The Nordic Countries and the European Security and Defence Policy

348 THE NORDIC COUNTRIES, THEIR REGION AND EUROPEIn summary, the Independence Party continues for the present to exercise ablocking role vis-à-vis the possibility of EU membership, and ‘a revolution’would be needed to change the Independence Party’s position on Europe solong as Oddsson’s legacy remains. It might take the closure of the Keflavíkbase or termination of the Defense Agreement to trigger such a change, ifcombined with the continued doctrinal and practical build-up of the CFSP andthe ESDP. Icelandic politicians still think as much in terms of territorial guaranteesas they did during the cold war—although some of them are changing—and attach much higher value to the ‘hard’ security protection that the USA providesthan the ‘soft’ security protection that EU membership offers. It is thusdifficult to see the Independence Party or even the Progressive Partyenthusiastically advocating membership of the CFSP and the ESDP withouteither a definitive US withdrawal or a fundamental shift in their security philosophytowards a policy based as much on soft instruments as hard ones. This iswhy any move by the EU to provide more serious ‘hard’ security guarantees forits members could play a literally pivotal role in making EU membership moreattractive for Iceland’s current political elite.