Confronting Strategic Irrelevance: The End of a US-Icelandic 'Security Community'?
Dec 2005, Vol. 150, No. 6
By Valur Ingimundarson
Having been a key strategic outpost during the Cold War and a close political ally to the United States, Iceland has been faced with a stark new geopolitical reality since the break-up of the Soviet Union: its military irrelevance. This fact has not only put US-Icelandic relations to a severe test. It has also threatened to destroy a core element in Icelandic security policy: the 1951 defence agreement with the United States. Indeed, successive pro-American governments in Iceland have been forced to realize that it is not enough to give unqualified political support for US foreign policy to keep what they see as minimum – if merely symbolic – territorial defence: four F-15 fighter jets with supporting units. Despite the renewal of interest in territorial or homeland defence in the wake of terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001, it has had no impact on US intensions or presence in Iceland. And no credible argument has been put forward to suggest that Iceland is a potential terrorist target. In this article, I will discuss the impact of the changes that have taken place in US-Icelandic relations since the end of the Cold War, with special emphasis on the crisis in 2003. Karl Deutsch’s Constructivist model on ‘security communities’ is useful in analyzing this transformation. This 1950s construct has enjoyed a scholarly revival with increased theoretical interest in Constructivism at the expense of Realism. Deutsch’s definition of a ‘security community’ is contingent on a certain process: when two or more sovereign states become dependent on each other because of the development of ever-closer relations, it will lead to an international or transnational community. This community is based on common set of ideas and values and on mutually successful predictions of behaviour.
Add your comments
By Valur Ingimundarson
Having been a key strategic outpost during the Cold War and a close political ally to the United States, Iceland has been faced with a stark new geopolitical reality since the break-up of the Soviet Union: its military irrelevance. This fact has not only put US-Icelandic relations to a severe test. It has also threatened to destroy a core element in Icelandic security policy: the 1951 defence agreement with the United States. Indeed, successive pro-American governments in Iceland have been forced to realize that it is not enough to give unqualified political support for US foreign policy to keep what they see as minimum – if merely symbolic – territorial defence: four F-15 fighter jets with supporting units. Despite the renewal of interest in territorial or homeland defence in the wake of terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001, it has had no impact on US intensions or presence in Iceland. And no credible argument has been put forward to suggest that Iceland is a potential terrorist target. In this article, I will discuss the impact of the changes that have taken place in US-Icelandic relations since the end of the Cold War, with special emphasis on the crisis in 2003. Karl Deutsch’s Constructivist model on ‘security communities’ is useful in analyzing this transformation. This 1950s construct has enjoyed a scholarly revival with increased theoretical interest in Constructivism at the expense of Realism. Deutsch’s definition of a ‘security community’ is contingent on a certain process: when two or more sovereign states become dependent on each other because of the development of ever-closer relations, it will lead to an international or transnational community. This community is based on common set of ideas and values and on mutually successful predictions of behaviour.
You need 4 credits to access this item
If you are a member or registered user, please login
Not already a member and have not yet registered?
Add your comments
Copyright © 2009 RUSI