A little more on French voters' decisive rejection of the EU constitution. The New York Times has a pretty good story on the referendum, which includes these paragraphs:

At the polling place at the Karl Marx primary school in downtown Bobigny, a working-class suburb of Paris, by contrast, there was no sense that Europe's future hinged on the constitution.

With 18 percent unemployment and a large ethnic Arab and African population, 72 percent of the voters there said no.

Bernard Birsinger, the suburb's Communist mayor, accused Mr. Chirac of fear-mongering and dissembling when he predicted political and economic doom for France if the country rejected the constitution.

"We are already in a Europe of unemployment and regression," said Mr. Birsinger, adding, "We know that the destiny of France is not threatened."

I agree. The destiny of any country that names elementary schools after Karl Marx was sealed long ago.

The Sun is unabashedly jubilant:

Tony Blair, who is on holiday in Italy, will face the task of dealing with the fallout from the French vote when Britain takes over the EU presidency on July 1.

Before that, EU leaders will hold emergency talks on the treaty during a summit in Brussels.

Government insiders predict that a decision on the Constitution’s future will be made during Britain’s presidency in the autumn.

They admit there is no obvious way to save the Constitution in its current form now that it has been knifed in France.

Brussels chiefs fear the entire EU project will now be thrown into chaos.

I'm afraid that prediction is too optimistic.

The London Times takes a more cynical, and I suspect more accurate view:

Yet it is hard to claim that the practical implications of losing the constitution will be huge. The EU will muddle on, as it always has done, implementing only what it chooses rather than what it notionally has agreed. Even if the constitution were ratified, the EU would still ignore bits of it.

You have only to look at the scrapping, in effect, over the past 15 months, of the financial rules supposed to govern the eurozone. Although these are a central part of the constitution, France and Germany have found them inconveniently tough. They have now been watered down until they are almost meaningless.

If the constitution fails, as now seems likely, the EU will still salvage the parts it most needs (such as the replacement of a rotating presidency).

One interesting aspect of the referendum is the extent to which France's electoral map resembles that of the U.S.--a sea of red with a few urban islands of blue, like Paris and Lyon, which would seem to correspond reasonably well to American "liberalism." I don't know enough about French politics, however, to say why Brittany is blue:

There seems to be little doubt that the Dutch will vote "No" next week; Denmark is scheduled to hold a referendum in the fall. Great Britain is planning a referendum, but apparently it may yet be cancelled. What it all means politically, I don't think anyone knows. But the underlying reality is that "old" Europe is in deep trouble, and cannot be saved by adopting resolutions and approving documents.

Posted by John at 11:21 PM  |    |