Jonas Gahr Store, the Norwegian Foreign Minister, looks set to break ranks with the other Nordic countries by recommending that Norway grant loans to Iceland before the Icesave issue is finally resolved with the Netherlands and the UK.
Aftenposten reports that not only are the Norwegians potentially interested in granting Iceland the promised loan through the IMF right away, but that Store’s government may also be willing to offer another separate loan to Iceland in co-operation with the EU.
Store’s timing seems to be deliberate, with his comments coming just a day before today’s meeting of the Nordic finance ministers in Denmark. So far all the other Nordic nations have said their support for Iceland will not be paid out before Icesave is completely off the agenda. Icesave will be on the agenda in Copenhagen today.
“Norwegian assistance is tied to the IMF package and in our opinion the IMF package is not tied to a solution to the Icesave issue as the conditions of the package stand,” Store told Aftenposten.
Store emphasised that the Nordic nations should not do anything to hinder Iceland’s IMF package—his comments a direct response to a Nordic neighbour’s opinion that the Icesave issue must be out of the way before any loan can come from that country to Iceland through the IMF. Store said the issue will be discussed today.
Store added that there is no sign that the British and Dutch have tried to stall the IMF’s work in Iceland; and a week ago the Fund’s chief, Dominique Strauss Kahn told the press he is ready and willing to continue with the Iceland package without a final agreement in the Icesave issue.
Convoluted.
So, the position before this? IMF not dependant on Icesave, but dependant on the Nordic loans. Nordic loans dependant on Icesave. Therefore, IMF effectively dependant on Icesave.
The situation after? IMF still not dependant on Icesave. Nordics except Norway still dependant on Icesave. Therefore, IMF effectively dependant on Icesave. Norway not dependant on Icesave but is dependant on the IMF, so Norway is effectively dependant on Icesave.
Sweden is the biggie. In fact, there has been a bit of a spat between Sweden and Iceland in the past few days over this, with Borg apparently saying something like “Icelanders can not simply decide to ignore their obligations”, which wasn’t well received.
http://www.aftenposten.no/okonomi/utland/article3560215.ece
This is good, Iceland will no longer have any problem paying for the unfulfilled part of the guarantee and can refund the UK/NL immediately.
with his comments coming just a day before today’s meeting of the Nordic finance ministers in Denmark.
This meeting took place yesterday (confirmed over on IWR by the Aftenposten reporter). Norway is (so far) the only one to break ranks.
http://icelandweatherreport.com/2010/03/turnaround-in-norway.html#comments
Not a surprise. But still welcome development.
Now Norweigan coalition has regained feet, influence of anti-EU members ( ie all of them except Labour ) is finding its feet again :
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/10/01/norway-to-save-iceland-from-icesave-woes/#comment-94759
The only surprise is that Jóhanna ” there is no Plan B ” Sigurðardóttir has not been pelted with tomatoes and eggs for being such a * lying * traitor to this country :
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/10/11/iceland-prime-minister-accused-of-blocking-loan/
This is one moro smoke courtine, they are just cleaning their name, and like the IMF throwing the ball to others:
IMF: “We don’t hold the IMF loan subject to Icesave, BUT if the nordic countries don’t pay their part we can not pay either”.
NORDICS: “we don’t hold the loans subject to Icesave, BUT if the IMF doesn’t pay its part we can not pay either”.
NORWAY: “we dont hold the loan subject to Icesave, BUT if the other nordic countries don’t pay their part we can not pay either”.
Circular resoning ebyone??
It would seem Jonas Gahr Stoere is alone on this one.
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandreview/daily_news/?cat_id=16539&ew_0_a_id=359239
He calls for unity when he is the one promoting disunity?
“Stoere said the leaders of the other Nordic countries are not of the same opinion as Norwegian authorities. He said he had encouraged his Nordic counterparts to unify their position.”
I’m sure that if Norway was to provide a loan to Iceland for the purpose of paying the IceSave debt – that would be a different matter – unity all round including UK/NL : )
Not that this is news of anything definite re Norway breaking rank, but it would put some sized spanner in the works of some of the contributers here who appear to gloat at the thoughts of an effective siege, a financial starvation to force Iceland to accept a punitive Icesave settlement.
@Alex.
