Skepticism concerning the European Union's first constitution in France is so widespread that most now believe next month's referendum will get a resounding no from the French people. But now, it seems, the constitution could face a serious challenge in a place where it was least expected -- Germany, where a renegade politician with Bavaria's conservative Christian Social Union is doing his best to stop the government's planned mid-May ratification.

On Thursday, Peter Gauweiler of the CSU, the sister to the country's main opposition party, the Christian Democratic Union, submitted a petition to the country's highest court, asking it to rule that a national referendum be held on the issue. "The Bundestag cannot give away more rights to the EU than it has itself," Gauweiler said Thursday. "Such a far-reaching constitutional law can only be based on a referendum of the German people." Members of the CDU took pains on Thursday to distance themselves from Gauweiler, saying the majority in the CDU and CSU would vote in favor of the constitution.

The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung lashes out at Gauweiler for his attempt at slowing the constitution's ratification. "Gauweiler is not concerned about more democratic legitimacy in the EU constitution or a far-reaching and open debate," the paper writes. "He is calling for a referendum to show the how dramatic he believes the situation is -- because the constitution will apparently undermine all of our state institutions." But the paper says Gauweiler's petition is "unfounded" in every way. For even after the constitution is approved, all of Germany's institutions will still be in place -- its own constitution, the parliament and German state will all be the same. "There can be no talk of a new founding of the EU," it concludes, "otherwise the governments of France and Britain would never have signed the treaty."

Meanwhile, the center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung takes a more critical approach to the government's position of ratifying the constitution without putting a vote up to the people. The EU constitution, the editorial by Heribert Prantl argues, will be difficult to reconcile with Germany's own constitution, and that it says is only one of Brussels' many democratic deficiencies. "One has to have confidence," the paper writes, ironically parroting what governments in Europe constantly tell their citizens about the EU. "Things will turn out fine and one must not disturb the EU's development and growth." Someday the EU will become democratic, someday it will become constitutional and someday the people of Europe will love it. "Someday the European Parliament will become a real parliament. Someday there will be separation of powers and a European constitutional court which its citizens can also turn to. Someday Europe will have a basic law that is as strong as Germany's constitution -- but who knows how much that will actually be worth if a much weaker EU constitution goes into effect?" European law, it concludes, violates every national law -- including Germany's constitution -- at least as it is presented in this constitution. The two most recent German leaders, Helmut Kohl and Gerhard Schroeder, he notes, have argued "this may not be optimal ... but it's better than disrupting European development." Yeah right, he says. The big decision for the Constitutional Court now, he argues is this: "How long, Europe, do you intend to abuse our patience?" But the editorialist doesn't have much faith in the court paving the way for a referendum. "The Constitutional Court judges will at most be able to evade Gauweiler's petition by using tricks," he writes, "but it shouldn't try to. The time for tricks is over."

With the latest poll in France showing that 58 percent of voters will oppose the EU constitution in May's referendum, the term "Plan B" is being whispered in Brussels with increasing frequency. Jean-Claude Juncker, prime minister of Luxembourg, which currently holds the rotating EU presidency, wants other European countries to proceed with the ratification process, even if French voters give the dreaded non. But British diplomats are saying London will likely drop its planned referendum if the French reject the constitution. If both countries fail to ratify the document, it could pose a serious threat to the EU's future.

"The EU hardly has any good options in the event of a failure of ratification," writes the center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. The editorial penned by Nikolas Busse notes that even without the constitution, a number of institutions it envisions could still be created. They include the solidarity clause in the event of a terrorist attack, the creation of a European Defense Agency and the creation of an EU foreign service. However, these institutions would have been greatly strengthened by the fundamental changes to the architecture of the EU foreseen in the constitution, and without it they would be greatly disadvantaged. Without the constitution, the piece concludes, the EU has three options. Maintain the current Treaty of Nice, which was a product of national interests and is disliked by most member states. Try to renegotiate the constitution, though that would be opening up a whole new can of worms. The third option, which is potentially the most explosive, would be for the constitution to go into effect in the countries which have ratified it. The problem is, they might use it to exit the European Union and create a new one based on the constitution. Countries like Britain and France would most certainly not join them. "If one of the major EU member states were excluded, the geopolitical consequences would be considerable," Busse continues. "An EU without Britain would be significantly weakened," he concludes, "an EU without France is hardly conceivable."