happens, the eu is done for
"A new poll says 54 percent support joining the EU. "
Probably proceeds to fail by like 30
Polls lie, they only interview liberal city dwellers, and forget about everyone else.
Just so you know: Icelandic last names are patronymic, so you should just use their first names.
Lots of names are patronymic, doesn't mean we don't use them.
No one calls Osama Bin Laden simply Osama, if anything, more people call him Bin Laden.
@@NK-vd8xi Not like that, his sons will still be Bin Laden, no? Icelandic last names are directly derived from the name of the father (or mother).
@@NK-vd8xiReferring to someone by just their father's name is weird - it's similar to calling someone 'Jesse's dad'. That's just not how you address someone in a (semi)formal setting.
Boris Johnson has a last name that he shares with his family. His kids are named Johnson, his dad was. In Iceland, his kids would have the patronym Borisson/Borisdaughter. There is no sense of a shared name.
@@Adam-326 not traditionally, they've formalised their name to BinLaden now but it literally means Son of Laden.
Almost all Arabic names with Bin/Ibn (=Son) are patronyms as opposed to formalised surnames.
English names worked the same, Johnson, Jackson, Thomson etc
@@ifer1280 no, it's not weird, it's actually the norm in many parts of the world and was the norm in English too, which is why we have the name Johnson to begin with in the first place.
Countries with small economies which have their own independent currencies find that it' very costly protecting their currencies against speculators making a run on their currencies in the foreign exchange market. The flipside is that they lose monitory control and are left with only fiscal policy.
We can already not be trusted with monetary control. Bring on the Euro and their historically always lower inflation.
As a heavily export driven economy it is likely against Iceland's interest to join the Eurozone. In fact I would argue it was against everyone's interest except the Netherlands and Germany, given the massive structural unemployment it created in Spain and Italy.
It sounds like brussels is getting ready to enrich Iceland
Fishery used to be the largest export of Iceland, and so they were extremely sensitive to being able to fish their own fish and not share their fishing quotas with the EU. This is historically what has kept both Iceland and Norway out of the EU (Norway also being protective of their oil). More recently tourism in Iceland has grown to be twice the size of fishery and is still growing, while metal exports have gotten to about the same size and is growing fast too, while fishery is growing slower. So things are changing. But lets not get ahead of ourselves.
It's not like we're losing all of our fish. Just some.
As a Norwegian I have never heard anyone in Norway be concerned for our oil in discussion of joining the EU.
Agriculture was the biggest issue. If you live as a farmer in the Arctic and have to grow crops in between rocky mountains, there's no way of competing with continental farmers with completely different conditions for production, so it would mean an effective end to Norwegian agriculture beyond milk, potato and sheep.
@@StormCrownSrstill, Iceland and Norway should push for a reform of the EU fisheries.
If Iceland has more fish than it can fish, that is great and should be used to keep fish stocks stable.
@@sciencefliestothemoon2305 no-one has more fish than they can fish. that's not how fisheries work. there's no-where on the seven seas where we're not over-fishing right now.
@Nabium under the Arctic ice?
Damn the last time I was this early Churchill has just dropped his "Damn man Hitler has no chill fr fr" video
"The Hitler situation is crazy"
"Hitler is not bussin' fr fr"
"once again germany took a huge L in this war"
You sure it wasn’t Hitler saying that about Churchill? Cuz last I checked Hitler sent him 6 peace treaties.
"that ruling party they have is skibidi as heck, no cap mate, cheers"
Honestly, I would only go for a referendum if they see that there is a somewhat clear stable majority of ~60% for EU membership.
Please! Iceland would make a great member in the EU- Family!
No. My ancestors were harmed by them.
@@GardenGuy1942our ancestors were harmed by almost everyone mate😂👻
This EU - mafia would destory them
@@GardenGuy1942who are your ancestors
Are you ready to take shitloads of Africans?
I for one welcome our Viking brothers and sisters
Stop using vikings as a name whenever you get the chance, please :) that was an occupation of a small part of the population over a thousand years ago. You are probably just as much related as any of us are, statistically speaking. Vikings were horrible people. I don't go around calling Americans slave-owners for example 😅
Why do you do that? Vikings were evil people according to the left and the icelandic people would have to agree to multiple thousands islamic immigrants a year or be fined. is that a good and welcomming think for your ''viking'' brotehrs and sisters? xDD
I don’t. I want to preserve Iceland from all the third worlders you force on members
I think there is something really important also that no one here seems to take into consideration : Defence.
