Reykjavík Grapevine - 06.08.2008, Blaðsíða 6

6 | REYKJAVÍK GRAPEVINE | ISSUE 11—2008
INTERvIEW By sigurður KJartan Kristinsson — photo By gasOPINION
IngIbjörg SÓlrún gíSladÓttIr: InternatIonal welfare IS SerIouS buSIneSS
What exactly is The Iceland Crisis Response
Unit, and what are its functions?
The Iceland Crisis Response Unit is our contribu-
tion to peace cultivation in the world and is consid-
erably new. Its actions are merely civilian, not war
related at all. Some peace crisis response units are
inclusive in a military setup, but of course we don’t
possess an army of our own so that’s not the case
here. Let’s keep that straight; all of our employees
are merely civilian and not soldier-like at all. The
unit’s main role is elaborate but it basically consists
of developing communities damaged in warfare,
the basic precondition for the ICRU’s arrival is that
actual military conflicts have ceased.
What are the main goals of this Icelandic
peace movement and how do you plan to at-
tain them?
Well, the main goal is to do our best to encourage
development following military confrontations. We
emphasise the protection of women and children
and the extensive difficulties faced by women and
children in demanding times. A lot of them have
suffered repulsive abuse; the strategy of using rape
as an instrument of war is well known. This is but
part of the substantial aftermath to conflict that
needs to be dealt with. We try to achieve our goals
with pragmatic assistance and useful instructions.
Many of the areas patrolled by the ICRU are
rife with animosity against interfering West-
ern forces. Have diplomatic methods always
sufficed to meet ICRU goals? Have they resort-
ed to more hostile approaches?
No, the ICRU has never been involved with anything
of the sort. Our people do not possess the knowl-
edge or training mandatory for extreme measures
such as military operations; they have not been
trained in warfare so it is really impossible.
It is still a well-known and heavily criticised
fact that some of the unit’s personnel, for in-
stance the ones in Afghanistan, carry weap-
ons on a standard basis. Are you insinuating
that these people have not had the appropri-
ate training for carrying arms, and are incom-
petent?
No not at all. The ones working at the airport in
Kabul carry weapons, and those people have re-
ceived substantial training. We like to think that al-
though they carry weapons, it is only for protection
but not for any professed military responsibilities.
The security in Kabul is military operated, though,
and we have to abide to their control.
Do you think it is proper to mix development
aid, which you say is the main role of the ICRU,
with military actions such as in Kabul?
It is of course rather obvious that development aid
isn’t exactly our main goal in Kabul. Although our
professed agenda comprises of various objectives,
such as development assistance, there are certain
“advanced activities” that are not included in it.
So we are apparently taking part in various
militaristic activities. but who decides the
unit’s projects? Is it the Icelandic Govern-
ment?
Yes. It’s merely us that decide where, how and why
we operate.
Is the ICRU established to fulfil Iceland’s inter-
national commitments?
Not at all. Its establishment was a contribution to in-
ternational welfare. However, it was always a goal
that it would measure up to international criterion.
But again, no, we weren’t under any international
pressure at all. This is our idea, our policy formula-
tion and our decision.
The present cost of sustaining the ICRU is
about 600 million ISK a year. What are your
future plans for it? Will you augment the bud-
get?
Yes. It is on our agenda to increase funding for de-
velopment assistance and co-operation, and that
includes amplifying the ICRU, which will become
a much more established organisation in the com-
ing years.
Was revoking the ICRU’s member based in
Iraq some sort of statement? If so, have you
received any feedback?
Of course it was a statement. I was against the Iraq
invasion from the beginning, and I think the whole
situation was a genuine fiasco. When I came into
office we reached the conclusion that we wouldn’t
take part in any operations based in Iraq. Regard-
ing feedback; everybody seems to have concurred
with my decision, at least I haven’t heard any com-
plaints.
It is on your agenda to obtain a seat in the UN
Security Council. Is operating the ICRU per-
haps a strategy to further that goal?
I mean, of course it’s connected to our bid for a
seat in the Security Council. Any nation that sits in
the council has to be familiar with the realm of the
present conflicts, as they constitute the bulk of the
council’s work.
