EUROPEAN FEARS:Tension in Brussels at the prospect of a No vote has been building for some time, writes Jamie Smyth, European Correspondent
DIPLOMATS AND journalists gathered in Luxembourg yesterday to follow discussions between ministers on energy policy suddenly found themselves focused on a very different topic.
All talk turned to events in Ireland and the Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll showing the Lisbon Treaty referendum headed for rejection.
Reporters scheduled to write about the unbundling of electricity networks began filing stories about the real prospect of a No vote in Ireland.
Back in Brussels the daily press briefing at the European Commission was also dominated by colleagues asking about the consequences of an Irish No for Europe.
But the tension has been building for some time.
One anxious official at the European Commission grabbed me on the way into the daily press briefing this week seeking news about the latest opinion poll. By the time I'd updated him about the latest twist and turn in the referendum campaign he had chain-smoked three cigarettes and mentioned the word "political crisis" at least six times.
President of the commission José Manuel Barroso recently warned "we will all pay a price for it, Ireland included" if voters reject the treaty on June 12th.
Exactly what that price would be has not been spelled out yet. Privately, most diplomats say that a No vote would weaken the EU by suggesting that member states are incapable of agreeing how to reform the union. It would also create huge tensions between states eager to forge ahead with integration and Ireland, which would be blamed for destabilising the union.
"One country cannot hold up 26 member states," said one French diplomat over lunch recently. Asked why there had been little talk of throwing France out of the union when it rejected the EU constitution, the diplomat replied adroitly that Nicolas Sarkozy had fixed this by coming up with the idea of a mini-treaty in the shape of the Lisbon Treaty.
An Irish No would be a disaster for the upcoming French presidency of the union, which is due to start in July. Paris has an ambitious legislative agenda and wants to oversee the appointment of several top EU jobs. All this would be placed on hold if the treaty is rejected, ruining Sarkozy's opportunity to shine on the European stage.
A feature of the "referendum panic" that is currently gripping Brussels is the difficulty in persuading anyone to go on the record and speak openly about the Irish vote. Memories of the French and Dutch votes against the EU constitution are still etched in diplomats' minds and after seven years of drafting new EU treaties no one wants Lisbon to fail.
"People are afraid comments will be taken out of context in the heat of a referendum campaign," explained one commission official. There is also a natural reluctance among member states to be seen to issue any public threat before the Irish vote next week.
Even at official press conferences senior EU officials blanch at the sight of an Irish journalist with their hand raised. "I can't answer any questions about Lisbon," pleaded Alexander Weis, chief executive of the European Defence Agency recently when The Irish Times and RTÉ turned up to ask about Irish neutrality.
These jitters are not confined to officials. One analyst at a prominent think tank recently insisted in going "off the record" to discuss some of the consequences that would result from an Irish No vote.
Fears of upsetting Irish voters have been alive in Brussels for months. Irish diplomats have co-operated closely with the commission to delay sensitive legislative proposals and debates on issues ranging from tax to budget reform. The European Council, the body that represents member states in Brussels, has also warned its officials and member states not to begin debating how to implement the treaty before it is ratified in Ireland.
Tension among Irish officials in Brussels is also palpable. At a recent embassy reception Ireland's Ambassador to the EU, Bobby McDonagh, made an impassioned speech about the benefits of the union and offered a toast to "the truth".
It was no coincidence that earlier that week wild claims about the loss of an Irish veto over taxation and World Trade Organisation deals had been peddled by the No campaign: not to mention the claims that a Yes vote would introduce abortion, euthanasia and the death penalty.
It is small wonder that the Irish diplomats and even journalists in Brussels are nervous as the current climate of fear could quickly turn to anger if EU reform is stalled. One British colleague has already helpfully offered to lend me her full body armour in the event of a No vote. "We Brits have to wear it regularly in Brussels," she said, noting that Britain is regularly the bad boy of Europe. I'll decide next week whether to put it on.