Trump just won the elections in the US, and we already know his stand about NATO. Iceland is an Army-less nation placed directly in front of Russia's waters whose defence is deeply related to the US. Entering the EU is a way to ensure another way of defending themselves.
Doesn't matter what Trump thinks as Iceland has a special agreement with the US.
The United States and Iceland have a longstanding defense relationship, formalized through a bilateral defense agreement signed in 1951. This agreement stipulates that the U.S. will make arrangements for Iceland’s defense on behalf of NATO, given that Iceland does not have its own standing military.
The EU needs to find a way of membership where Island can maintain the important parts of their rights of fishery. Fishery is a vital part of Icelandic economy and Island can make only little concessions on that front. On the other hand the major governing and opposition parties need to agree on membership. It makes no sense to negote something that immeditately gets walked back as soon as the majorities change and a different government gets elected. EU membership is a long term plan that needs one or two decades to process in full.
We could also just keep things the way they are. Contriving a way for Iceland to join without giving up their fishing rights is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
It'd be really cool if iceland joined the eurozone. I bet their coinage designs would be absolute bangers.
Seeing an EEA country become a full member would be wild.
Imagine then the whole Scandinavian block looking at Norway.
"Bro. It's your turn now. Even Iceland joined."
And if Iceland joins as an EEA member to full member and will use Euro instead of Kroná. Then not just Norway won't have any excuses not to want to become full member, but also Sweden and Denmark won't have any excuses to use Euro either.
If Iceland fully integrated. It will have an impact on the other scandinavian countries.
@@Andy-dg1pj That would prevent Iceland from going bankrupt like they did in 2008.
@@steinarnielsen8954 even as a pro EU guy. Like even an EU federalist that I am, we need to improve some areas. The rest of the EU states to join the Eurozone, invest more in an EU internal defence and security zone. Meaning no army, but the national armees can be assembled to protect the EU territory internally and the external border. Ramp up the Frontex budget to 2-digit billion sums and increase the GDP of the EU. Less beaurocracy for companies in the EU, create the capital market union and an EU insolvency right.
Plus the initiative right for the EU parliament and the QMV in the EU Council.
Then you will see how positive thing will change. It's just the national egos of the member states that slow it down.
@@Andy-dg1pj Based.
@@Andy-dg1pjthe best excuse is that the people don’t want it, we’ve voted on EU membership twice, the vote failed horribly twice. We aren’t pressured by our Scandinavian neighbours and after 600 years of foreign rule we won’t be ruled by Brussels. Despite your wishes us Norwegians are more than content with the status quo
They shouldn't
As an Icelander I hope this will never happen.
Iceland should do a sort of ‘Scandinavian Union’ along with norway, denmark, far oer and sweden
What do you think ?
Prédikaðu bróðir!
Dittó.
@@Delibng No.
@@LordMagiru better off alone
Migrant Quotas will be introduces in 2026
If one EU country accepts migrants like Spain pretty much all countries accept them even if they don't want them
The EU has many flaws and they don't start here
It would be great for example for the EU to have a unified stock market
I hope that the people at Brussel realize that if they continue wanting weak boarders, then European resentment will push people to vote nationalist leaders that in turn are hostile towards the EU.
I've been saying this for years, before Brexit was a thing, but still I feel like people have not gotten the message.
I think EU should leave Norway and Iceland sovereignty when it comes to fishing. Already lack of sovereignty is one of the reasons why there is a far-right increase. Such move would gain the EU more support.
All the arguments I hear are opportunistic ones. "It is currently in our benefit to join, because...". And this is not great. The EU doesn't need more countries on board that join when the going is tough, then leave again when things get better or other opportunities present themselves. Brexit was a hard breach of trust, as is the defiance of Hungary and possibly Romania. I think we should add a minimum term for joining, for example 50 years, to prevent these on-and-off-again situations. But most importantly, nations should join because they believe in the things the EU stands for, like democracy and cooperation and solidarity; not because they see it as a currently favorable transaction.
