DOCSLIB.ORG

Why Did the Cod Wars Occur and Why Did Iceland Win Them? a Test of Four Theories

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Why Did the Cod Wars Occur and Why Did Iceland Win Them? A Test of Four Theories Sverrir Steinsson MA Thesis in International Affairs School of Social Sciences June 2015 Why Did the Cod Wars Occur and Why Did Iceland Win Them? A Test of Four Theories Sverrir Steinsson MA Thesis in International Affairs Advisors: Silja Bára Ómarsdóttir and Guðni Th. Jóhannesson Faculty of Political Science School of Social Sciences University of Iceland June 2015 This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in International Affairs at the University of Iceland. This thesis cannot be reproduced without the author’s consent. © Sverrir Steinsson 2015 090390-3689 Reykjavík, Iceland 2015 Abstract Few attempts have been made to provide theoretical explanations for the occurrence and outcomes of the Cod Wars. In this thesis, I test hypotheses derived from four IR theories and perspectives on the Cod Wars: the Rationalist Explanations for War perspective, which sees information problems, commitment problems and issue indivisibility as drivers of conflict; Liberal IR theory, which expects democracy, commercial ties, and institutions as pacifying influences; Structural Realism, which expects states to pursue their security interests; and Neoclassical Realism, which expects statesmen’s pursuit of security interests to be distorted by domestic pressures. I find that Liberal and Structuralist Realist expectations were not met, that rational miscalculation and misinformation contributed to the occurrence of the disputes, and Neoclassical Realist expectations were fully met in all of the disputes. Following these tests, I provide a new, structurally informed explanation of the Cod Wars. The disputes occurred due to powerful domestic pressures on statesmen to escalate. As the disputes escalated and security interests were put at greater risk, British statesmen were able to make greater concessions due to weaker domestic constraints than those faced by Icelandic leaders. Iceland therefore reached a highly favorable agreement in all Cod Wars. 3 Preface This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in International Affairs at the University of Iceland. It comprises 30 ECTS credits. My gratitude goes to my instructors, Silja Bára Ómarsdóttir and Guðni Th. Jóhannesson, for advice and constructive comments. I would also like to thank Bradley Thayer, Erla Hlín Hjálmarsdóttir, Ólafur Darri Björnsson and Þorsteinn Kristinsson for constructively commenting on drafts of this thesis. All remaining errors are my own. I gratefully acknowledge the University of Iceland Research Fund for supporting this project with a grant. 4 Table of Contents Abstract................................................................................................................................................... 3 Preface.................................................................................................................................................... 4 List of Tables........................................................................................................................................... 6 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 7 2 Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 12 3 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................................. 15 3.1 Realism ................................................................................................................................. 15 3.2 Liberalism.............................................................................................................................. 22 3.3 Constructivism....................................................................................................................... 25 3.4 The “Rationalist Explanations for War” Perspective.............................................................. 27 4 The Cod Wars............................................................................................................................... 29 4.1 Theories on the Cod Wars .................................................................................................... 29 4.2 The Dispute of 1952-56......................................................................................................... 34 4.2.1 The Costs and Risks of No Agreement .................................................................... 35 4.2.2 Testing the REW Dispute Hypothesis ....................................................................... 37 4.2.3 Testing the Liberal Dispute Hypothesis .................................................................... 39 4.2.4 Testing the Structural Realist Dispute Hypothesis .................................................... 42 4.2.5 Testing the Neoclassical Realist Dispute Hypothesis ............................................... 44 4.2.6 Testing the Outcome Hypotheses............................................................................. 45 4.3 The First Cod War................................................................................................................. 47 4.3.1 The Costs and Risks of No Agreement .................................................................... 48 4.3.2 Testing the REW Dispute Hypothesis ....................................................................... 49 4.3.3 Testing the Liberal Dispute Hypothesis..................................................................... 51 4.3.4 Testing the Structural Realist Dispute Hypothesis .................................................... 56 4.3.5 Testing the Neoclassical Realist Dispute Hypothesis ............................................... 58 4.3.6 Testing the Outcome Hypotheses............................................................................. 60 4.4 The Second Cod War............................................................................................................ 62 4.4.1 The Costs and Risks of No Agreement .................................................................... 63 4.4.2 Testing the REW Dispute Hypothesis ....................................................................... 63 4.4.3 Testing the Liberal Dispute Hypothesis..................................................................... 65 4.4.4 Testing the Structural Realist Dispute Hypothesis .................................................... 68 4.4.5 Testing the Neoclassical Realist Dispute Hypothesis ............................................... 68 4.4.6 Testing the Outcome Hypotheses............................................................................. 73 4.5 The Third Cod War................................................................................................................ 75 4.5.1 The Costs and Risks of No Agreement..................................................................... 76 4.5.2 Testing the REW Dispute Hypothesis ....................................................................... 77 4.5.3 Testing the Liberal Dispute Hypothesis..................................................................... 79 4.5.4 Testing the Structural Realist Dispute Hypothesis .................................................... 81 4.5.5 Testing the Neoclassical Realist Dispute Hypothesis ............................................... 82 4.5.6 Testing the Outcome Hypotheses............................................................................. 84 5 Explaining the Cod Wars .............................................................................................................. 87 6 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 92 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 96 5 List of Tables Table 3.1.1 Classical Realism, Structural Realism and Neoclassical Realism ............................... 20 Table 3.1.2 Structural Realist and Neoclassical Realist Expectations of the Cod Wars................. 22 Table 5.1 Options for British Statesmen ...................................................................................... 90 Table 5.2 Options for Icelandic Statesmen .................................................................................. 91 Table 6.1 Findings for Dispute and Outcome Hypotheses .......................................................... 93 6 1. Introduction In 1976, Iceland’s exclusive economic zone extended to 200 nautical miles after a highly favorable resolution to the Third Cod War. This Cod War was the last of four post-WWII disputes in which Iceland and the UK incurred great costs and risks to achieve their preferred delimitation and fishing rights in the waters off the shores of Iceland.1 The first Anglo- Icelandic post-WWII dispute over fishery limits occurred in 1952-56 over Iceland’s unilateral extension from 3 to 4 nautical miles.2 The second dispute, referred to as the First Cod War, occurred in 1958-61 and revolved around Iceland’s unilateral extension from 4 to 12 miles.3 The Second (1972-73) and Third Cod Wars (1975-76) revolved around Iceland’s unilateral extensions from 12 to 50 miles,
Recommended publications
  • Icelandic Folklore

