Iceland’s Alleged Reservation to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty
When Iceland became a party to NATO, the Icelandic government seems to have believed that it made a reservation to the core obligation of the North Atlantic Treaty – the “one for all and all for one” obligation — in a speech held during a dinner celebrating its signature. A few decades later, this b...
| Published in: | Veftímaritið Stjórnmál og stjórnsýsla |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | Icelandic |
| Published: |
Stjórnsýslustofnun
2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.irpa.is/article/view/a.2016.12.1.4 https://doi.org/10.13177/irpa.a.2016.12.1.4 |
| Summary: | When Iceland became a party to NATO, the Icelandic government seems to have believed that it made a reservation to the core obligation of the North Atlantic Treaty – the “one for all and all for one” obligation — in a speech held during a dinner celebrating its signature. A few decades later, this belief prevails, to some extent, in Icelandic politics. This opinion has no substance in international law. As is discussed, the reservation does not conform to formal and substantive requirements that international law makes to reservations. Consequently, Iceland is bound by the North Atlantic Treaty in the same way as other member states. Við aðild Íslands að NATO virðast íslenskir ráðamenn talið sig hafa gert fyrirvara við kjarnaákvæði Norður-Atlantshafssamningsins – sem kveður á um að árás á eitt aðildarríki jafngildi árás á þau öll – í kvöldverðarræðu í tilefni af undirritun hans. Áratugum síðar virðist enn eima eftir þeim þankagangi að einhverju leyti. Þær hugrenningar eiga sér þó enga stoð í þjóðarétti. Eins og rakið verður stangast slíkur fyrirvari á við ýmis formskilyrði og efnisreglur sem þjóðaréttur setur um fyrirvara. Þetta leiðir til þess að Ísland er bundið af Norður-Atlantshafssamningnum með nákvæmlega sama hætti og önnur aðildarríki NATO. |
|---|