I agree we are doing great so it would be foolish to join a Union with so much turmoil.
@@andriandrason1318 Very witty! And reinforcing my opinion.
The EU does not stand for democracy. If it did then it would allow European parliament to introduce legislation instead of just veto it. The EU is an anti-democratic organization meant to circumvent democratic opposition to neo-liberal economic policy. Look at the language you use, "defiance". You aren't even pretending there is benefit to the organization.
@@andriandrason1318 "So much turmoil" is exaggerate. The Union is strong and can get much stronger with ambitious people and countries in it
hell freezes before any other state leaves the EU. people might say shit but support of EU is well above 80% in Hungary. one thing what politicians say and an other thing is what people believe
If Iceland had a (convincing) referendum and would put everything behind it they could meet the basic entry conditions in 2030 or so. Enough time for entry negotiations.
No exception to the Euro for new members! With their dependency on fish, some special agreements should be possible there. What during a time of global tensions is a bit problematic - Iceland doesn't even pretend they have any intention to defend itself. No military, no heavy arms for the police forces, nothing. As EUrope tries to ramp up the defence capability, that could be a price they would have to pay.
Iceland would be able to join much sooner than 2030, the security and defence policy has already been Provisionally closed by the EU and we are a founding member of NATO.
@@andriandrason1318 Membership to NATO is utterly irrelevant, though. Neither Ireland nor Austria are. I for one would welcome it if Iceland joined the EU.
The Euro is a failed experiment that creates structural unemployment in poorer EU countries.
@@timolynch149 It's just that not enough people here are sure, so it's likely not going to happen unless it's forced... which means that there is going to be a backlash, which isn't good for anyone.
Well, in all fairness to Iceland, even if it were to try and organize a military, the best it probably can do is a few thousand.
That's with zero institutional knowledge on military structure and strategy. Zero experience, zero equipment, it'll be all from scratch.
Makes little sense to invest so much into something so useless
Iceland is too chill like that
Deffinaltly too chilld for thousands of violent islamic migrants. But oh well. The psychotic left will do phsycotic left things
It's a chronic condition.
I wonder if the EU should be reformed to a federal republic first before accepting new candidates -- even though how well fit Iceland and possible other candidates are.
Politically the EU is becoming ungovernable.
The EU is sort of untenable. The Euro currency is a failed experiment that caused massive structural unemployment, and the governing system is not democratic enough. More democracy and less currency control would be difficult.
@@XandateOfHeaven Both the EU and the Euro are huge successes. Unemployment has nothing to do with the euro currency, just like the USD has nothing to do with unemployment in the mid-West states of the US.
@Jurjen. What are you talking about? The Euro is essentially entirely responsible for the unemployment crisis in Southern Europe. This is exactly what happened in the European sovereign debt crisis. You can't just gaslight everyone into pretending this didn't happen.
There's actually a good case that parts of the United States should have separate currencies. For the rust belt it is more important for them economically that their exports are competitive than they are able to import at higher prices. But more significantly the inequality in productivity between US states is not as significant as the difference between EU states, at least in part because of a more integrated infrastructure policy.
@@XandateOfHeaven No, the unemployment has everything to do with competitiveness and *that* has everything to do with (labor) productivity. In short, those countries were lazy and everytime shit hits the fan, they deprecated their currency -- in effect stealing sometimes half of the people's money.
Now with the Euro their politicians can't do that anymore so they have to face the real economic problems.
It's a cultural thing but they'll learn -- like the Greek did in since 2008.
It's a bit easy to blame Southern Europe of "laziness" AND it's a bit silly to blame it all on the Euro.
There is no easy one directional answer for complex problems guys.
Iceland should stay out - I don’t see how membership would improve their situation.
It would make it worse, Brussels has no business in how Reykjavik conducts their business.
says the brexiteer
Iceland shouldn't under any circumstance give away their fishing waters and it seems highly unlikely that the EU would give them a concession to stay out of the common fisheries policy.
Or the EU would make these concessions, the EU has learned to be more flexible in what they want and what sovereign nations want.
Bad idea. And this video is a bit premature since they haven't formed a government yet, and they don't look like they would even have enough support in parliament for this.
How can a supermarket join the EU??
