Iceland's former PM says EU referendum result would not bind government

Icelanders go to the polls on Saturday to answer a single question: whether the government should reopen negotiations on joining the European Union. A Gallup poll published in mid-August put the Yes side at 51.5 percent, a narrow lead that has turned the referendum into a genuine contest. Yet the man who last led Iceland out of accession talks in 2015 insists the result will not constrain a future administration, no matter which way it falls.

A referendum without a binding mechanism

Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson, leader of the Centre Party and prime minister when Iceland withdrew its application over fishery quotas, told POLITICO the question on the ballot paper, "Should negotiations on Iceland's membership in the European Union start again?", is deliberately vague. He argued that a future foreign minister or prime minister could satisfy a Yes vote simply by asking Brussels what it would offer and then walking away. "If I become foreign minister or prime minister later, have I fulfilled this simply by asking the EU, 'what are you willing to give us?' And is my job done?" he asked. "They can't explain how to honor the vote if it's a 'Yes,'" he added, referring to the Social Democrat-led coalition that called the referendum.

The Centre Party currently polls around 15 percent, making it a potential kingmaker in any future parliament. Gunnlaugsson's interpretation matters because it signals how a right-of-centre government might treat a Yes outcome: as a procedural box to tick rather than a mandate to negotiate in earnest. The current government, a coalition of the Social Democratic Alliance, the Left-Green Movement and the Pirate Party, has not published a detailed roadmap for what follows a Yes vote, leaving the procedural ambiguity unresolved.

The 2015 withdrawal and the fisheries dispute

Gunnlaugsson's scepticism is rooted in experience. In 2015, his government formally notified the European Commission that Iceland no longer considered itself a candidate for membership. The decision came after years of stalled talks in which the EU refused to budge on fishing quotas, a red line for an island nation whose economy depends on marine resources. At the time, Gunnlaugsson argued that the EU's Common Fisheries Policy would hand control of Icelandic waters to Brussels, a surrender no sovereign coastal state should accept.

That position has not shifted. In the current interview he reiterated that the fundamental asymmetry, Iceland's total reliance on fisheries versus the EU's insistence on common management, remains unchanged. "The EU has not moved on fisheries," he said. "Until it does, any negotiation is a waste of time." The Centre Party's platform still treats the 2015 withdrawal as a settled matter, and Gunnlaugsson made clear he would not campaign for a Yes vote even if the party's parliamentary arithmetic required compromise.

Trump, Greenland and the geopolitical argument

The referendum campaign has been coloured by Donald Trump's repeated suggestions that the United States should acquire Greenland, the autonomous Danish territory that lies just 300 kilometres west of Iceland. Pro-EU voices, including former Reykjavík mayor Dagur Eggertsson, have argued that the unpredictability of American foreign policy makes European integration a security necessity. Eggertsson told local media that "Greenland shows we cannot take our neighbourhood for granted" and that EU membership would anchor Iceland in a collective defence framework.

Gunnlaugsson dismissed the argument. "I can understand that it's both annoying and worrying for our friends in Greenland and in Denmark," he said. "But I don't think we should read too much into the hyperbole." He added that he never believed there was "a real chance" of an invasion and characterised Trump's rhetoric as "one of his shenanigans." The Centre Party leader's refusal to treat the Greenland issue as a strategic turning point reflects a broader Icelandic tradition of guarding sovereignty against both European and American encroachment.

A right-wing party in the European Parliament's ECR group

In June 2026, the Centre Party joined the European Conservatives and Reformists group in the European Parliament, aligning itself with parties such as Giorgia Meloni's Brothers of Italy and Poland's Law and Justice. The move surprised some observers in Reykjavík, where the Centre Party has historically presented itself as a centrist, anti-establishment force rather than a conventional right-wing nationalist outfit. Gunnlaugsson rejected the populist label. "People sometimes call us populist, and it always annoys me because I always see myself as anti-populist," he said. "I'm always talking about things that are difficult to explain, and I'm always annoyed about how politics is becoming all about just the surface and easy ideas."

The ECR affiliation matters for two reasons. First, it gives the Centre Party a platform in Brussels despite Iceland not being an EU member; the party's sole MEP sits with the group and can influence committee work on enlargement, fisheries and Arctic policy. Second, it signals a strategic bet: if Iceland ever does reopen talks, the Centre Party wants a seat at the table with the bloc's sovereignist wing, not the federalist mainstream. That calculation assumes the EU will still be negotiating with applicant countries on terms shaped by national vetoes, an assumption the Commission's current enlargement methodology does not guarantee.

Schengen, free movement and the demographic question

The Centre Party's deputy chair, Snorri Másson, took a harder line on the Schengen area and the European Economic Area agreement that underpins Iceland's current relationship with the EU. "We're a small nation. 400,000 people, unique culture, unique language. And, you know, the number of immigrants has just skyrocketed in the past few years," the 29-year-old told POLITICO. He did not advocate leaving the EEA, which guarantees free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, but said a revision "may be in order" if demographic trends continue.

Másson's language, "losing control over our demographic destiny", echoes arguments heard in larger European capitals but carries particular weight in a country whose population has grown from 320,000 to roughly 390,000 in two decades, driven largely by net migration. Eurostat data shows foreign-born residents now account for more than 18 percent of the population, up from 8 percent in 2012. The Centre Party has not proposed a concrete mechanism for limiting free movement while remaining in the EEA, a legal puzzle that has defeated larger member states.

What the polls say and what happens next

The Gallup poll giving Yes a 51.5 percent share was conducted between 11 and 18 August, with a margin of error of roughly three percentage points. Earlier surveys had shown a consistent No lead, suggesting the Trump-Greenland narrative may have shifted sentiment in the final weeks. Turnout is expected to exceed 70 percent, high by Icelandic standards for a consultative referendum. If Yes wins, the government has pledged to submit a formal request to the European Council to resume negotiations, but the timeline for any substantive talks remains undefined.

If No prevails, the issue will likely return to dormancy for another parliamentary term. Gunnlaugsson said he did not believe a No vote would trigger an Icelandic exit from Schengen, despite his criticism of the zone's recent strains. "Just in recent weeks, we've seen many, many countries in Europe go against Schengen," he noted, referring to temporary border controls reintroduced by Germany, Austria and others in response to migration flows. "But I didn't think Iceland should leave the Schengen zone in case of a 'No' win."