The future of the EU hangs in the balance as next week, heads of state and government of the 27 member states are expected to rubber stamp the Reform Treaty during an informal summit in Lisbon on 18 and 19 October. But the ghosts which have haunted the now defunct Constitutional Treaty, seem to be back from the dead. And this should come as no surprise, for many argue that in essence, the new treaty is just a play on words on the rejected EU Constitution or a European Constitution by any other name.

The new treaty in fact retained most of the key items found in the Constitution. These include the double majority rule for Council decisions (55 per cent of member states and 65 per cent of EU’s population needed for a proposed EU legislation to pass by qualified majority) which, however, will only start applying as from 2014 with an extra transition until 2017 due to fierce Polish opposition, the decision to extend qualified majority voting to 40 policy areas including those related to asylum, immigration, police cooperation and judicial co-operation in criminal matters, the permanent Council Presidency for two-and a half years, the setting up of the post of High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (instead on the idea of establishing an EU Foreign Minister), reducing the number of Commissioners from 27 to 15 by 2014, establishing a single legal personality for the EU, strengthening national parliaments and introducing an exit clause making it possible for members to leave the EU.

So what exactly was dropped? First and foremost is the “Constitution” label, which has always been held partly-responsible for its failure. There is also no longer any reference to the EU symbols and anthem and the full text of the Charter of Fundamental Rights was replaced by a short version with the same legal values, but which is not legally binding in the UK while Poland has asked to follow suit. The reference to “free and undistorted” competition as the EU’s goals was also removed on French insistence.

Otherwise it is the same treaty with some minor new inclusions such as references to new challenges to climate change and energy solidarity and applying new opt-in and out provisions to some new policy provisions.

So it is not surprising that some of the past problems are fast resurfacing and the new Treaty, whose outlines were agreed upon during a landmark EU summit on 21-23 June 2007, could still face a bumpy ride despite that Commission President José Manuel Barroso stated that the Treaty reflects a consensus amongst the EU-27.

As the text of the reform treaty was revealed in all EU languages on 5 October, Poland, for instance, has already threatened to reject it on arguments that it fails to satisfy its demands for stronger voting rights. The country feels that the treaty does not reflect its strong position as one of the six largest EU member states and with general elections looming, the situation could become even more complicated. Poland for instance wants to reinstate the so-called “Ioannina Compromise” which allows a country to significantly delay a key decision even if it does not have enough votes to block it.

And even if an agreement is reached, the Treaty may still face an uphill task when it comes to ratification. UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown for instance is already under pressure to hold a referendum on arguments that it has been promised for the Constitution and given that the new Treaty is very identical, a referendum should still be held. And analysts are already anticipating a resounding “No” in the UK.

The governments of other countries such as The Netherlands, the Czech Republic, Portugal and Denmark are also already under pressure to call a referendum. And while parliamentary ratification in countries such as Germany, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Hungary, Sweden, Latvia, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta, should not be problematic, there could be more complications in the case of Belgium and Poland.

It will be also interesting to see whether French President Sarkozy will be able to resist calls for a referendum. If he does not, here too one can anticipate a rough ride for the new Reform Treaty considering that the French electorate, together with the Dutch, voted “No” for the Constitution, in 2005.

So the future of the EU is again in the balance, but it is still too early to judge. At this stage, one hopes it shall not plunge itself into another long and painful stalemate.

Ronald Mizzi, Research Analyst, Forum Malta fl-Ewropa