Headlines are screaming "Europe in Crisis" all because a handful of French nationals voted "non" to the ratification of the European Constitution. Or did they? Was this vote even about the wordy and complex 400-page document, which seeks to nominate Brussels as Europe's federalist beating heart?

For many voters their "non" was directed at their government for its failure to get the country's 11 percent unemployed back to work. Some oppose the EU's expansion plans concerned that Europe's richest nations will be drained propping up struggling newcomers.

Others fear the ubiquitous Polish plumber out to grab baguettes from the mouths of his French counterparts not to mention the hordes of Turks, they erroneously worry will one day beat down their doors intent on changing their very identity as their former President Valery Giscard d'Estaing has warned.

Those who did vote against the constitution per se, claimed it was too Anglo-Saxon (read in favor of Britain's interests) and a conduit for unwelcome globalization (read US free market policies) putting small businesses, local industries and farmers at risk.

Then there were the "no buts", committed EU supporters in favor of a constitution who want a revised constitution weighted in France's favor and a second referendum at some point in the future. The "no buts" may have seriously miscalculated however as they may not get another chance.

Nine out of the 25 EU member countries may have already signed up to the constitution but tomorrow the known-to-be-wavering and increasingly nationalistic Dutch will cast their ballots and fears are that fence sitters could be influenced by the decision of their fellow founding members, the French.

Furthermore, Britain may not now hold a referendum - planned for next year - because if one EU member opts out then it's either back to the drawing board to construct a watered-down constitution or, alternatively, the status quo will simply continue. So by next year there may not be a draft constitution in existence for Britain to consider.

One can almost hear the sigh of relief from Tony Blair, who despite his pro-EU fervor and self-avowed enthusiasm concerning the draft document, has failed to sell the package to many members of his own party let alone the electorate.

Indeed, a Sky News snap poll taken on Sunday shows almost 90 percent of Britons do not support the grandiose plan fearing the erosion of their sovereignty and are irritated by the perception of having to bend to Franco-German diktats over hours of work, holidays and the minimum wage.

On the other hand, Blair may not be entirely off the hook as EU officials are suggesting it should be business as usual when it comes to those members that haven't yet ratified the document. In other words, they want all EU countries to register a firm "yes" or "no" hoping that if the no camp is greatly outnumbered the dissenters could be embarrassed into going cap-in-hand before their wayward electorates to beg them to change their minds.

In any event, Blair's relief will no doubt be short lived as he is set to be the next rotating EU president and will be lumbered with the onerous task of cleaning up the fall out from the French rejection - and probably also the Dutch. European parliamentarians are already asking, "where do we go from here?" - a direction Blair will be responsible for mapping.

In the meantime, Blair has called for a period of reflection before deciding which way to jump. "Underneath all of this there is a more profound question which is about the future of Europe and, in particular, the European economy," he said. The shape of things to come may be clarified at a June 16 EU crises meeting.

Indeed, the markets have already spoken. Their knee-jerk reaction has seen the fall of French assets along with the euro against other currencies.

But is Europe truly in crisis? I think not. In fact, I fail to understand what all the fuss is about since the idea that the peoples of 25 countries speaking different languages, espousing a variety of social and political ideologies and enjoying varying levels of prosperity would all be persuaded to agree with one another during a comparatively short space of time is even more incredible than the idea that some of those peoples might suffer from cold feet.

When Britain's EU Commissioner Peter Mandelson said no single EU member should have a veto over a constitutional treaty of this sort, he was absolutely right. We shouldn't forget that a whopping 45 percent of French voters said "yes" to the proposed new face of Europe, so in this case why should just 10 percent have the power to affect the lives and livelihoods of other members of the union? There is surely something seriously wrong with this scenario.

It seems to me that patience is required on the part of EU member states. And there should be less of the "all or nothing" approach with more options provided. In the same way that some countries have opted out of the common currency the euro, why can't dissenters over the constitution opt out for a limited period? Perhaps then they can be given the ultimatum: Sign up or pack up and face isolation.

This would provide wiggle room for their interior political and economic climates to alter, hopefully for the better, and for prospective voters to gradually understand what the constitution is all about and why it is so politically and economically crucial that Europe stands united.

At the end of the day, a weak and fractured Europe does nobody any favors, especially in the face of rising superpowers and new and dangerous threats from rogue states.

Europeans would do well to reflect upon the reasons why the union was formed in the first place among the shards of a post-Nazi dominated continent. Hitler's decimation of Europe was a real crisis. A relatively small group of French nationals fending off an invasion of foreign plumbers doesn't stand comparison.

Enough negativity! It's time for Europe's leaders to put their heads together and sort this one out in a spirit of compromise and for Blair to rise to the challenge. He's long been a leader in search of a positive legacy. Gluing Europe back together could finally be it.