Brussels had hoped that by positioning itself as a pillar of defence and security in an increasingly volatile world, it could draw wealthier nations into its orbit. Icelandic voters have now cast doubt on that strategy.
In a referendum on Saturday, 52.8% of Icelanders rejected resuming negotiations to join the European Union. The outcome is a setback for EU officials who had welcomed the vote as a test of whether security considerations could override the historic reluctance of wealthy Nordic countries to join the bloc.
Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos had argued last week that in a world of shifting alliances and weaponised dependencies, "becoming stronger together is our biggest asset." But the result suggests that for many Icelanders, the economic bargain—especially on fisheries, currency, and sovereignty—matters more than security promises.
Security arguments fail to sway voters
The geopolitical backdrop seemed to favour the EU's case. US President Donald Trump has threatened to seize Greenland by force, Russia's war in Ukraine grinds on, and the Arctic is becoming a contested arena for resources and trade routes. In April, Iceland's Prime Minister Kristrún Frostadóttir told Euronews she expected these shifts to influence the debate, though she stressed she did not want the discussion driven by fear.
Yet the campaign focused largely on economics. The 'Yes' side emphasised joining the euro to lower debt interest rates and ease mortgage costs; the 'No' side highlighted preserving Icelandic control over fishing and farming. Hulda Þórisdóttir, a professor at the University of Iceland, said the referendum touched deeper nerves around sovereignty and identity, with the security angle reinforcing existing views rather than changing minds.
"The security angle might have reinforced existing views for voters already leaning towards a 'Yes' or a 'No', in light of pre-existing beliefs. But it was not a decisive issue during the campaign," she told Euronews.
For many Icelanders, talk of European rearmament and a potential EU army stirred anxiety about being drawn into military obligations. Iceland has no standing army and sees itself as a peace-loving nation, even as it is a founding member of NATO.
NATO remains the primary security guarantee
Both Iceland and Norway are NATO members and deeply integrated into Europe's security architecture. Despite concerns about US disengagement under Trump, both countries appear to believe NATO membership suffices, and that Brussels offers little extra on defence.
"If the Norwegian government did not believe the NATO security guarantee was credible any longer, it would have already started discussions on EU membership," said Espen Emil Thygesen, an advisor at the Norwegian think tank Agenda. "Norway is already deeply integrated in EU defence cooperation. The calculation with the average voter is probably that the cost of full membership would outweigh the security benefits."
The European Parliament has even suggested extending the EU's mutual defence clause under Article 42.7 to Norway, as part of deeper cooperation on Arctic security. But Norway, like Iceland, seems content with the current arrangement.
Chris Kremidas-Courtney, a senior advisor at the European Policy Centre, said the referendum offered "a cold splash of reality on where the EU stands as a security provider." He noted that EU membership does not offer a unique territorial guarantee, so the vote turned on economic issues.
The result complicates the EU's broader enlargement strategy, which has gained momentum since Russia's invasion of Ukraine. While Sweden and Finland quickly applied for NATO membership, no similar rush toward the EU has emerged among Norway or Iceland. The Icelandic No vote is a reminder that security arguments alone may not be enough to persuade wealthy, non-member states to join.
For Brussels, the challenge now is to demonstrate that EU membership offers tangible benefits beyond security rhetoric. As the bloc seeks to expand in the Western Balkans and beyond, the Icelandic result may prompt a rethink of how to pitch membership to nations that already enjoy NATO's protection and deep economic integration with the EU.
