The result of the referendum "will not threaten stability" in the country, points out daily Morgunbladid, which quotes a representative of the IMF in Reykjavik who says that "Icesave was not associated with the IMF programme" to bailout the country. At the height of the financial crisis in 2008, the International Monetary fund granted Iceland a loan of two billion dollars, the final installment of which will be paid out during the summer.

Both of the “no” votes follow on from the January 2009 announcement of the immediate resignation of the Icelandic government in the wake of mass protests by citizens who had lost their savings and their jobs. Commenting on the 9 April result in El País, Icelandic writer Guderburg Bergsson remarks: "Until now, Iceland was largely unknown to the general public in other countries, but as word of a ‘street’ rebellion that toppled the government continues to spread, it could become an example for larger corrupt countries.” He continues, "Money has taken over from ideology. The people in the streets lost the money with which they were hoping to buy a small part of the American dream, and that is why they rebelled violently."

"There has been no catastrophe in Iceland, but events have put a stop to the national megalomania, which resulted from isolation," concludes the writer, who believes that "the crisis has brought the country to its senses. Countries always have to be forced to come to their senses."

“Will this latest development (…) have an impact on Iceland’s accession to the European Union?” wonders Le Soir. In spite of “threats from London and The Hague to slow down or even block negotiations on the island’s entry into the EU,” the “huge ‘no vote’ (93%) in the referendum on the first version of the agreement in 2010 did not prevent the opening of accession negotiations in July” of last year.  Interviewed by the Belgian daily, political scientist Baldur Thorhallsson explains that the British, who responded angrily to the first  referendum, “were nonetheless accommodating, because they would like to have a new eurosceptic ally in the EU.”

Polling company director Olafur Gylfason points out that the Icelanders “draw a clear distinction between the Icesave affair and the issue of EU membership.”  Icelandic public opinion has changed significantly since the financial crisis, continues Le Soir. “Amid the initial panic, many people believed that Europe would provide a safeguard for the future of the island,” explains Gylfason,  but “they are less enthusiastic. Only 18% of the population judge the EU to be credible, and the fate of accession plans, which have divided the country’s centre-left government, will be determined by the very sensitive issue of fishing rights.

The ratings, which are supposed to evaluate the capacity of states to pay their creditors, are attributed by three large agencies – Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch – who share an oligopolistic market. In case you were wondering, these are the same agencies that failed to predict the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States, the consequences of which are now all too familiar. They were also a little slow to realise what was going on in Greece, though some of the blame for this must be shared by Athens, which had cooked its books to comply with the parameters for the single currency.

Today, the ratings agencies are weighing heavily on European nerves: a simple downgrade in their assessment of the creditworthiness of one of the "PIGS" (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) could result in the end of the euro. To maintain their ongoing level of apprehension, European readers have been invited to familiarise themselves with odd series of letters, which in the language of finance describe the level of risk for financial investors inherent in their countries' government bonds: AAA, AAB, BBB, BB+ and so on.

A final word of warning: these ratings are not to be confused with BHV, the acronym for Belgium's bilingual arrondissement of Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde, which is also enjoying a moment of glory in the media. At the end of last week, failure to reach agreement on the division of the borough – an issue that is the subject of major tension between Belgium's Flemish and Walloon communities – resulted in the fall of the government of Yves Leterme, which was supposed to assume the rotating presidency of the European Union in July.

 Gian Paolo Accardo

A week of air traffic bans did much to raise consciousness of our dependence on air travel. We also realized that certain regions, in particular in eastern Europe, are not sufficiently accessible by road and rail. And finally, we took note of the environmental gains – a reduction in noise pollution and CO2 emissions – prompted by the closing of European airspace. The development of a citizens' Europe is in part based on a means of transport that is polluting, non-egalitarian in as much as some of us are forced to use it because we have no alternative, and fragile – so fragile that even a cloud can result in the cancelation of a wide range of activities. If it is to fulfill its social, environmental and political aspirations, Europe should take this opportunity to rethink its transport model.

It could do more to develop a high speed rail network that extends across the entire continent, coordinate the activity of major national airports to rationalise and reduce the air traffic over our heads, and establish a European plan to promote the transport of air freight by rail or sea. In short, the ash cloud may have a silver lining, because it has revealed a host of areas where Europeans should be encouraged to work together to create a more stable and greener economy.

Eric Maurice

Icelanders will go to the polls on 6 March 2010 to vote on a referendum concerning the repayment of €3.8 billion owed to the UK and the Netherlands in the wake of Iceland's financial meltdown. Le Soir says the referendum is "likely to be rejected, given the hostility shown by the country's 320,000 inhabitants for a related law that barely passed Iceland's parliament in January. "There is no doubt that London and The Hague will be in no hurry to start membership talks if the referendum is voted down," says Le Soir.

“This could not have come at a worse time,” observes NRC, seeing as on 16 July the selfsame parliament voted in favour of EU accession talks. “So this country is liable to be a doubtful partner,” opines the Dutch paper. “No wonder Verhagen gave his opposite number Skarphedisson to understand, in not very diplomatic terms, that Iceland’s accession is out of the question if it fails to respect its financial obligations.”