France’s rejection of the European Union Constitution is likely to throw the EU into an unprecedented crisis. Last Sunday, some 55 per cent of French voters said “no” to the EU Constitution, an even bigger victory for the “no” camp than had been anticipated.

Apart from the internal political implications that the overwhelming victory for the “no” camp has had, and will continue to have, on France, Sunday’s ballot will also have an effect on the future of Europe. The negative feeling will continue to be enhanced if Holland, as is widely expected, votes in the same way tomorrow. It is likely that the French vote will be a boost for the Dutch “no” camp, which is already strong.

There are many who say that the French voted against the ratification of the Constitution not only because they are against it, but because they also wanted to show their dissatisfaction with the way things are being run in their country. They might have chosen the wrong way of doing this, but ultimately what counts is that they said “Non”.

The EU must now take stock of the situation and will have to see what direction it will take. The fact that there was no “Plan B” – the EU was confident that all the member states would ratify the Constitution – complicates matters further. It will take some time before the EU recovers from such a blow from one of its founder members.

For the Constitution to stand, all 25 member states must ratify it within a period of two years. Before Friday, nine countries had already done so, in different forms. Some chose the national parliament – as Malta will do in the coming weeks – others preferred the popular vote, as France did.

Technically, the Constitution can still be ratified by the French Parliament, but given the circumstances, that scenario is unlikely.

The French rejection means that, for the first time, a large founder member of what is now the European Union has voted against the process of European integration. If, when the Constitution was signed last year, anyone thought that one or more countries might not ratify it, few were those who thought France would have been the first.

The French voters’ defeat of plans to bind the 25 EU members more tightly together is now threatening to set back plans for broader integration by years. But it was also a humiliating blow to French President Jacques Chirac, and a rejection of the current French government’s policies.

The lack of a Constitution will not stop the EU from functioning. The existing Nice Treaty established that day-to-day business in Brussels can continue as usual.

But several questions have now been raised as a result of last Sunday’s French vote. Will France, traditionally one of the strongest nations in Europe, if not the world, retain its political clout in the EU after having failed to deliver the support of its people?

Will the EU continue with the ratification process of the Constitution, now that the French rejection means that it cannot come into force?

Will the French people be given a second chance? If so, what will the EU and France do to convince the French people to change their mind?

Will the “Non” vote affect the inclusion of Bulgaria and Romania as members of the EU? Will pre-accession negotiations with Turkey continue?

It seems that several other countries which still have to ratify the Constitution are keen to continue their internal process, irrespective of the French vote. Others, like Britain, are biding their time and only yesterday British Prime Minister Tony Blair said that it is still too early to say whether a referendum will be held in his country on the matter.