And how do you live on a land made out of ice?
check out Malta
The UK being out of the EU probably makes the fishing negotiations easier, as they would probably have been the main threat to Icelandic fisheries within the EU and were even responsible for a couple of invasions of Icelandic fisheries known as the "cod wars". It would also be funny to see the UK surrounded in all four cardinal directions by EU member states if Iceland joined.
We got Iceland joining the EU before Macedonia 💀💀
Iceland has been a member of EFTA since 1970 and the free market since 1994.
Iceland: *joins EU*
"This enraged Putin, who punished Ukraine severely"
Being in the EU and on the Euro would probably be beneficial in long term. The fishing issue is not trivial though. It’s likely not just jobs but the cultural link to fishing that makes it such a tough issue
The Euro currency has essentially never benefited anyone. The lack of currency control lead to structural unemployment in much of the Eurozone outside Germany and the Netherlands.
@@XandateOfHeaven I'd disagree with that. Countries only have an issue if they are fiscally irresponsible such as Greece was. Countries such as Ireland have definitely benefited from membership. The biggest advantage is the ease to which it makes it for business/consumers to operate within the Euro zone.
@@keiththoma2559 It's not about fiscal irresponsibility, it's that poor countries with worse infrastructure and a less educated population can't compete with exports from rich countries if they can't make their exports cheaper by devaluing their currency.
Greece, Spain and Italy would have had to overspend for their infrastructure to catch up to Germany and the Netherlands. This issue is too widespread to be attributed to individual responsibility. The reason Spain and Greece have structural unemployment and Poland doesn't is currency control.
Blaming national governments for the systemic failure of the Euro currency is politically motivated by saving face on the failed Euro experiment.
@@XandateOfHeaven It 100% is around fiscal irresponsibility and bad governance. Greece had crazy laws such as license and resections that limited number of workers in sectors etc such as truck drivers.
@keiththoma2559 That's over regulation not fiscal irresponsibility, but that's another thing the EU doesn't help with by adding an additional layer of government regulations on top of local, subnational and national.
Economies can't have 20% unemployment without some sort of currency structural issue. It just isn't natural.
I can see Iceland 🇮🇸 joining the EU they would be very welcome, from their nearest EU Neighbour, Ireland 🇮🇪,
Denmark (because of the Faroe Islands): “Am I a joke to you?”
@@Bear-c4xFaroe isn't in the EU though, they are like Greenland, part of Denmark but not in the EU.
I think Iceland and Norway will join the EU *eventually*, at some point over the next few decades. But I don't know if it will be next year or during this next government's tenure. One thing I'd say is that if they're going to hold a referendum on EU membership they should also really hold a simultaneous referendum on the Euro as well, to settle that questions too.
But there's no reason for them to join. Norway is one of the wealthiest countries in Europe. They've managed just fine without joining.
Norway hasn't a single reason to join the EU and frankly neither does Iceland
@@XandateOfHeaven Both Norway and Iceland (and Switzerland as well, btw) are already part of Schengen and EEA; EU citizens can live and work in them and vice versa and they dutifully accept all new EU laws and regulations. Literally the only reason not to join is inertia and fisheries, and those are both solvable and relatively transient.
Assuming an EU will still exist then.
@@sontohartono True, it will be replaced by United States of Europe by then.
There are pros and cons joining the EU.
The "pro" eu parties did not want to talk about joing the EU before the elections so I think many of the voters where not voting for them to join the EU.
The inflation is high but the wages have also risen alot, so to compare the Euro to the ISK is hard, tbere are so many factors
Their polling was atrocious until they stopped talking about joining the EU and adopting the Euro. That kinda talk is considered treasonous by many in Iceland.
Iceland is ready for some “cultural enrichment” 😂😂
As of 2022, the Icelandic population was just over 376,000. About 86,000 residents (23.7%) were of foreign background.
Iceland is already part of the Schengen Area, immigration is a separate issue. You do not know enough to be part of this conversation.
They are more or less already in. We can formalise it in a week if they wish so.
Such a small country so dependent of one main sector would be eviscerated when abiding to the EU rule. But hey, at least the EU will be able to make it more 'multicultural'. That will surely enough help the island.
Yes. It would. We need more workers. Screw your bloated bigoted ass.
It is already in the Schengen area.
