Charlemagne. The noose tightens

As the process of ratifying the European Union constitution gets under way, the pressure on Britain increases

WHEN Tony Blair signed the European Union's constitutional treaty at a ceremony in Rome in October, his face bore the tight-lipped smile of a man signing his own political death warrant. Mr Blair has promised that Britain will hold a referendum on the constitution, probably early in 2006. This week the British cabinet agreed that the question should be a simple yes or no one. But the polls suggest that British voters will say no. If that happens, Mr Blair, who once promised to put his country “at the heart of Europe”, might find that instead he became the prime minister who presided over a fatal rupture in Britain's relationship with the EU - and he might well have to resign.

Like many a condemned man, Mr Blair is hoping for a last-minute reprieve. If he cannot turn around British opinion, perhaps one of the other ten countries that have promised to hold a referendum might help by rejecting the constitution first? But such hopes have taken a knock now that the French Socialist Party has decided to campaign for a yes in France's referendum. This decision makes it far more likely that the French will vote in favour of the constitution when their referendum is held early next summer. Polls point to a strong French yes.

This news will have come as a bitter blow to Mr Blair. As one senior (and sardonic) German diplomat puts it, “both Britain and France secretly hope that the other country will reject the constitution, although publicly they both have to say they want the other to vote in favour.” The argument is that, for the British, a French no would mean that Britain avoided the danger of isolation in Europe, and might also kill off a document that they never really wanted in the first place. For the French, a British no would mean that Britain was pushed to the margins of the EU (or even out of the door altogether), giving France an opportunity to reassert its traditional leading role in Europe.

This game of double-bluff over the referendums is part of a battle royal between Britain and France for influence over the EU that has been running for some years. Each country has its flagship policy. For the British, it is enlargement to take in new members. Enlargement has the virtue, as Downing Street sees it, of making the EU simultaneously more liberal, more Atlanticist, more English-speaking and less open to control by a Franco-German axis. For precisely these reasons, the French have been deeply wary of enlargement. Instead their flagship policy has been to create a political union in Europe, through such measures as a single currency and, now, an EU constitution. The French hope that political deepening in Europe will serve their national interests by creating a new global power - under the benevolent leadership, naturally, of France and Germany.

Over the past couple of years, both these policies have advanced in parallel. The EU was duly enlarged to take in ten new members, mostly from central Europe, last May. Just as the British had hoped, the new 25-member EU is increasingly doing its business in English, and is more inclined to take a British line on economic and foreign policy. But even as enlargement was proceeding, so was the French-backed project to give Europe its first constitution. The convention that prepared the first draft was chaired by Valery Giscard d'Estaing, a former French president, and the constitution embraces many ideas that are dear to the French, such as the creation of a legally binding Charter of Fundamental Rights, and a commitment to work towards a “common defence policy” for the EU.

Even so, the French did not get everything they wanted. As Laurent Fabius, a former prime minister who led the Socialist group that wanted to reject the constitution, declared, there is less “social Europe” in the document than the French would have liked. France has also had to swallow some reforms to the EU's voting system that will dilute its power. But a decisive majority of Socialist Party members has rejected this Fabiusien gloom and backed the constitution. That puts the pressure back on to Britain - and raises the deliciously ironic prospect (from a French point of view) that Mr Blair's government might one day have to leave the enlarged EU that it has done so much to create.

To encourage the others

Mr Blair can still hope for a last-minute reprieve. The French may now be more likely to vote in favour of the constitution, but the Dutch, who vote next spring, are wobbling. The notion of further Muslim immigration is deeply unpopular in the Netherlands after recent events. But the constitution increases EU powers over immigration, as well as making it impossible for any EU member country unilaterally to withdraw from the international convention on asylum. A Dutch no might not deal the constitution as fatal a blow as a French one - but it would be a big shock, given the status of the Netherlands as one of the six founders of the EU. Denmark, Poland and the Czech Republic, all of which are planning referendums on the constitution, also have strong Eurosceptic voices at home, so any of them might yet vote no. Collectively, they would give Mr Blair helpful cover. But unfortunately for him, sentiment in all three countries seems instead to be moving in the direction of saying yes to the constitution. The prospect of British isolation as the only naysayer looms ever larger.

Yet the British could still play an enlargement card. Next week's EU summit is likely to take a big step towards the eventual admission of Turkey - a policy that is deeply unpopular in France. The French government is worried that the prospect of Turkish entry could poison their referendum campaign, even though they have promised a separate vote before Turkey is let in. This week, Michel Barnier, the French foreign minister, told Brussels-based journalists that “if there is a link between Turkey and the constitution, we will lose the referendum. It is as simple as that.” Those words may give Mr Blair hope. Not that he would dream of saying so in public, of course.

Commentary feature which says that both France and Britain hope secretly that the other rejects the European Constitution in the referendums planned.

• Primary Source