iceland

Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and the Faroe Islands back calls for Infantino’s resignation amid FIFA crisis.

Six Nordic football associations have delivered a united blow to FIFA President Gianni Infantino, declaring they have lost confidence in his leadership while demanding sweeping governance reforms at world football’s governing body.

The six Nordic FIFA members – Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and the Faroe Islands – met in Helsinki and issued a rare joint statement on Sunday, backing calls for Infantino’s resignation from three major regional confederations.

They also supported demands for an independent investigation into his proposal to sell a stake in events like the World Cup to private equity investors, a plan that was quickly abandoned in the face of a global backlash.

“The six Nordic football associations have lost confidence in FIFA’s president and are concerned about the organisation’s governance and decision-making at the highest level,” they said in a statement.

“The Nordic football associations stand united with UEFA and support the measures that the organisation and its national member associations have jointly proposed.

“We expect FIFA to provide binding guarantees that the organisation’s governance or competitions will never again be opened up to private ownership.”

FIFA did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

On Friday, Denmark’s football association pledged to find a credible alternative to Infantino in March’s presidential election.

Infantino is under pressure from three confederations to resign: UEFA, the AFC and CONCACAF.

The sport’s regional powerhouses in Europe, Asia, and North and Central America and the Caribbean have also discussed a potential vote of no confidence against the FIFA chief.

“We also support the demand made by AFC, CONCACAF and UEFA that a fully independent external investigation into the events surrounding the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal be established,” the Nordic associations added.

“We also call on FIFA to initiate a comprehensive and independent review of its governance framework to determine whether it ensures the independence, checks and balances, transparency and accountability that were intended when FIFA adopted its reform programme in 2016.”

Infantino, who is seeking a fourth term until 2031 in next year’s election, is in the Dominican Republic this weekend, where he has met with officials of the Caribbean Football Union (CFU).

CONCACAF President Victor Montagliani had asked Infantino to stay away from a youth football tournament in the country, saying his presence would overshadow the event.

“This meeting of the presidents of CFU takes place in the environment of [an] under-14 youth tournament in the region, which actually is one of those tournaments that can take place thanks to the FIFA Forward programme,” Infantino said.

“So even more so a reason to be proud to be here and happy as well because it’s important to engage, to have a dialogue, to express views and opinions.”

Iceland will hold a referendum on August 29 on whether to reopen negotiations over joining the European Union, in a closely contested vote that could reshape the country’s economic and strategic direction.

The referendum, however, is not a vote on EU membership itself. Icelanders will only decide whether their government should begin accession negotiations with Brussels.

If voters approve the proposal, negotiations could last two or more years before Iceland holds a second referendum, potentially in 2028, on whether to actually join the bloc.

With opinion polls showing a near-dead heat between supporters and opponents, the vote has become an important test of Iceland’s relationship with Europe at a time of economic uncertainty and growing geopolitical competition in the Arctic.

Is Iceland Voting to Join the EU?

No.

The August 29 referendum only asks whether Iceland should begin negotiations with the European Union.

A “yes” vote would open a potentially lengthy accession process. Iceland would then negotiate the terms of membership with Brussels before citizens have another opportunity to accept or reject the final agreement.

That means the upcoming referendum is essentially a decision about whether to explore EU membership, rather than a final decision to join.

Prime Minister Kristrun Frostadottir’s government has nevertheless presented the vote as a potentially decisive moment.

What Happens If Iceland Votes No?

The government has described the referendum as a “now or never” opportunity.

Frostadottir has warned that rejecting negotiations would effectively put the EU question aside.

This makes the vote particularly important because Iceland has already attempted the accession process once.

Reykjavik applied to join the EU in 2009, but negotiations were abandoned in 2013 after a Eurosceptic government came to power.

A second rejection could therefore close the issue again for the foreseeable future.

Why Does Iceland Want to Reconsider EU Membership?

Economic concerns are among the strongest arguments for reopening negotiations.

Iceland has faced high living costs and economic volatility, while the country’s relatively small economy remains vulnerable to external shocks.

Supporters argue that closer integration with the EU could provide greater economic stability and strengthen Iceland’s position when dealing with larger trading partners.