    Icelandic Folklore

    i ICELANDIC FOLKLORE AND THE CULTURAL MEMORY OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE ii BORDERLINES approaches,Borderlines methodologies,welcomes monographs or theories and from edited the socialcollections sciences, that, health while studies, firmly androoted the in late antique, medieval, and early modern periods, are “edgy” and may introduce sciences. Typically, volumes are theoretically aware whilst introducing novel approaches to topics of key interest to scholars of the pre-modern past. FOR PRIVATE AND NON-COMMERCIAL USE ONLY iii ICELANDIC FOLKLORE AND THE CULTURAL MEMORY OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE by ERIC SHANE BRYAN iv We have all forgotten our names. — G. K. Chesterton British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. © 2021, Arc Humanities Press, Leeds The author asserts their moral right to be identified as the author of this work. Permission to use brief excerpts from this work in scholarly and educational works is hereby granted provided that the source is acknowledged. Any use of material in this work that is an exception or limitation covered by Article 5 of the European Union’s Copyright Directive (2001/29/ EC) or would be determined to be “fair use” under Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act September 2010 Page 2 or that satisfies the conditions specified in Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act (17 USC §108, as revised by P.L. 94– 553) does not require the Publisher’s permission. FOR PRIVATE AND ISBN (HB): 9781641893756 ISBN (PB): 9781641894654 NON-COMMERCIAL eISBN (PDF): 9781641893763 USE ONLY www.arc- humanities.org Printed and bound in the UK (by CPI Group [UK] Ltd), USA (by Bookmasters), and elsewhere using print-on-demand technology.
  • Þingvellir National Park

