Le Nord : revue internationale des Pays de Nord - 01.06.1938, Page 87

THE KINGDOM OF ICELAND
79
eign Affairs, or through its legations, consulates, or other repre-
sentatives. It has undoubtedly been of great advantage to Iceland
that Denmark has thus placed at her disposal the experienced
Danish foreign service with its well-established traditions.
But this arrangement does not mean that Iceland has re-
nounced her right to manage her own foreign affairs, a step which,
if it had been taken, might have been construed into a partial
waiving of her sovereignty, at least for the period covered by the
agreement. It is the Icelandic Government and Legislature which
decide what matters are to be made the subject of negotiations
and agreements by the Danish Ministry for Foreign Affairs and its
staff. If the latter concludes a treaty or enters into an agreement
with a foreign State on behalf of Iceland, then the decision as to
the conclusion and substance of that treaty or agreement is taken
by the Icelandic Government alone and on its sole responsibility.
Just as no negotiation or agreement with a foreign State can
be binding on Iceland without the authorization of her own Go-
vernment, so a fortiori no treaty or agreement which Denmark
alone may conclude with any foreign State can have any effect
as far as Iceland is concerned.
From the fact that both the Icelandic and the Danish Govern-
ments have supreme power over their own foreign affairs it fol-
lows that there can be no question of a joint foreign policy for
the two States in a constitutional sense. Each of the two countries
may pursue a policy differing from that of the other. In conse-
quence, inter alia, of the co-operation between the Northern
countries Iceland does in many cases follow the same line of policy
as Denmark, and she may do so for other reasons as well. But
constitutionally there is nothing to prevent Denmark and Iceland
from pursuing different foreign policies, and in actual practice
they sometimes do so.
A case in point is the fact that Iceland has always stood out-
side the League of Nations, while Denmark (and the other Nor-
thern countries) have been members of the latter. As a member of
the League, Denmark took part in the sanctions against Italy,
whereas Iceland had nothing to do with them. She was thus
enabled, in the spring of 1936, i. e. in the very middle of the
sanctions period, to conclude a trade agreement with Italy which
contained provisions which the sanctions would have made it im-
possible for Denmark to accept at that time.
Section 7 of the Act of Union does not, of course, affect the