EU membership could also eventually allow Iceland to adopt the euro, replacing the Icelandic krona.

Supporters say the euro could reduce currency volatility, help address inflation and potentially lower interest rates.

The country’s strategic environment has also changed since Iceland abandoned its previous accession negotiations.

The war in Ukraine and growing competition in the Arctic have encouraged Iceland to reconsider how closely it should align with European institutions.

What Would Iceland Gain From Joining the EU?

EU membership would provide Iceland with access to the bloc’s customs union and its wider internal market.

The customs union eliminates internal tariffs between member states while applying common external tariffs to goods entering the bloc.

Iceland would also gain a formal role in EU decision-making.

Its representatives would participate in institutions including the European Parliament, European Commission and European Council.

For supporters, this is important because Iceland would move from being closely connected to the EU economically to having a direct role in shaping policies that affect it.

The argument is particularly relevant for a small country dealing with much larger economic powers.

Why Do Icelanders Oppose EU Membership?

Opponents argue that membership would transfer too much political authority from Reykjavik to Brussels.

They also question whether joining the EU would substantially improve Iceland’s security.

The most sensitive issue, however, is fisheries.

Why Are Fisheries Central to the Debate?

Fishing is one of the pillars of Iceland’s economy and a major part of the country’s national identity.

Opponents fear that joining the EU would subject Iceland to the bloc’s Common Fisheries Policy and potentially weaken its control over fishing resources.

They worry that common European resource-management rules could eventually increase access for foreign vessels to Icelandic waters.

For a country surrounded by some of the world’s most important fishing grounds, that is not simply an economic concern. It is also a question of national sovereignty.

The fisheries debate therefore gives the opposition one of its strongest arguments against membership.

Why Does Iceland Want to Keep the Krona?

Iceland’s currency is another major dividing line.

Supporters of the euro argue that replacing the krona could reduce exchange-rate volatility and improve economic stability.

Opponents see the krona differently.

They argue that an independent currency provides Iceland with an important economic adjustment mechanism.

During a downturn, the krona can weaken against major currencies, potentially helping Iceland’s economy adjust. During periods of stronger growth, it can appreciate.

Giving up that flexibility in favour of the euro, opponents argue, could leave Iceland with fewer tools to respond to economic shocks.

Who Supports EU Membership?

The country’s centre-left government coalition has backed putting the issue to a referendum.

Vidreisn, Iceland’s most explicitly pro-EU political party, pushed for the vote.

Prime Minister Frostadottir’s Social Democrats also support EU membership, although they have taken a more cautious approach to campaigning.

The coalition’s third party, the People’s Party, opposes membership.

The political divide therefore does not fit neatly along government versus opposition lines.

Who Opposes EU Membership?

The opposition Independence Party, led by Gudrun Hafsteinsdottir, is campaigning against reopening accession talks.

Its argument centres on sovereignty, fisheries and economic independence.

Opponents believe Iceland can maintain its existing relationship with Europe without accepting the political obligations of EU membership.

The close polling suggests neither side has yet secured a decisive advantage.

Why Is the Arctic Important to the Vote?

The referendum is taking place against a backdrop of growing geopolitical competition in the Arctic.

Iceland occupies a strategically important position between North America and Europe.

It sits along the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom gap, commonly known as the GIUK gap, a critical North Atlantic maritime corridor.

The area has long been important for monitoring Russian naval movements between the Arctic and the North Atlantic.

Iceland is also a NATO member despite having no standing army of its own.

That makes its strategic location particularly important to the security architecture of the North Atlantic.

What Would Iceland Mean for the EU?

For the European Union, Iceland’s potential membership would have significance beyond economics.

It would expand the EU’s presence in the Arctic at a time when the region is becoming increasingly important to major powers.

Russia, the United States and other countries are paying greater attention to Arctic shipping routes, natural resources and military positioning.

Iceland could therefore give the EU a stronger institutional and geopolitical foothold in the North Atlantic and Arctic region.

Its accession could also be relatively straightforward compared with some other countries seeking EU membership.

Unlike Ukraine and several Western Balkan states, Iceland already has close economic and institutional links with Europe and would require fewer major reforms to align with EU rules.

