Iceland will vote on reopening its entry to the EU in a referendum marked by division

The opposition rejects that interpretation and argues that Brussels cannot solve Iceland's internal problems. For those against accession, economic difficulties must be addressed by Icelandic politicians themselves and not through a transfer of powers to the EU.

Fishing constitutes another major point of conflict. European regulations establish criteria for distributing fishing quotas, while advocates of remaining outside the bloc fear losing control over national waters. Those supporting negotiations believe that Iceland could maintain a favorable position since other EU countries have hardly fished in its waters for decades.

The referendum, moreover, will not directly decide on accession to the European Union. A 'yes' victory would only authorize the government to reopen negotiations with Brussels. Subsequently, likely several years later, Icelanders would have to vote again to decide whether to accept becoming actual members of the bloc.

According to a document from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, talks could begin towards the end of 2026 and last between 18 and 24 months if citizens support their reopening. The timeline will also be conditioned by the upcoming general elections, which must be held no later than November 2028.

Polling stations will open at 9 a.m. and close at 10 p.m. across the country, which has a population of around 400,000 inhabitants. The result will determine whether Iceland takes a new step towards European integration or maintains, for now, its traditional distance from the bloc.

However, the electoral discussion has mainly focused on the economy. Iceland is facing persistent inflation and high interest rates that have significantly increased mortgage costs. The central bank's reference rate currently stands at 8%, compared to 2.25% from the European Central Bank.

Proponents of integration believe that EU membership and, eventually, the adoption of the euro could help stabilize the economy and reduce financial costs. Economists in favor of the initiative acknowledge that integration would not solve the country's structural problems on its own, but could serve as a catalyst for a healthier economy.

The citizens of Iceland will head to the polls this Saturday to decide whether the country should reopen negotiations for a possible accession to the European Union (EU), in a referendum marked by a strong division among voters and debates over the cost of living, interest rates, national security, and control of fishing waters.

The contest arrives without a clear favorite. A poll published on Friday showed a slight majority against reopening talks with Brussels, partially reversing the advantage previously held by supporters of the 'yes' vote. With a narrow margin, the outcome remains open and could depend on the final days of campaigning.

Supporters of the 'yes' argue that approaching the EU could help alleviate some of the economic problems in Iceland, particularly its high interest rates. They also believe that greater European integration would strengthen the country's security in an increasingly unstable international scenario due to the war in Ukraine and tensions in the Arctic, including U.S. President Donald Trump's insistence regarding Greenland.

Opponents, on the other hand, argue that membership in the bloc would mean ceding part of national sovereignty and could jeopardize Iceland's control over one of its most important economic resources: fishing.

The debate is not new. Iceland applied to join the EU in 2009, during a deep financial crisis that hit its small economy particularly hard. Negotiations progressed for a few years, but in 2013 a Eurosceptic government decided to suspend the process. Since then, the issue has remained open and has resurfaced strongly in light of the deteriorating geopolitical landscape.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Thorgerdur Gunnarsdottir, a supporter of the 'yes' vote, has argued that Iceland must reconsider its position in a world where the international structures that have guaranteed its security and prosperity for decades are under increasing pressure. According to this view, for a small country it is becoming increasingly important to clearly define its alliances.