@@Spacemongerr Schengen just means you can visit without a passport. EU citizens don't have a right to stay longer than 60 days
About adopting EUR: in contradiction to what you said in the video, Iceland actually would not(!) seek exemption from EUR. Moreover. in fact even and particularely representatives of the Independence party have propagated to adopt EUR (20 years ago), even without joining EU. They had to learn the EU would not like this. Moreover, the only point the pro-EU group Evrópuhreyfingin is advertising repeatedly IS joining the EUR, to presumingly achieve less inflation and allover lower price levels.
Iceland?.
Okay, well thats up to Iceland then..
I’ve seen maybe seven foreign elections from TLDR so it’s pretty surreal to see my own country on here
EUs stance on fisheries is crazy. Demanding that Iceland gives up control of their main resource if they join the union is just bizarre. What will Icelanders do when their fishing areas are flooded with huge factory fishing vessels from across Europe?
Infrastructure repairs across the country due to volcanic eruptions? No, just in the localised area of the periodically erupting volcano, specifically around the Blue Lagoon and associated geothermal power plant and the nearby fishing village and only amounts to building lava berms and making good road, hot water and electricity connections over the latest lava field.
I’m pretty sure most people assume Iceland was already part of the EU
In the end it comes down to money.
Cultural connections haven't been enough for the better part of the last 50 years. And as a member of NATO, Iceland has no need for the defense aspects of the EU. And being a member of Schengen, there are no Visa issues.
So what remains is money, the fiscal protection mechanisms.
Are they DRUNK? LOL
Do they not see all the issues in Europe? They are concerned about economics? And what, Germany is booming economically under the EU? NO...
Welcome to the EU here your complimentary 50,000 migrants
It's already this way.
About 86,000 residents (23.7%) were of foreign background.
Hi, for the fact that Iceland's fishery and following externalities contributes for 25% of Iceland's GDP... would you mind sharing source for it ? (I am now writing a thesis on that topic, so just wandering)
Not to mention forced refugees/migrants dumped on them with some EU love
@oldbordergeek we need workers. Just because you fear normal people does not mean the rest of us do.
@@StormCrownSr😂 are you that dellusional? Go look at paris berlin or london and see the ghettos with your beloved workers spiraling 🎉 also have fun with 80% german/french laws on your island 🎉 democracy? 😅 watering down local opinions to zero 😅😅😅
@@oldbordergeek Currently the EU is not forcing any redistribution of refugees. And it such rules require unanimous votes of the EU Council which won't allow any change to this.
@@listenerobserver7160you are very uninformed wich is evil when you sprout nonsense. My EU country cannot stop immigrants OR send them back because of EU treaties. I hope we can leave the EU fast with their ecological fetishes. This is not what we gained indepence for hundreds of years ago!!!! 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
"50/50" is as far from "consensus" as mathematically possible. What you meant was that there is no current consensus regarding EU membership in Iceland.
Today was the day I learned Iceland is not part of the European Union. I thought they were something like Norway or Switzerland. Not part of European Union fully but integrated enough that there is no issues between each other.
They are part of the EFTA, an old rival organization against the EEC ( Old EU) and have the same treaties now.
They literally have the same deal as Norway
They are. Iceland and Norway, and tiny Liechtenstein are in the EEA and EFTA, which guarantees free trade, aswell as the Schengen area which is what guarantees free movement of goods and people. Fun fact, even some EU members like Ireland, Romania and Bulgaria aren't even in the Schengen area. EEA is basically just the full package of joining the EU in all but name, whereas EFTA is a limited deak with the basics, whereas Schengen is the DLC you can have both as an EU or non EU member, but you don't really need to.
Switzerland however is only in the EFTA and Schengen, not EEA. EEA is basically just an expanded EFTA, which means Switzerland has some free trade with its EU neighbours, but can still stop more vehicles and have some more custom barriers.
Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein on the other hand are all in the EU's inner market and can only have custom barriers and tariffs like an EU member state, which in practice makes them all a EU member state in all but name. They are not represented in the EU parliament, obviously, and may thus veto most EU bills. Iceland and Liechtenstein does that occasionally whereas Norway hasn't done that a single time since first joining EFTA in 1973, then the EEA in 1995, because Norway is scared of the possible consequences if they were to piss off the EU.
