Iceland has engaged in a bitter struggle with the US over
Washington's plans to reduce its military presence here, leaving
Iceland's airspace defenceless and its economy weakened.
For half a century, the US has maintained a strong military presence here to counter the Soviet threat.
But Iceland now needs to come to grips with the bitter reality of its strategic insignificance in a changing world.
Last week Elisabeth Jones, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, handed Iceland's Prime Minister David Oddsson and Foreign Minister Halldor Asgrimsson a letter from President George W Bush which outlined the "changes in defence considerations".
The letter confirmed the US' commitment to the joint 1951 Defence Agreement, but nobody here has been fooled by the glossy language: it quickly became clear that Washington wants to pull out its remaining four F-15 fighters, three rescue helicopters and fuel planes from Keflavik Naval Air Station at the end of summer.
That would leave Iceland, which has no military of its own, without any air defences. Such a unilateral decision is viewed in Reykjavik as a violation of the spirit of the Defence Agreement, which calls for consultations.
Iceland wrote back, urging Bush to reconsider, and while officials here would not comment any further, it has been reported that the tone of the letter was far from friendly.
It seems that the Icelanders are willing to play hardball, telling the Americans that if they strip Iceland of its air defences, then they should also give up the rest of the Keflavik base, which continues to be a useful outpost for the US empire.
Valur Ingimundarson, foreign relations expert and associate professor at the University of Iceland, said the issue is fast becoming "one of the most difficult crises in US-Icelandic relations since the end of the Cold War".
There is little indication that Oddsson's view has changed since he declared two years ago: "If the Americans decide they do not want to maintain a base that serves the interests of both countries it will simply be closed down. It's as simple as that and this is not a threat... The base can not be smaller than it is today".
President Bush may have to intervene personally to prevent the situation from getting out of hand, Ingimundarson said.
The writing has been on the wall for the US air force presence in Iceland since the collapse of the Soviet empire, observers say, but now they sense a new, harder edge to Washington's tone.
"What has changed is that the Pentagon seems to be more insistent than before on overriding Icelandic political objections to the removal of the planes," Ingimundarson said.
Iceland has also been quick to remind Washington of its firm support over the years, most recently when it backed the Iraq war despite strong disapproval among the Icelandic population.
Few in Iceland have considered the possibility of Iceland maintaining its own air defences.
It would be costly for the small economy and the total operational cost of the Iceland Defence Force (IDF), now paid by the Americans, equals one-tenth of Iceland's public expenses.
Although Icelandic officials play down the economic consideration of the issue, the IDF has contributed considerably to the small nation's economy.
The IDF's spending totals 1,5% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP), according to estimates from Icelandic Central Bank.
It is also estimated that the proposed reduction at the Keflavik base could result in the loss of half the 1 700 Icelandic jobs, which are linked, directly and indirectly, to the IDF.
That would be a serious blow to the town Reykjanesbaer next to the base, where most of the Icelanders working for the IDF live.
"The people are worried and the uncertainty is worst," says Bodvar Jonsson town council chairperson of Reykjanesbaer.
Apart from the direct job losses that could follow a reduction at the base, Jonsson estimates that close to a quarter of revenues in the town's service sector are derived from the Americans.
"The best result, from both the economic and defence perspective, would be that things remain unchanged," Jonsson says.
"We trust the government to hold its ground and ensure the country's defence," he said. – Sapa-AFP.
For half a century, the US has maintained a strong military presence here to counter the Soviet threat.
But Iceland now needs to come to grips with the bitter reality of its strategic insignificance in a changing world.
Last week Elisabeth Jones, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, handed Iceland's Prime Minister David Oddsson and Foreign Minister Halldor Asgrimsson a letter from President George W Bush which outlined the "changes in defence considerations".
The letter confirmed the US' commitment to the joint 1951 Defence Agreement, but nobody here has been fooled by the glossy language: it quickly became clear that Washington wants to pull out its remaining four F-15 fighters, three rescue helicopters and fuel planes from Keflavik Naval Air Station at the end of summer.
That would leave Iceland, which has no military of its own, without any air defences. Such a unilateral decision is viewed in Reykjavik as a violation of the spirit of the Defence Agreement, which calls for consultations.
Iceland wrote back, urging Bush to reconsider, and while officials here would not comment any further, it has been reported that the tone of the letter was far from friendly.
It seems that the Icelanders are willing to play hardball, telling the Americans that if they strip Iceland of its air defences, then they should also give up the rest of the Keflavik base, which continues to be a useful outpost for the US empire.
Valur Ingimundarson, foreign relations expert and associate professor at the University of Iceland, said the issue is fast becoming "one of the most difficult crises in US-Icelandic relations since the end of the Cold War".
There is little indication that Oddsson's view has changed since he declared two years ago: "If the Americans decide they do not want to maintain a base that serves the interests of both countries it will simply be closed down. It's as simple as that and this is not a threat... The base can not be smaller than it is today".
President Bush may have to intervene personally to prevent the situation from getting out of hand, Ingimundarson said.
The writing has been on the wall for the US air force presence in Iceland since the collapse of the Soviet empire, observers say, but now they sense a new, harder edge to Washington's tone.
"What has changed is that the Pentagon seems to be more insistent than before on overriding Icelandic political objections to the removal of the planes," Ingimundarson said.
Iceland has also been quick to remind Washington of its firm support over the years, most recently when it backed the Iraq war despite strong disapproval among the Icelandic population.
Few in Iceland have considered the possibility of Iceland maintaining its own air defences.
It would be costly for the small economy and the total operational cost of the Iceland Defence Force (IDF), now paid by the Americans, equals one-tenth of Iceland's public expenses.
Although Icelandic officials play down the economic consideration of the issue, the IDF has contributed considerably to the small nation's economy.
The IDF's spending totals 1,5% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP), according to estimates from Icelandic Central Bank.
It is also estimated that the proposed reduction at the Keflavik base could result in the loss of half the 1 700 Icelandic jobs, which are linked, directly and indirectly, to the IDF.
That would be a serious blow to the town Reykjanesbaer next to the base, where most of the Icelanders working for the IDF live.
"The people are worried and the uncertainty is worst," says Bodvar Jonsson town council chairperson of Reykjanesbaer.
Apart from the direct job losses that could follow a reduction at the base, Jonsson estimates that close to a quarter of revenues in the town's service sector are derived from the Americans.
"The best result, from both the economic and defence perspective, would be that things remain unchanged," Jonsson says.
"We trust the government to hold its ground and ensure the country's defence," he said. – Sapa-AFP.
Advertisement
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE SAVE THIS ARTICLE FEEDBACK
To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here
