This has already been explained in this thread. The law regarding the freezing of assets is part of the “Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001”, that doesn’t mean that Iceland violated “Anti-terrorism statutes”. The Act provides for the protection of a UK citizen’s person and property, with regard to the actions of non-citizens or foreign governments. Because there was a threat that billions in public and private funds would disappear, the UK government froze the UK-based assets of Iceland. Doing so neither declared Iceland a terrorist state, or state supporter of terrorism. The Icelandic government appears to have played it up that way at home though. This extraordinary step was taken after UK and Icelandic ministers had met in Washington DC and an offer from the Bank of England of an emergency loan to Landibanksi (one of the Icelandic banks that was failing). After reading WormTheRed’s posts (which are very balanced and fair, imo) it appears that there’s a certain amount of “he said, she said” going on with the UK and Icelandic governments, which is to be expected as neither can be seen as letting their respective electorates down.
Thank you Szlater
I think your last sentence is what means the most in these circumstances. Obviously, neither government can be seen as weak in this matter as it would give the national opposition a walk-in-the-park to take over come next elections. And since what a politician cares about the most (no matter which country he is in), is to stay in power, they obviously cannot loose face.
This bugs me incredibly much, since I believe much of what has happened in the last few weeks could’ve been avoided if both sides sat down and discussed things in a calm and rational manner; agreeing that mistakes have been made on both sides.
Fat chance of that happening…
I wondered why it got to the pit so late.
It was a bit of lazy work on behalf of the government, the law fits, so use it!
Kittehs, Long Boats, and Led Zepplin…Oh, my!
To try to clarify what others have said – apparently the statutory language of the “Anti-terrorism Act” is much broader than the title of the act suggests. Kind of like the American “Patriot Act” – the law is like a dumpster of regulartory and enforcement tools for prosectors and government agencies to use in all kinds of situations.
The Chancellor [finance minister] has very broad powers to take almost any action he deems necessary in a financial emergency “in the interests of the orderly conduct of fiscal policy”.
A number of warning shots were fired near fishing vessels in the so-called ‘Cod War’, and number of collisions took place between Icelandic gunboats and RN warships while manoeuvring to obstruct each other’s movements around the trawlers. RN vessels generally came off worst in these collisions, due to their rather fragile construction which was not intended for hitting things.
Well, we had to use the only means we had. Being completely out-gunned and all.
The Wiki on the Cod Wars is actually pretty good, even though I’m missing the tonnage of the British ships for comparison to the Icelandic Coast Guard Vessels (ETA: but it’s kinda nifty to look at the strength comparison).
The Cod Wars were totally screwed up, and everyone was to blame. Hopefully this current issue can be sorted out shortly to everyone’s satisfaction without too much damage to Icelandic and UK relations this time.
Well this time, I think the two nations are too intermingled on a personal and economic level to let things go too far. The UK will (or just has) sue(d) Iceland to get reparations and after a few weeks we’ll settle on a level that’s pretty fair to both sides.
Then both Governments will call this a “Great Victory for our side”.
Also, you guys are next in line to handle the Air-Defence for us* 
Which makes it all a tad more amusing (to me at least).
*It goes on a rotating basis among the NATO-countries since the US left.
Have you read this article from the FT?
No I hadn’t.
It seems to make the situation quite clear as far as we can see it now. The ICB and the Icelandic Government have handled this in the worst way possible, which I’ve never meant to deny (sorry if I worded myself poorly).
I’d be most happy to tell my opinions on the current Government, and that I think they should go crash and burn, in another thread, but that’s not what this issue is about. It’s about wether Mr Darling and Mr Brown overreacted when they choose to use that particular legislation against the Icelandic banks?
That remains the field of interest in this thread, not how Iceland could’ve used lots better legislation in handling our banks.
Well that, along with Björk, Vikings, Axi/es of Evil, Kitties, Pirates, Ninjas and all other things that have been mentioned.
I imagine these comments from the Icelandic Finance Minister didn’t help.
When you have a Finance Minister saying stuff like that on national TV, how do you react?
Surely, the more prudent action would have been to approach the UK government and discuss it behind the scenes and come to an understanding?
I think freezing assets was heavy handed, for sure, but without a more intimate understanding of the legislation I don’t know what else you can do. I’m sure that that sort of action isn’t taken on a whim.
David Oddson is the head of the Icelandic Central Bank; he’s not a member of the government and he sure never knows when to be silent.
As for trying to come to a quiet understanding, that’s what the Minister of Finance did - see this transcript of a phone conversation from October 7.th. ETA: An articleabout the conversation.
I’d say the words spoken in a private conversation between the concerned Ministers should be taken more seriously than something said on national TV, meant to sooth concerned viewers at home. (I do however admit that it was a truly wrong thing to say)
Sorry for getting that wrong.
Hmm… The transcript is interesting.
No problems, just want to keep things straight.
It sure is. But I do realize that the Icelandic Minister of Finance didn’t make any actual promises in that conversation. Basically, he was asking for more time to sort things out. Time Mr Darling didn’t give him.
Yes, it appears that way, but the question is, was there actually time for anything to be done at all?
Looking at the Wiki page for the crisis, it looks like there was some serious issues overnight, because the next day (after the phonecall and Oddsson’s interview) Glitnir was put into recievership, and it was at that point that Landsbanki’s UK assets were frozen. Then the next day Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander (Kaupthing’s UK subsidary) was put into administration by the FSA (independant financial overseer).
The story from the Icelandic point of view is that Glitnir and Landsbankinn were doomed, but Kaupthing only fell since the British Gov. decided to nationalise S&F, which was an altogether different matter.
Serious oversight, yes. Not enough regulations in Iceland, yes. But the Kaupthing matter basically came down to the British Gov saying: We want you to be able to guarantee all deposits in S&F in a few* hours and if you can’t we’ll put S&F into administration. This would be quite hard for most banks, considering it was a serious amount** of money.
I’ll be most happy to find the exact figures tomorrow.
ETA: Was there time? I guess we’ll never know. The British Government aparently didn’t think there was, while the Icelandic one did.
*yet again, I don’t remember the exact time.
** Nope, don’t remember that amount
That makes sense.
Historically, most ninja were slightly trained peasants with modified gardening tools. Vikings would mop the floor with them, as would pirates or most anything else for that matter. Things change if we take the matter into the land of fiction of course.
I’d seize Bjork, if you catch my drift, wink wink nudge nudge say no more.
On a broad note, while in my limited view of things, Britain was merely protecting themselves and it was Iceland that spun this into the ‘UK thinks we are terrorists’ thing… Is it OK for a government to protect its citizens if it means a whole other country will suffer as a result? Some would say it’s natural and good to love and protect countrymen over foreigners, but what if the numbers were reversed and Iceland had 200x the population of the UK? I have to admit the UK’s actions would make me a lot less comfortable then, ethically-speaking.
I found the numbers, but I’m afraid there in an Icelandic Newspaper so the link’snot worth much to you.
What happened was that Kaupþing got a call at seven o’clock in the morning on October 8 in which they were told to pay 300 million Pounds at nine o’clock and in addition make an additional payment of 2,3 billion Pounds within ten days - the total sum of all deposits at accounts in Kaupthing Edge.
And for the rest of you: Björk’s not that hot. We’ve got plenty better.