    Þingvellir National Park

    World Heritage Scanned Nomination File Name: 1152.pdf UNESCO Region: EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA __________________________________________________________________________________________________ SITE NAME: Þingvellir National Park DATE OF INSCRIPTION: 7th July 2004 STATE PARTY: ICELAND CRITERIA: C (iii) (vi) CL DECISION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE: Excerpt from the Report of the 28th Session of the World Heritage Committee Criterion (iii): The Althing and its hinterland, the Þingvellir National Park, represent, through the remains of the assembly ground, the booths for those who attended, and through landscape evidence of settlement extending back possibly to the time the assembly was established, a unique reflection of mediaeval Norse/Germanic culture and one that persisted in essence from its foundation in 980 AD until the 18th century. Criterion (vi): Pride in the strong association of the Althing to mediaeval Germanic/Norse governance, known through the 12th century Icelandic sagas, and reinforced during the fight for independence in the 19th century, have, together with the powerful natural setting of the assembly grounds, given the site iconic status as a shrine for the national. BRIEF DESCRIPTIONS Þingvellir (Thingvellir) is the National Park where the Althing - an open-air assembly, which represented the whole of Iceland - was established in 930 and continued to meet until 1798. Over two weeks a year, the assembly set laws - seen as a covenant between free men - and settled disputes. The Althing has deep historical and symbolic associations for the people of Iceland. Located on an active volcanic site, the property includes the Þingvellir National Park and the remains of the Althing itself: fragments of around 50 booths built of turf and stone.
  • Power, Communication, and Politics in the Nordic Countries

    Power, Communication, and Politics in the Nordic Countries

    POWER, COMMUNICATION, AND POLITICS IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES POWER, COMMUNICATION, POWER, COMMUNICATION, AND POLITICS IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES The Nordic countries are stable democracies with solid infrastructures for political dia- logue and negotiations. However, both the “Nordic model” and Nordic media systems are under pressure as the conditions for political communication change – not least due to weakened political parties and the widespread use of digital communication media. In this anthology, the similarities and differences in political communication across the Nordic countries are studied. Traditional corporatist mechanisms in the Nordic countries are increasingly challenged by professionals, such as lobbyists, a development that has consequences for the processes and forms of political communication. Populist polit- ical parties have increased their media presence and political influence, whereas the news media have lost readers, viewers, listeners, and advertisers. These developments influence societal power relations and restructure the ways in which political actors • Edited by: Eli Skogerbø, Øyvind Ihlen, Nete Nørgaard Kristensen, & Lars Nord • Edited by: Eli Skogerbø, Øyvind Ihlen, Nete Nørgaard communicate about political issues. This book is a key reference for all who are interested in current trends and develop- ments in the Nordic countries. The editors, Eli Skogerbø, Øyvind Ihlen, Nete Nørgaard Kristensen, and Lars Nord, have published extensively on political communication, and the authors are all scholars based in the Nordic countries with specialist knowledge in their fields. Power, Communication, and Politics in the Nordic Nordicom is a centre for Nordic media research at the University of Gothenburg, Nordicomsupported is a bycentre the Nordic for CouncilNordic of mediaMinisters. research at the University of Gothenburg, supported by the Nordic Council of Ministers.
  • Iceland's Contested European Policy

    Iceland's Contested European Policy

    An evolving EU engaging a changing Mediterranean region Jean Monnet Occasional Paper 01/2013 Iceland’s contested European Policy: The Footprint of the Past - A Small and Insular Society by Baldur Thorhallsson Copyright © 2013, Baldur Thorhallsson, University of Malta ISSN 2307-3950 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without any prior written permission from the Institute for European Studies, University of Malta. Publisher: Institute for European Studies, Msida, Malta. The Institute for European Studies The Institute for European Studies is a multi-disciplinary teaching and research Institute at the University of Malta, offering courses in European Studies which fully conform to the Bologna guidelines, including an evening diploma, a bachelor’s degree, a masters and a Ph.D. The Institute also operates a number of Erasmus agreements for staff and student exchanges. Founded in 1992 as the European Documentation and Research Centre (EDRC), the Institute was granted the status of a Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence in 2004. The Institute is engaged in various research and publication activities in European Integration Studies and is a member of the Trans-European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA), the LISBOAN network, EPERN, EADI, and the two Euro-Mediterranean networks, EuroMeSCo and FEMISE. The Institute is also a member of the Council for European Studies (hosted at Columbia University). The research interests of its staff include comparative politics and history of the European Union (EU); EU institutions; EU external relations and enlargement; small states in the EU; Malta in the EU; Euro-Mediterranean relations; Stability and Growth Pact; economic governance of the euro area; Europe 2020; EU development policies, climate change, international economics, economic causes and consequences of globalisation and EU trade and cohesion policy.
  • Food Security and Identity: Iceland