Iceland trades alot with the UK and US, whilst Liechtenstein is a tax heavan and has Switzerland, so they both generaly don't care. whereas Switzerland, only in Schengen and EFTA, in general isn't obliged to join most EU bills and thus tends to hold popular referendums on those its government considers to be logical or adventageous to join.
Edit: changed EEC to EEA
@@sofiaormbustad7467 EEA, not EEC. The reason Norway and Iceland stay out of the EU is that they'd have to join the Common Fisheries Policy which would be very damaging for both of them.
You were right. They are part of EFTA and the EEA like Norway. So very integrated with the EU, part of the single market, but not actually members of the EU.
They need to pull Iceland closer to Europe so they'll actually be a part of EU. Somewhere close to Spain if they have nice weather we can vacation there.
Dumbest thing they could do. Preserve your culture
All countries in the EU are preserved, what are you talking about?.
RIP Iceland
I was just there over the weekend and wrongly assumed I was in the EU
Don't do it Iceland keep your sovereignty.
Iceland is one of those countries that people often assume is part of the EU anyway.
iceland is welcome to join, but i think they are better off outside the eu. There location is a long way of continental europe, so they don't have the same challenges
As an Icelandic I fully agree but we are probably the most woke infected country in Europe so you never know.
@@andriandrason1318my perception is that icelandic people are pretty chill (no pun intended)
now imagine Iceland joining EU, so all these woke Icelanders feel even more support from their European ideological siblings to implement their "superb" ideas @@andriandrason1318
It's around 2/3 against. 50-50 myass
"I'm poor, let me join the EU"
"I'm rich, let me leave the EU"
basically, ukraine and the balkans want in but no rich northern country like norway or iceland is gonna want in
Not really though? Sweden is still a fairly recent member, and they were(and are) rich. The wealthiest countries in the EU have absolutely no plans to leave. Brexit was the best thing that ever happened to the EU.
@@youtubebob123 sweden now has a gangs and armed crime problem the level of latin american countries, all thanks to "diversity". and the economy is stagnant, little to no innovation, living off the hard work of generations past but not new growth.
@@youtubebob123notice how neither the Swedes nor the Danes are in the Eurozone?
@@ItzLucky90 the danes are in the eurozone in every way but name, their currency is pegged to the euro. they do not have an independent monetary policy. both will probably join the euro in the not too distant future as the swedish krona just keeps falling and the danes want to signal unity and invest in the european project now that you can't rely on the US anymore.
It’s also important to mention that a social democrat coalition would likely have to cooperate with the people’s party which previously split from the social democrats. The people’s party is a left wing party but it puts more more of an emphasis on internal matters and does not support eu admission
A candidate member nation should have bi-partisan local support. The question cannot depend on which party is in power. That is not a stable foundation for such a structural decision.
@ If you read my comment as intended, you wouldn’t have replied as such. The point stands: a solid, multi-party support is needed as well as a referendum to complete EU candidature on a sustainable basis. Not sure why you’re using my comment as a platform to call the UK and the US ‘third world countries’ either. FYI - I don’t live in either of them. You really need to chill.
@@lours6993can’t see anyone but your comment
@@inteallsviktigt Becasue it’s been deleted…
51st state when?
Don't think they would like the migrant quotas. It would ruin the safe country's image immediately.
And yet they're not being applied. Just look at Hungary and Poland
True
Just because YOU are a racist, that wants to make everything about how you hate brown people does not mean everyone else is...
@@TurinStark5 Hungary and Poland literally have to fight everyday to beat them back and are fined for doing so. These wonderful peaceful migrants are hellbent on committing crimes to get into countries illegally.
@@TurinStark5 You have to be joking? The political pressure, the financial pressure, the withholding of EU funds? They are trying to force them in every way they can.
The leader is not that pro eu.....
I was so positive about them joining the EU before this video. Now I’m skeptical. Why join the EU and share their fishing waters when they already have most of the important benefits of being in the EU? It feels like Iceland just wants the EU title and give compromises for it.
Why is the text on the voting box changing?
That would be dope
Only in case of a major crisis
Isn't anyone in Iceland paying attention to the EU? They'll forbid Iceland to fish in it's own waters and give that right to the Congo.