Unrelated to this story, but you’ve got to run the story on RUV about the banks attacking the Krona:
http://www.ruv.is/frett/segir-bankana-hafa-fellt-kronuna
It’s possible/probable that there are two or more Bjarni Kristjánssons out there, but I bet you that’s our Bjarni.
Norway, as a rich country because of its oil exports, can afford to bail out Iceland singlehandedly. So, why aren’t they simply doing that, instead of making arguements about the IMF credits? To me, this looks as if Store is putting up a smoke screen to disguise the fact that Norway won’t give a loan to Iceland!
“Store added that there is no sign that the British and Dutch have tried to stall the IMF’s work in Iceland”
Well, either they are very discretely working behind the scenes, or they hope that the IMF loan will enable Iceland to repay the guarantee fund moneys. Regardless, lack of evidence isn’t evidence of a lack of action.
Btw, that guy’s name is actually “Støre”. Not to be too nitpicking, but when not using nordic letters, wouldn’t it be more accurate to spell that as “Stoere” (like the Icelandreview does), in order to give the readers a hint at the proper pronounciation?
This is indeed a strong, firm and unexpected action from Jonas Gahr Store, Norwegian PM to break away from the majority isolation of Iceland Re-Icesave problem. Positive. Yes because the thought of the Norwegian PM has given the Icelanders the chance to survive unlike the British and Dutch who wants to annihilate Iceland first by the Anti-Terrorist Law, blockade, interest 5.5 %, and payment supported by some politicians who wihtout transparency confirmed the national responsibility to pay without national consultation.
It is gratifying to know that among all others, there is one Norwegian PM and his people who believes and understand the Icelandic predicament. Thank you.
Nothing will come out of this, Store is just responding to pressure from those who support Iceland, its Ground Hog day in Iceland again :)
We need to start moving our busyness out of Europe to make us less vulnerable to economic attacks, like the Brown/Darling terrorist law against Iceland.
“…he British and Dutch who wants to annihilate Iceland…”
No they don’t. They just want their money back. Get the flag out of your eye that your president so carefully placed there, and you might see that.
@Gray, Germany. That’s true, Støre should be pronounced ‘Stirrer’.
Which is quite fitting.
@Gray, Germany:
1. Iceland has never requested to substitute the IMF with Norway – quite the contrary. Norway has already disbursed 25% of the promised loan. A bilateral loan agreement with Norway and Iceland could very well put an end to the IMF plan. This option may be exercised later on, but not before Iceland’s currency reserves runs out. Denmark and Sweden are also capable of “bailing out” Iceland singlehandedly.
2. Iceland’s own IMF board member, the one shared between the Nordics and Baltics, does not want to push forward the second review of the IMF plan. Hence, blaming UK or the Dutch would be inappropriate. Personally, I would blame Denmark. They have the strongest relation to Iceland, and much less self-interest than Sweden in the Icesave matter. Sweden is also dependant on Denmark to control the actions of the Nordics and Baltics board member.
3. Yes, if Støre is not used, it would be better to use Stoere than Store.
Written by a (biased?) Norwegian :)
@demy
I agree that the Norwegian loan is a good thing. However, “of the Norwegian PM has given the Icelanders the chance to survive unlike the British and Dutch who wants to annihilate Iceland first by the Anti-Terrorist Law, blockade, interest 5.5 %, ”
British and Dutch people and governments do not want to annhilate Iceland
Seizing financial assets has been in British law for at least 50 years. Unfortunately in 2001 it got bundled in with the Anti- terrorist and security legislation. This was indeed very regrettable.
There is no blockade ( don’t see the British and Dutch Navies circling Iceland!)
The interest rate being offered by the British and Dutch is now is the SAME as on offer from the Norwegians. It is a commercial rate. Personally I think the UK should offer a considerably lower rate.
I think the British and Dutch have spent alot of time and effort into creating the circumstances that would force us icelanders to sign a deal that would surrender ownership of our natural resources to them if we were to default on any loan, so that would serve their interests to help us in that direction after the deal would be done, they are not going to change their mind and suddenly offer a fair deal, so its pointless to expect anything.