    Food Security and Identity: Iceland

    FOOD SECURITY AND IDENTITY: ICELAND A thesis submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts by Gina Marie Butrico August, 2013 Thesis written by Gina Butrico A.A.S., Middlesex County College, 2009 B.A., Kent State University, 2011 M.A., Kent State University, 2013 Approved by ___________________________________, Advisor Dr. David H. Kaplan, Ph.D. ___________________________________, Chair, Department of Geography Dr. Mandy Munro-Stasiuk, Ph.D. ___________________________________, Associate Dean for Graduate Affairs, Raymond A. Craig, Ph.D. College of Arts and Sciences ii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ..........................................................................................................v List of Tables ....................................................................................................... viii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................ ix Chapter I. Introduction .................................................................................................1 Food Security in Iceland ..............................................................................3 Food Identity in Iceland ...............................................................................5 Site Selection ...............................................................................................6 Food Geography...........................................................................................7
  • Digital Tools and the Derailment of Iceland's New Constitution

    Digital Tools and the Derailment of Iceland's New Constitution

    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Gylfason, Thorvaldur; Meuwese, Anne Working Paper Digital Tools and the Derailment of Iceland's New Constitution CESifo Working Paper, No. 5997 Provided in Cooperation with: Ifo Institute – Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich Suggested Citation: Gylfason, Thorvaldur; Meuwese, Anne (2016) : Digital Tools and the Derailment of Iceland's New Constitution, CESifo Working Paper, No. 5997, Center for Economic Studies and ifo Institute (CESifo), Munich This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/145032 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Digital Tools and the Derailment of Iceland’s New Constitution Thorvaldur Gylfason Anne Meuwese CESIFO WORKING PAPER NO.
  • A Review of International Fisheries Management Regimes

    A Review of International Fisheries Management Regimes

    Cefas contract report C7372 A review of international fisheries management regimes Authors: Stuart A. Reeves, James B. Bell, Giulia Cambiè, Sarah L. Davie, Paul Dolder, Kieran Hyder, Hugo Pontalier, Zachary Radford & Duncan Vaughan Issue date: 02/08/2018 Cefas Document Control Title: A Review of International Fisheries Management Submitted to: Georgina Karlsson/Charlotte Wicker Date submitted: 02/08/18 Project Manager: Stuart A. Reeves Report compiled by: SAR Quality control by: Defra various & Kieran Hyder Approved by & Kieran Hyder, 8/1/2018 date: Version: 3.5a Version Control History Author Date Comment Version SAR et al. 20/06/17 Compiled from individual 2 chapters SAR et al. 19/07/17 Working version for comment 2.1 SAR et al. 1/09/17 Complete draft for comment 2.2 SAR et al. 21/11/17 Revised to take account of 3.1 comments SAR et al. 12/12/2017 Further revisions in response to 3.2 comments SAR et al. 12/12/2017 Revised structure inc. MRF 3.3 chapter SAR et al. 24/1/2018 Further corrections & enhanced 3.4 exec summary. SAR et al. 26/2/2018 Minor corrections 3.4a SAR et al. 27/7/18 Pre-publication corrections & 3.5 formatting SAR et al. 02/08/18 Fixing minor typos & formatting 3.5a A review of international fisheries management regimes Page i A review of international fisheries management regimes Page ii An international review of fisheries management regimes Authors: Stuart A. Reeves, James B. Bell, Giulia Cambiè, Sarah L. Davie, Paul Dolder, Kieran Hyder, Hugo Pontalier, Zachary Radford and Duncan Vaughan1 Issue date: 02/08/2018 Head office Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HT, UK Tel +44 (0) 1502 56 2244 Fax +44 (0) 1502 51 3865 www.cefas.defra.gov.uk Cefas is an executive agency of Defra 1 Contact Address: c/o Natural England, Suite D, Unex House, Bourges Boulevard, Peterborough, PE1 1NG.
  • J. R. MCNEILL AHA Presidential Address Peak Document and the Future of History

