Iceland review - 2016, Page 65

ICELAND REVIEW 63
POLITICS
ty and an incentive to facilitate domestic
food production, as the restrictions “will
not last forever.”
The Russian Embassy in Iceland denies
that their government’s decision to put
Iceland on the blacklist is due to finan-
cial difficulties and reassures that this
step should be regarded as an expression
of consistency in the country’s foreign
policy: in short, Icelandic fish will be
welcomed back as soon as Icelanders lift
their sanctions. They hope it will become
possible by summer this year. In the
meantime, Iceland-Russia collaboration
strives to succeed in other areas.

CAUTION IN THE ARCTIC
Senior Arctic official for Iceland Árni
Þór Sigurðsson, however, makes it clear
that Iceland does not support Russia’s
actions.“There are very compelling
arguments that Putin’s government vio-
lated international law by its actions
in Ukraine and such attitudes should
be condemned.” Sanctions do not turn
Icelanders and Russians into opponents
on every matter though, he points out.
For now, the Arctic Council is trying
to focus on how to make at least the
advantageous but fragile Arctic region
a more secure place for all, as oppor-
tunities here are in abundance but the
scope of a failure would be unimagina-
ble. Precautionary measures, says Árni,
are among the main priorities of their
framework, and stakeholders start to
affirm this: “The Arctic states [Canada,
Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway,
Russia, Sweden and the US] have made
two binding agreements on search and
rescue and oil pollution prevention. The
next will presumably be on scientif-
ic cooperation.” Leaders of the Arctic
Council anticipate that in coming dec-
ades the Far North will witness increased
economic activity and become a hotbed
of grave environmental concern. It is one
of the most pressing problems to avert
any conflict in this area, because, as they
often recap, “What happens in the Arctic,
doesn’t stay in the Arctic.” *
Yaroslava Kutsai is a Ukrainian journalist
based in Reykjavík.