Icelandic politicians criticise unclear EU negotiating mandate

Hildur Sverrisdóttir and Svandís Svavarsdóttir have criticised the government for asking voters to authorise the start of European Union membership talks without setting out clear negotiating objectives or “red lines”, mbl.is reports.

Sverrisdóttir, the Independence Party’s lead candidate in Reykjavík South, said it was extraordinary that the government had not explained how it intended to conduct possible negotiations. She and Svavarsdóttir, a former member of parliament and minister for the Left-Green Movement, discussed the issue on the latest episode of Dagmál.

“To ask for a mandate to sit down at the negotiating table, but say nothing about how you intend to conduct yourself there, where the red lines are or where you will draw the line, is very strange,” Sverrisdóttir said.

What would a yes vote mean?

Svavarsdóttir agreed with the criticism and questioned what a yes vote would actually authorise.

“Where are the red lines and what is included in the mandate? What does a yes vote mean?” she said.

She said there was a major contradiction in the arguments made by those placing the greatest emphasis on securing a yes vote. On the one hand, they said little was at stake and that the vote was only about looking into the matter, finding out more and securing an agreement. On the other, they described it as one of the biggest decisions in Iceland’s political history.

Svavarsdóttir said it was impossible to ignore that possible EU membership would entail fundamental changes to the country’s system of government, including constitutional amendments.

For that reason, she said it was inappropriate to portray the process as a neutral fact-finding exercise.

“How could this possibly be about anything other than simply wanting Iceland to become a member of the European Union? There is no intermediate stage in this,” she said.

In her view, the main question should have been whether Icelanders wanted to pursue membership. If the answer was yes, it would then be appropriate to enter negotiations, she said, “but not claim that it is something else”.