Your annual report cites Dr. Martin Luther
King’s famous quote: “We have to contribute
to peace in a non-violent way”. Isn’t that a bit
sarcastic, since you operate armed divisions?
There is a crisis going on in Afghanistan and the
UN Security Council has ordered squads there to
be armed for security’s sake. So I wouldn’t say it un-
suitable to call our measures non-violent. I am not
particularly fond of their bearing arms, and even
think it might only entertain a false sense of secu-
rity. But if experts have ordered them to carry arms
for their own personal safety, I won’t dispute their
verdict. It is after all they who face the dangers of
that environment.
I hail from a surfers’ paradise in the Caribbean,
where the ocean gets rowdy and unpredictable
with undertows and strong currents. The most
dangerous beaches all have warning signs, which
do not prevent tourists from splashing in the seem-
ingly calm waters only to require rescue or, even
worse, resulting in drowning.
From this personal experience, when I
learned of the couple who nearly drowned in
Dyrhólaey and of the subsequent controversy
about whether a warning sign should be erected,
I sided with the Environmental Agency of Iceland.
It announced that warnings can be risky because
tourists then assume that any place without a sign
is safe. It also creates a slippery slope. Once you
put one sign up, more will follow and then when
will it stop?
As a tourist, you have to be aware that the
sublime and pristine nature of Iceland is also vola-
tile and unforgiving. It deserves respect, whether
that be not standing so close to the shore or not
entering an ice cave in the summer months when
the ice is melting. The weather here is extremely
erratic, especially in the highlands. It can change
within a few minutes and drastically at that.
I experienced this first hand while I was hik-
ing along the stark desert landscape adjacent to
the Dyngjufjöll Mountains. A windstorm of mam-
moth proportions sprung out of nowhere. I was
being pelted by tiny rocks with gusts of winds
so strong that it felt like I was being shot at with
bb guns. The wind swayed me like a paper doll
and I had to crawl to get to the car. Once I got to
the mountain hut, the ranger in charge told me in
what direction I needed to park my car in order for
it not to flip over like a Tonka toy.
If you are embarking on a trip that stares
Mother Nature in the eyes, it will be remarkable
but you may be at jeopardy. This is true in any
country. If Iceland were to put a warning sign
in places that are deemed perilous, most of the
country could be dotted with the word ‘danger’.
Tourists have perished on the hike from Land-
mannalaugar to Þórsmörk due to sudden changes
in weather, does that deserve a sign? Blue solid
chunks of ice have collapsed from an ice cave kill-
ing an adventurous tourist. Should there be a sign
by the many ice caves tourists visit each year? The
foul-mouthed British celebrity chef Gordon Ram-
sey recently recounted his near-death experience
after falling off a cliff trying to catch puffins in the
Westman Islands. Should all cliffs where tourists
perch on its ledges to capture a close-up of a puf-
fin have a warning sign?
I say no.
Contributing to International Welfare
Ingibjörg Sólrún Gísladóttir talks about the Iceland Crisis Response Unit
i aM not partiCuLarLy fonD of
their Bearing arMs, anD even
thinK it Might onLy entertain a
faLse sense of seCurity. But if
experts have orDereD theM to
Carry arMs for their own per-
sonaL safety, i won’t Dispute
their verDiCt.
To Warn or Not
to Warn, That
is the Question
By aLexanDra herteLL
A few years ago, the Icelandic
government decided to contribute
to international peacemaking
and established an organisa-
tion known as The Iceland Crisis
Response Unit, ICRU . Its activity is
still somewhat of a riddle to many
and some of its operations have
been heavily criticised. The stated
purpose of the squad is to promote
stability in war-zones and other
areas in need of help, but various
critics consider the unit nothing
more than a fledgling “Icelandic
Army”. Some of the unit’s person-
nel are armed at all times and the
ICRU's employee based in Iraq was
even withdrawn when Ingibjörg
Sólrún Gísladóttir, Iceland’s cur-
rent Minister of Foreign Affairs,
took over. Just after the release
of their 2007 Annual Report,
Grapevine caught up with her
and picked her brains about this
unique state-operated movement.