They should join together with Balkans
That would be cool🥶
That would be a mistake
Imagine then the whole Scandinavian block looking at Norway.
"Bro. It's your turn now. Even Iceland joined."
And if Iceland joins as an EEA member to full member and will use Euro instead of Kroná. Then not just Norway won't have any excuses not to want to become full member, but also Sweden and Denmark won't have any excuses to use Euro either.
If Iceland fully integrated. It will have an impact on the other scandinavian countries.
I don't think Norway cares too much, they're doing pretty well as they are right now.
@jdjphotographynl let's see...
I'm a pro EU Norwegian, but I honestly don't see us joining any time soon. Yes, the pro EU side has been gaining, but it has been gaining from "insignificant" to "maybe we can use Trump to scare the rest of the country into joining".
During the last election the biggest winners were the most Eurosceptic parties on the left, during the next polls show the largest party on the right to be the Eurosceptic populists. Until our economy truly tanks, maybe cause of overinvesting in petroleum in a decade, I don't see us joining.
@msuomtv give it time. The wheel keeps spinning as people say. Pretoleum will not always be an economic boom for every country. Look at the arabians. The Saudis already diversify their economy.
@@Andy-dg1pjThe Norwegian economy is already quite diverse, Norway exports much fish and lumber as well as being a technologically important nation. And to say it’s not diversifying a lot already is just wrong
Don’t do it
1) An exemption from the Eurozone is not an option.
2) Iceland has to make its mind.
1) It's so non-negotiable that seven members haven't adopted the euro yet. Where for instance Sweden intentionally doesn't fulfil the criteria required as to avoid having to implement it. Similarly Denmark och Poland doesn't seem too keen on implementing it either.
The EU could benefit from being a bit more lenient on certain issues if it means more member states.
@@irispettsonnah. Quality over quantity. Integration over accession. No half measures
@@BuddyStoll So the countries that haven't adopted the euro, and aren't keen on doing so, should leave..?
There won't be any exceptions in the adoption of the Euro for new members, including UK if they would choose to rejoin in the distant future.
@@irispettson Yes, I do think they should either integrate or leave honestly.
Also all of the mentioned countries that have those measures have joined in the early days. The EU has made the commitment to not allow any opt outs like that for new members. The reason Sweden and Denmark get away with it is simply historical. Iceland wouldn't have the same benefit. The same way the UK would never be allowed to rejoin the EU under the same deal they had. They'd have to join the EU fully, including adopting the Euro and Schengen.
Does this mean that, finally, Canada has a chance of joining too?
Dear God what a nightmare
No lol.
@@XandateOfHeaven care to elaborate?
God no
@@logixthreesome298 Because it's complete nonsense, unnecessary, offers no real benefit to Canada, etc?
Canada already has free trade with the EU, it already has visa free travel. Joining the EU would cripplingly insane. It would offer no benefit because we already have the benefit of visa free travel and free trade. It would hurt the county massively because it would impose new and different regulations which would be massively disruptive to industry, housing, agriculture, mining, fishing, etc, and would harm our trade with the US.
Would would be giving up our sovereignty to Germany with nothing to show for it but a collapsed agricultural sector.
There are also smaller things like the massive spike in food price that would result from being a part of the EU's damaging protectionist agricultural tariffs.
The idea that we should be part of the EU is deranged.
Joining the EU involves joining the Common Fisheries Policy, so that's a definite No for Iceland and Norway.
Tbh they could get a deal where they are exempt from that. Lots of countries joined the eu with special deals and exemptions, so why not iceland too
@@TheArcticWitch The countries that got special deals, got them because back then they had a bigger negotiation power than the EU. Nowadays, I doubt that Iceland has any kind of leverage to negotiate special opt-outs.
Why do you think there is quotas to begin with? To have a healthy fish population, its a good thing not bad thing. In the long run its good.
There's no need for any excemption from joining Eurozone, it's de facto not mandatory.
i mean it de jure is
but nobody cares
Britain should be rejoining, three years outside of Europe has only hade a decade and a half of Tory incompetence worse, if Starmer truly wants to fix the country he needs to undo the worst catastrophe that Britain has undergone so far this century.
I'd like us to rejoin but at this point we'd have to make major concessions to the EU to prove we're not going to be a troublesome member again, and even then I think it would take decades. We'd almost certainly have to give up on the pound, the discounted membership rate we got before Brexit.