I am sure Store wants to help us out, but i doubt he will be able to do that.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1434855627&play=1
“…I think the British and Dutch have spent alot of time and effort into creating the circumstances that would force us icelanders to sign a deal that would surrender ownership of our natural resources…”
No, they haven’t. They just want their money back. Quit with the paranoia. All countries that have national debts have to pay them back, why is Iceland so very special do you think?
that would surrender ownership of our natural resources to them if we were to default on any loan
Really? How would that happen?
There is no requirement in the Icesave agreement to surrender any natural resources (fish, geothermal power). Don’t confuse Icesave with joining the EU, where the common fishing policy would need a carefully negotiated opt out!
One of your other natural resources, your footballers, have already left :)
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2010/03/14/iceland-struggles-to-keep-up/
http://www.economicdisasterarea.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/Icesave_samningurinn_innistaedutryggingar_bretland.pdf
“16.3 Waiver of sovereign immunity
Each of the Guarantee Fund and lceland consents generally to the issue of any
process in connection with any Dispute and to the giving of any type of relief or
remedy against it, including the making, enforcement or execution against any of its
property or assets (regardless of its or their use or intended use) of any order or
judgment. lf either the Guarantee Fund or lceland or any of their respective property
or assets is or are entitled in any jurisdiction to any immunity from service of process
or of other documents relating to any Dispute, or to any immunity from jurisdiction,
suit, judgment, execution, attachment (whether before judgment, in aid of execution
or otherwise) or other legal process, this is irrevocably waived to the fullest extent
permitted by the law of that jurisdiction. Each of the Guarantee Fund and lceland also
irrevocably agree not to claim any such immunity for themselves or their respective
property or assets.”
“Really? How would that happen?”
The Dutch icesave deal.
http://www.economicdisasterarea.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/Icesave_samningurinn_innistaedutryggingar_bretland.pdf
“16.3 Waiver of sovereign immunity
Each of the Guarantee Fund and lceland consents generally to the issue of any
process in connection with any Dispute and to the giving of any type of relief or
remedy against it, including the making, enforcement or execution against any of its
property or assets (regardless of its or their use or intended use) of any order or
judgment. lf either the Guarantee Fund or lceland or any of their respective property
or assets is or are entitled in any jurisdiction to any immunity from service of process
or of other documents relating to any Dispute, or to any immunity from jurisdiction,
suit, judgment, execution, attachment (whether before judgment, in aid of execution
or otherwise) or other legal process, this is irrevocably waived to the fullest extent
permitted by the law of that jurisdiction. Each of the Guarantee Fund and lceland also
irrevocably agree not to claim any such immunity for themselves or their respective
property or assets.”
The British icesave deal
http://www.economicdisasterarea.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/Icesave_samningurinn_innistaedutryggingar_holland.pdf
There are 11 possibilities integrated into this deal to demand immediate payment from Iceland, this deal is designed to cash in on the Icelandic state, so its in the UK/NL favor to see Iceland default on some debts,
Brown and Darling are just con men, and Icelandic people are the mark, its as simple as that.
Interesting interview with Alex Jurshevski, Recovery Partners.
http://dagskra.ruv.is/sjonvarpid/4472556/2010/03/14/3/
“this deal is designed to cash in on the Icelandic state, so its in the UK/NL favor to see Iceland default on some debts,
Brown and Darling are just con men, and Icelandic people are the mark, its as simple as that.”
That has to be either remarkable stupid, or brazen arrogance. Just a little reminder, this is about a PARTIAL repayment of money that Icelandic banks took from EU depositors with the full backing and knowledge of the Icelandic government. Asking for our money back, when you *guaranteed* that you would pay it on demand is not a con; its a God given right.
Thanks Axel, but do you understand what you’re quoting? How does “irrevocably waived to the fullest extent
permitted by the law of that jurisdiction” equal “we’re taking your fish”? Are your (possible) oil fields in UK waters? Are your windmills in Holland? Etc.
Axel, you are a true patriot. I can only hope that more in your country have a clue about what is going on. Not only are the people of Iceland the “mark”, but the people of many lands are. These politicians and bankers have a great time at their meetings figuring out how to shear the wool off of the sheep.
Those who believe what their televisions and politicians tell them are also part of the problem. People need to get off of their backsides to read this stuff and figure out what’s really going on.
@Axel
now, I am not a lawyer, but I believe that these clauses are fairly standard in international loans
http://www.unitar.org/pft/sites/default/files/DocSeries15.pdf
If you look at the above document, it also shows examples where there is an expropriation clause, allowing the lender to directly seize and sell assets belonging to a borrower in default.