Could Iceland Join the EU Quickly?

Potentially, but the process would still take years.

A “yes” vote would only begin negotiations.

Iceland would then have to negotiate the terms of membership before citizens could vote again on the final agreement.

The second referendum could potentially take place in 2028.

This means that even if Icelanders vote in favour of talks on August 29, actual EU membership would remain uncertain.

The referendum is therefore the beginning of a political process rather than its conclusion.

Analysis: Why Does Iceland’s EU Vote Matter?

Iceland’s referendum is ultimately about more than whether a small North Atlantic country should join a political and economic bloc.

It reflects a wider debate over sovereignty, economic resilience and strategic alignment in an increasingly contested Arctic.

For supporters, EU membership offers economic stability, greater influence over European decisions and closer integration with a bloc that could provide Iceland with additional leverage against larger powers.

For opponents, the same process represents a potential loss of national control over fisheries, monetary policy and important economic decisions.

The strategic dimension is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

Iceland’s location makes it disproportionately important to North Atlantic security despite its small population and lack of a conventional military. As competition involving Russia, the United States and European countries intensifies in the Arctic, Iceland’s relationship with the EU could acquire greater geopolitical significance.

The vote also highlights a fundamental dilemma facing smaller states: whether greater integration with a larger political bloc provides more security and economic strength than the sovereignty it requires them to surrender.

The August referendum will not answer that question definitively.

It will determine whether Icelanders are willing to begin the conversation.

If voters choose “yes,” Iceland could move toward its most significant geopolitical realignment in more than a decade. If they choose “no,” the country may once again put EU membership aside and preserve its distinctive position outside the bloc while remaining closely connected to Europe.

With information from Reuters.

THE most beautiful buildings in the entire world have been named and one surprising estate from the UK has made the list.

However, if you want to visit the pretty British attraction book to go as soon as possible is set to close for a multi-million pound revamp.

The Barbican in London has taken second place to India‘s grand Taj Mahal as Time Out’s 26 ‘most beautiful buildings’ to see in 2026.

The free-to-visit landmark attracts over a million visitors each year and is set to undergo a huge upgrade to save it falling into disrepair.

At the estimated cost of £231million, The Barbican will upgrade its indoor rainforest in its Conservatory which is home to 1,500 species of plant.

Also included in the plans is to protect Barbican’s brutalist foyers and lakeside terrace.

PARK UP

Epic UK holiday parks with waterparks, theme parks & Spoons pubs from £3pp a night

HOL YES

Cheapest summer for holidays in YEARS – with August breaks still on sale for £188pp

Outside in the courtyard, the pond will be revamped to stop water leaking onto the Metropolitan Line below – there will be new fountains and seating outside too.

The visitor destination is already free to visit, and this will continue once the revamp is complete.

The refurbishment project is set to start in 2028 when it will close until 2029.

The Barbican was pipped to the post by the Taj Mahal, a picture-perfect landmark in India built in the 1600s – it’s not hard to see why it got top spot.

Coming in third place was the Hallgrímskirkja in Iceland which is a church standing at 244 feet.

Not only is it a place of worship, but it has an observation tower where visitors can get incredible city views.

In Europe, other honourable mentions go to the Sagrada Familia in Spain which is very near completion after 140 years.

The outside of Gaudi’s basilica was completed in February, but there is some work still to do before it’s officially finished.

The Twist in Norway came in twelfth position and is a spectacular art gallery that is also used as a bridge.

It’s part of the Kistefos Sculpture Park and sits across the Ranselva River.

Another UK building did make the list coming in at number 21 – and it’s the Maggie’s Centre at St James’s Hospital in London.

The publication described it as having “mushroom-shaped forms grow from the floors to form the tiered roofs, and the stems are deep enough to contain loos and lifts.

“The space is decorated with mostly natural materials – think cork-topped tables, resin floors and cascading potted plants.”

Some more classic monuments and structures on the list include The Pyramids of Giza in Egypt, the Pantheon in Italy and Ad-Dayr in Petra, Jordan.

Colombia‘s impressive Santuario de Las Lajas comes in at number 19.