Sadly, a ton of Brits still think they are better off outside the EU and think the crisis has nothing to do with the Brexit
Right now only 59% wanna rejoin, so if they hold a referendum there is a big chance the same happens as last time where aggressive campaigning on lies and false promises is enough to tip the scales in favor of staying out, especially since the US election showed how carefully we have to look at polling data.
And Starmer's government pushing to rejoin would not go down well with the 40+% of Brits who see rejoining as the worst case scenario for Britain.
tldr, this situation is like the US, a lot of people want this outcome and are actively happy to vote against their self interest.
The Eu don't want us back and we don't want or need to go back, so let's just all move on from there.
I'd love the UK coming back, but you have to fix problems over there first..
I would even say that the UK should join the EU in these difficult times, but it cannot be rushed.
Most of Britain’s problems have nothing to do with the EU.
I would love to have Iceland in the EU, but they should manage a deal protecting their own fishing waters. (Im Dutch, not Icelandic).
My advice from living inside EU!! Don’t do it!!! You won’t be sovereign state anymore!
With EU being broke, and unnecessarily bureaucratic, doesn't seem like it would be a wise decision.
How is it broke. My friend now that America is about to plunge into the abyss it is Europe that shall take the crown
The promise to introduce the Euro when joining the EU is linked to one important condition: as soon as the requirements are met. As the countries of Sweden, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Romania show, this can take many years.
... we all know these countries dont "meet" the requirements because they still don't want to implement the euro. if they wanted to they'd had the euro a long time ago.
For the Icelandic people here who take issue with the way patronyms were used in this video, respectfully, your rules don't apply here.
In English, we treat patronyms just like surnames.
For example, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia is Mohammad Bin Salman, Bin Salman is a patronym as his father was Salman Bin Abdulaziz.
In English it is completely normal to refer to him as "Bin Salman" for short, even though it's not a surname.
In Icelandic you might just call him Mohammad and that would be correct for you, but it's not polite/formal in English.
Sure, you can do whatever the F you want.
However, this is like if I called you by only your middle name. Yes it is part of your name, but it's not how you would identify yourself.
I could refer to Donald J. Trump as John and yes it is part of his name, but it is not an identifier that he would connect with at all.
And yes we know foreigners don't usually understand or give a F , but referring to someone how they want to be referred will always be the more polite thing to do.
This is not quite correct. Iceland doesn't have a standing army, true, but it has a defense force, the country has experience with the logistics of annual NATO exercises and the small IRCU haa been deployed as part of peacekeeping missions. Yes, this is not the same as a standard military operated by other countries, but there are structures and institutional knowledge to build on.
They are already members when it comes to the vast majority of things they just do not have a voice on how EU rules are made so it makes sense for them to join and get a voice in Brussels
And crucially, they are not in the CFP.
That and we don't have the euro.
@@StormCrownSr historically the Euro was literally one of the reasons Iceland wanted to Join the Union given the crash the Icelandic Krona experienced after the 2008 financial crisis
@@paullarne that's probably the only argument they have for maintaining the status quo considering how significant the fishing industry is for them, still will that continue to be the case? I do not know
LOL the eu is in decadence, joining would only mean having to take in "refugees"
I don't blame the majority there for being Eurosceptic
British?
@@lyonduart3131he’s possibly the most obviously Irish person I’ve ever seen online
@@ItzLucky90 haha I know🤣
To understand the graph at 1:28 I had to google both Euro vs Usd and Krona vs Usd, as the Euro values now for example 1.05 USD. So very far from the 0.008 Usd on the Y graph. Maybe add the Euro value on the opposite Y axe and add labels? Otherwise very interesting as usual. Thanks for the work.
As an Icelandic man I do not want to join the eu. The eu immgration policy is top tier garbage. I am quite sure it would destroy this country. Also the sharing of our fishing zone one of our few resources on this isolated rock and for what just to be able to switch to the euro not worth it.
we are already in schengen so the eu immigration policy is iceland’s immigration policy already
@@forsakenvoidz6828 hmm did not know that
@@forsakenvoidz6828 Their saving grace is being miles away by sea but if they introduced higher migrant quotas they would replace the population is only a few years.