There is no expropriation clause in the Icesave agreement. I believe that in the event of a default, a court would have to decide which assets should be sold to pay the debts.
I would welcome some more qualified comments on this.
If you expect to negotiate a good deal while calling the other side con-men, maybe you should reconsider your strategy.
To Andrew as of March 13 – The PM of Norway is the first to go out of his way and was kind to extend or let out his verbal support to ICELAND BEFORE THE ICESAVE DISCUSSION. Nobody else did.
– Annihilating Iceland ( to destroy or defeat someone completely) With the collapsed of the bank, UK with Holland had an ECONOMIC BLOCKADE CAMPAIGN and (not a NAVAL BLOCKADE) after the Anti-TERRORIST implementation. This is after knowing the fact that the creditors of Icesave is more than 300,000 which is much more than population of Iceland. Bleeding and demanding outright with the hope of profiteering from the transaction.
Yes the interest rate is LOWER BUT WHAT IS NEEDED IS A FAVORABLE INTEREST RATE – (NOT TOO MUCH OR SUITABLE ) after the force and intimidation, bullying and premeditation. All other mitigating as to the nature of the transaction and the aggravating circumstances after the fact has to be considered.
To GREVLING AS OF 13 March -
Andrew says:
“There is no blockade ( don’t see the British and Dutch Navies circling Iceland!)”
Head in the sand time again.
There is in effect a financial blockade as regards foreign loans.
This blockade is in effect until Iceland agrees to the terms set by the British and the Dutch re the Icesave debt.
Furthermore, the dispute is not about the principal of paying the debt it is about the terms. What does it matter to you what terms the miniscule chronically indebted Iceland state seek to negotiate with 2 major European states?
Knowless wrote
>“There is in effect a financial blockade as regards foreign loans.”
During April 08 when concerns about IceSave started to surface – a popular UK consumer finance website looked at the issue. A part of the information provided by IceSave intended to reassure savers – stated.
“In the extremely unlikely event that the Icelandic government wasn’t in a position to meet all claims, all the Nordic countries have an arrangement where they will step in and help any one of the participating countries that are in trouble so there is an additional layer of reassurance and cover.”
http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2008/04/01/icesave-how-safe-are-your-savings-facts-and-myths/
Although I’ve posted this link before – I cannot recall anyone commenting upon the validity of an inter-Nordic loan arrangement? Or, is it an agreement to generally assist a neighbour, but not specifically to do with banks?
If loans are being blocked – it would be unsurprising, real-politik etc. What is the difference between Icelandic ships cutting the lines of trawlers fishing in your waters, and UK cutting credit lines of Iceland consequential to your internet banks ‘phishing’ within UK/NL? (sorry about that one!).
>“What does it matter to you what terms the miniscule chronically indebted Iceland state seek to negotiate with 2 major European states?”
Give us a break – poor little Iceland! Way back in Jan 09, I posted.
“Icelandic society seems a paradox – an enigma. As an outsider, one has an impression of a nation ‘strutting’ as a ‘big player’ – yet also playing the ‘little kid’ who gets picked on by big nasty bullies in the playground.”
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/01/06/statement-from-the-icelandic-government-concerning-legal-proceedings-against-uk-authorities/#comment-58641
Big player!
http://forseti.is/media/files/05.05.03.Walbrook.Club.pdf
” What does it matter to you what terms the miniscule chronically indebted Iceland state seek to negotiate with 2 major European states?”
it matters a great deal to me. I do not want to see this problem continue and I want to see my country act with generosity to a small neighbouring country who’s people are in a bad situation.
Economic embargo? The aluminium is still moving around, the fish are still going for processing. No sign of interruptions to the telephone and internet communications.
“Stoere added that there is no sign that the British and Dutch have tried to stall the IMF’s work in Iceland; and a week ago the Fund’s chief, Dominique Strauss Kahn told the press he is ready and willing to continue with the Iceland package without a final agreement in the Icesave issue.”
Iceland wants to borrow more money. Many of the people who may lend money want to see how Iceland deals with its current international obligations before they lend more. Many of the lenders have interpreted the situation as “Iceland is liable to pay up for Icesave” (and I know that this is a disputed point, but that is how most of the lenders see it, regardless of the legal arguments for and against).