The enormous basilica sits on a bridge over the Guáitara River – it has been a pilgrimage destination since the eighteenth century and now gets up to 900,000 visitors each year.

Here’s the full list of Time Out’s ‘world’s 26 most beautiful buildings to see in 2026’…

1. Taj Mahal, India
2. The Barbican Estate, UK
3. Hallgrímskirkja, Iceland
4. Sagrada Familia, Spain
5. Museum SAN, South Korea
6. The Pyramids of Giza, Egypt
7. Fallingwater, USA
8. Ad-Dayr (The Monastery), Petra, Jordan
9. Fondation Louis Vuitton, France
10. Trinity College Library, Ireland
11. Great Mosque of Djenné, Mali
12. The Twist, Norway
13. Nasir Ol Molk Mosque, Iran
14. Jatiya Sangsad Bhaban, Bangladesh
15. Pantheon, Italy
16. Palmenhaus at Schönbrunn Palace, Austria
17. Bát Tràng Ceramic Community House, Vietnam
18. Museum at Eldridge Street, USA
19. Santuario de Las Lajas, Colombia
20. Museum of Old and New Art (MONA), Australia
21. Maggie’s Centre (St James’s Hospital), UK
22. Baháʼí Temple of South America, Chile
23. Futuna Chapel, New Zealand
24. National Holocaust Monument, Canada
25. Komera Leadership Centre, Rwanda
26. Enryaku-ji, Japan

Glaciers aren’t stationary. Immense and imposing, formed through the downward trajectory of water from mountains as it collects and freezes, they have always moved. Now, however, they’re leaving. The demise of glaciers is a fact inherent in all the bad news about the effects of climate change on what once seemed permanent. But for Icelanders, whose connection to glaciers is ancient and mythic, our human epoch has become an extended hospice for the landscape of their lives.

Somehow, though, Sara Dosa’s documentary on this matter, “Time and Water,” avoids playing like a funeral in waiting. Built around Icelandic writer Andri Snær Magnason’s voiced lamentations on a vanishing frozen world, along with archival footage of his family, it’s no simple howl of grief, even when it takes us to a publicly held memorial in 2019 for Iceland’s Ok glacier, the first such “death” diagnosis in the country’s history. Rather, Dosa’s film is a meditation on change — both the kind that we accept with a heavy heart and something more general. “Time and Water” is a curiously vibrant elegy, teeming with appreciation for the intimate majesty that is all life, generational and geologic.

Dosa has finessed this emotional-meets-elemental space before in her Academy Award-nominated 2022 documentary “Fire of Love,” about married volcanologists Katia and Maurice Krafft. That was a wonderfully eccentric romance forged in molten lava. Here, she’s in a collaboration of sorts with her subjects, both human and elemental. Magnason’s opening narration over spectacular footage of glaciers — up close and from far away — gently informs us that we’re watching a time capsule, one where the bonds of family and environment are intertwined.

We learn how Iceland’s glaciers, essentially rivers of varying pace, begat their unique ecosystems, but also how they provided the breathtaking terrain upon which Magnason’s grandparents Hulda and Árni fell in love. (Grandma Hulda was the first woman to fly in Iceland, itself a very cool fact.) The onset of dementia in Árni spurs his grandson to consider what’s lost when the markers of memory depart. “Time and Water” touches on the epic verse called rimurs, passed down via chanted song by Icelandic women, their descriptive, sorrowful tales like dispatches from previous ages.

“Tone poem” is an overused term in cinema, but the humbling “Time and Water,” graced with a playful, atmospheric Dan Deacon score, earns that distinction. Naturally, it helps that you can never tire of all the air-crisped glacier imagery, captured digitally and in 16mm. Folded into the cozy slide-show vibe of Magnason’s home videos and the carefully chosen archival footage, the movie plays like a scrapbook portrait in which home just happens to boast the grandest of backyards.

How much longer will Icelanders enjoy it? The glaciers are predicted to be gone within 200 years. That’s an eternity or a drip, depending on whose survival we’re talking about. Still, “Time and Water” collapses the notion that we are somehow separate from these ancient, essential formations: an encouraging hello to the future from inside a sobering goodbye.