    J. R. MCNEILL AHA Presidential Address Peak Document and the Future of History

    Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ahr/article-abstract/125/1/1/5721569 by Loyola University Chicago user on 03 March 2020 J. R. MCNEILL AHA Presidential Address Peak Document and the Future of History J. R. MCNEILL Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ahr/article-abstract/125/1/1/5721569 by Loyola University Chicago user on 03 March 2020 SOME YEARS AGO,IHAD the good fortune to join a small troop of geologists tramping around northeastern Iceland on the trail of a jökulhlaup.Tofind traces of a jökulhlaup, you hunt for rounded “erratics.” In Iceland, those erratics—boulders that look out of place—with craggy edges were probably pushed along by glaciers, and those with rounded edges probably tumbled into position in giant floods that resulted when volca- nic eruptions melted ice dams holding back sub-glacial lakes—in other words, in a jökulhlaup. My colleagues and I focused on erratics tossed around by a monster flood that, it seems, for two or three days had carried water equivalent to one hundred times the av- erage flow of the Amazon.1 By chiseling off chips from each boulder and sending them to a lab for something called cosmogenic radionuclide exposure dating, we learned that this jökulhlaup happened about seven to ten thousand years ago, a keen disappointment to me.2 I was hoping for a date recent enough to register in the human history of Ice- land, which began only about 1,150 years ago, and for a research project to which his- torians might be able to contribute.
  • ICELAND 2006 Geodynamics Field Trip May 30 – June 8, 2006

    ICELAND 2006 Geodynamics Field Trip May 30 – June 8, 2006

    ICELAND 2006 Geodynamics Field Trip May 30 – June 8, 2006 Massachusetts Institute of Technology/ Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Joint Program in Oceanography This field trip guide was compiled by Karen L. Bice using information from Bryndís Brandsdóttir, Richard S. Williams, Helgi Torfason, Helgi Bjornsson, Oddur Sigurðsson, the Iceland Tourist Board and World W. Web Maps from Thordarson and Hoskuldsson, 2002, Iceland (Classic Geology in Europe 3), Terra Publishing, UK. Logistical genius: Andrew T. Daly Field trip participants: Mark Behn, Karen Bice, Roger Buck, Andrew Daly, Henry Dick, Hans Schouten, Martha Buckley, James Elsenbeck, Pilar Estrada, Fern Gibbons, Trish Gregg, Sharon Hoffmann, Matt Jackson, Michael Krawczynski, Christopher Linder, Johan Lissenberg, Andrea Llenos, Rowena Lohman, Luc Mehl, Christian Miller, Ran Qin, Emily Roland, Casey Saenger, Rachel Stanley, Peter Sugimura, and Christopher Waters The Geodynamics Program is co-sponsored by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution’s Academic Programs Office and Deep Ocean Exploration Institute. TUESDAY May 30 Estimated driving (km) Meet at Logan Airport, Icelandair ticket counter @ 7:00 PM (80 km ≈ 50 mi) Depart BOS 9:30 PM Icelandair flight Day 1 - WEDNESDAY May 31 Arrive Keflavík International Airport 6:30 AM (flight duration 5 hours) Pick up 2 vans, 2 trailers (Budget) Free day in Reykjavík Night @ Laugardalur campground, Reykjavík Dinner: on own in town Day 2 - THURSDAY June 1 270 Late start due to trailer problems (2 hrs @ AVIS) To Þingvellir N.P., then north to Hvalfjörður fjord, stop at Skorradalsvatn Night @ Sæberg Hostel (1 km. off Rte 1 in Hrútafjörður, west side of road) Tel. 354-4510015 Fax. 354-4510034 [email protected] Dinner: mexican-style chicken (Rachel, Trish, Chris) Day 3 - FRIDAY June 2 320 To Lake Myvatn Lunch stop in Akureyri, stop at Godafoss, stop at Skutustadir pseudocraters Night @ Ferdathjonustan Bjarg campsite, Reykjahlid, on shore of Lake Myvatn Tel.
  • Fishing for Common Ground: Broadening the Definition of ‘Rights-Based’ Fisheries Management in Iceland’S Westfjords

    Fishing for Common Ground: Broadening the Definition of ‘Rights-Based’ Fisheries Management in Iceland’S Westfjords