“Not only are the people of Iceland the “mark”, but the people of many lands are. ”
This is true, the scams are so big no one really knows what to expect any more, this is like a minefield of all kinds of financial fraud,
it turns out it was the Icelandic banks that attacked the Icelandic currency Krona, not some hedge funds as we have been told, it would not surprize me if they made some bets on the Isk falling, this is what should be expected of bankers, and one of the reasons why we should not bail them out, i hope if there is a second “dip” in the resession in USA and UK, the people refuse to pay the casino debts of
some bankers.
it turns out it was the Icelandic banks that attacked the Icelandic currency Krona, not some hedge funds as we have been told
Hedge funds might still be involved in the shorting, although the $14bn that the Icelandic banks shorted by seems like a lot.
Terry says:
“if loans are being blocked ”
If??
Access to loans are being blocked.
” it would be unsurprising, real-politik etc. What is the difference between Icelandic ships cutting the lines of trawlers fishing in your waters, and UK cutting credit lines of Iceland consequential to your internet banks ‘phishing’ within UK/NL? (sorry about that one!).”
Whether this is an unsurprising or a justifiable tactic to you, is frankly irrelevant.
The matter I mentioned was that the loan blockade is a fact.
The fact that it is a fact, was the relevance in my earlier reply.
Andrew says:
March 15, 2010 at 6:30 pm
“it matters a great deal to me. I do not want to see this problem continue and I want to see my country act with generosity to a small neighbouring country who’s people are in a bad situation.”
That depends on your understanding of what defines generosity in this matter :)
Part of what you interpret as an act of generosity is the tactic of using the loan blockade as part of a strategy to force an agreement by an chronically indebted nation to repayment terms which which it regards as punitive.
The details of the Icesave term issues have been exhaustively discussed in minute detail elsewhere.
Knowless wrote
“Whether this is an unsurprising or a justifiable tactic to you, is frankly irrelevant.”
It was an opinion – and as such has relevance. It would be a pretty ‘thin’ message board if opinion were excluded! Even banal banter is officially welcomed by the management. : )
Alex said
Don’t worry Terry, a bit of banal banter is good for the soul!
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2009/10/09/a-year-after-the-storm-iceland-pm-on-bbc-news/#comment-96070
Unfortunately you disregard the main point within my post –
“In the extremely unlikely event that the Icelandic government wasn’t in a position to meet all claims, all the Nordic countries have an arrangement where they will step in and help any one of the participating countries that are in trouble so there is an additional layer of reassurance and cover.”
http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2008/04/01/icesave-how-safe-are-your-savings-facts-and-myths/
If there is such an arrangement – why the need for a UK/NL loan?
If there is such an arrangement – why the need for a UK/NL loan?
This will be the swaps thing. I’ve a sketchy memory of it, but IIRevenvaguelyC, the Central Bank did make use of the Nordic swaps, but we’re talking hundreds of thousands of euros rather than billions.
Likewise, I seem to remember Iceland was excluded from a Nordic-US swap agreement that came into effect shortly before the crisis.
So, in essence, I think that statement was incorrect, in that there was not an agreement that the Nordics would step in and help Iceland by the amount that would be required if it experienced a collapse.
@Knowless
I didn’t say that the UK government are acting with generosity, because I don’t think they are at all. I would like them to act with generosity (a lot of it). Unfortunately, I am not in the UK government!
I think the situation calls for a mini version of the Marshall Plan.
@Bromley . The swap agreement in May 2008 with Denmark/Norway and Sweden was 1.5 billion Euro – ment to sequre Icelandic economy. The agreement was extended out 2009. Others did not accept equal agreement earlier in 2008. I am not sure how much of it that was used.
Terry wonder if there is an agreement that Nordic taxpayers should pay out for the risk UK/NL savers took. Well, I can forward him the frequent email I get from “the Dutch State Lottery” – which should have similar value.
Thanks Oystein – I see that as well as getting it wrong, I was mixing up my amounts anyway as I obviously meant hundreds of “millions” rather than “thousands” :) .
Thanks Oystein. IceSave telling lies….whatever next!!
I was hoping if we ever get as far as a loan – it would be you rather than us ; )