    Master‘s Thesis Fishing For Common Ground: Broadening the Definition of ‘Rights-based’ Fisheries Management in Iceland’s Westfjords Katie Auth Advisor: Níels Einarsson, Ph.D. University of Akureyri Faculty of Business and Science University Centre of the Westfjords Master of Resource Management: Coastal and Marine Management Ísafjörður, May 2012 2 Supervisory Committee Advisor: Níels Einarsson, Ph.D., Director of the Stefansson Arctic Institute Reader: Gísli Pálsson, Ph. D., Professor of Anthropology at the University of Iceland Program Director: Dagný Arnarsdóttir, MSc. Katie Auth Fishing For Common Ground: Broadening the Definition of ‘Rights-based’ Fisheries Management in Iceland’s Westfjords 45 ECTS thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of a Master of Resource Management degree in Coastal and Marine Management at the University Centre of the Westfjords, Suðurgata 12, 400 Ísafjörður, Iceland Degree accredited by the University of Akureyri, Faculty of Business and Science, Borgir, 600 Akureyri, Iceland Copyright © 2012 Katie Auth All rights reserved Printing: Háskólaprent, Reykjavík, June 2012 3 Declaration I hereby confirm that I am the sole author of this thesis and it is a product of my own academic research. __________________________________________ Student‘s name 4 Abstract Since the 1980s, so-called “rights-based” fisheries management regimes – specifically those designed to apply market forces to problems of inefficiency and overfishing by divvying up fixed, tradable proportions of a total allowable catch among individuals or cooperatives – have become both one of the most widely advocated and most contentious aspects of marine resource management. Iceland, promoted by some as a successful international model of this approach, has been the site – for nearly thirty years – of fierce debate and controversy regarding the system’s effects on regional development, social justice and wealth disparity.
  • Reykjavík Unesco City of Literature

    Reykjavík Unesco City of Literature

    Reykjavík unesco City of Literature Reykjavík unesco City of Literature Reykjavík unesco City of Literature Reykjavík City of Steering Committee Fridbjörg Ingimarsdóttir Submission writers: Literature submission Svanhildur Konrádsdóttir Director Audur Rán Thorgeirsdóttir, (Committee Chair) Hagthenkir – Kristín Vidarsdóttir Audur Rán Thorgeirsdóttir Director Association of Writers (point person) Reykjavík City of Non-Fiction and Literature Trail: Project Manager Department of Culture Educational Material Reykjavík City Library; Reykjavík City and Tourism Kristín Vidarsdóttir and Department of Culture Esther Ýr Thorvaldsdóttir Úlfhildur Dagsdóttir and Tourism Signý Pálsdóttir Executive Director Tel: (354) 590 1524 Head of Cultural Office Nýhil Publishing Project Coordinator: [email protected] Reykjavík City Svanhildur Konradsdóttir audur.ran.thorgeirsdottir Department of Culture Gudrún Dís Jónatansdóttir @reykjavík.is and Tourism Director Translator: Gerduberg Culture Centre Helga Soffía Einarsdóttir Kristín Vidarsdóttir Anna Torfadóttir (point person) City Librarian Gudrún Nordal Date of submission: Project Manager/Editor Reykjavík City Library Director January 2011 Reykjavík City The Árni Magnússon Institute Department of Culture and Audur Árný Stefánsdóttir for Icelandic Studies Photography: Tourism/Reykjavík City Library Head of Primary and Lower Cover and chapter dividers Tel: (354) 411 6123/ (354) 590 1524 Secondary Schools Halldór Gudmundsson Raphael Pinho [email protected] Reykjavík City Director [email protected]
  • House of Ice and Cod: the U.S.-Icelandic Alliance Throughout the Cold War

    House of Ice and Cod: the U.S.-Icelandic Alliance Throughout the Cold War

    ABSTRACT HOUSE OF ICE AND COD: THE U.S.-ICELANDIC ALLIANCE THROUGHOUT THE COLD WAR From 1946 to 2006, the Icelandic government made sure to protect their people, their elves, and their cod from foreign powers. However, in a Cold War world, the need for spheres of influence on the part of the United States complicated Iceland’s security. The U.S. foreign policy makers intended to use economic and military coercion to create an alliance with Iceland. Iceland joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and offered an airbase in Keflavík to help the United States’ goal of collective security. The Icelanders and the British fought in three cod wars dragging the United States in to mediate between allies. The question of stationing military personnel and weapons further complicated their relationship. This work uses the range from 1946 to 2006 to show the ways in which two countries dealt with situations involving economics, the military, and the issues of alliance. Also, by showing these situations, one can view how the Cold War was truly a global war where nations large and small were affected in some way. Jeffrey Allen Moosios May 2015 HOUSE OF ICE AND COD: THE US-ICELANDIC ALLIANCE THROUGHOUT THE COLD WAR by Jeffrey Allen Moosios A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History in the College of Social Sciences California State University, Fresno May 2015 APPROVED For the Department of History: We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the university and the student's graduate degree program for the awarding of the master's degree.