Paris ? The dramatic French “no” to the European Union’s first constitution and indications the Netherlands will deliver the same verdict this week have European leaders scrambling to contain damage to the bloc’s unification project.

Is the historic charter, which needs to be ratified by all 25 EU nations, doomed?

French opponents of the document insist it can be altered to suit their tastes, and history suggests they may be right: In 1992, Denmark stunned the bloc by rejecting a landmark unification treaty, only to approve a revision a year later.

Yet prospects for salvaging the constitution – and the EU’s effort to become more of a global player – remain unclear.

The French ambivalence revealed by Sunday’s resounding defeat was captured by “no” voter Francois Denieul, who said the treaty was devised with only the bloc’s original core members in mind.

“Now we are so many countries in Europe that we need to define the new rules,” he said.

Which rules? And how? EU leaders and observers agree the constitution won’t be rewritten any time soon, if it is rejiggered at all.

“There will be no rerun in the foreseeable future,” said John Palmer, political director of the European Policy Center, a think tank based in Brussels, Belgium. “There is no prospect in the short term at anything that looks like a renegotiation.”

Clues about whether EU leaders can eventually muster the political will for charter revisions or a complete overhaul could come at a two-day summit of EU leaders in mid-June in Brussels.

“The treaty may not be dead, but it is gravely – possibly fatally – wounded,” Palmer said.

The rejection also was a severe blow to France’s government. President Jacques Chirac, who campaigned hard for the charter, was expected to announce a shake-up of his Cabinet on Tuesday.

The EU common currency, the euro, dropped below $1.25 to its lowest level against the dollar since October.

Nine countries – Austria, Hungary, Italy, Germany, Greece, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain – have ratified the constitution, and EU leaders vow the process will continue in other members despite France’s fierce “no.”

“When faced with difficulties, it is where we expect our politicians to show determination and vision to rally together for Europe,” said EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso.

Next up is the Netherlands, which holds a referendum Wednesday. Polls suggest the Dutch are at least as opposed as the French, and a defeat in another founding member of the EU could be a potential knockout punch for the treaty.

That vote is being closely watched in Britain, where “Euroskeptic” sentiment is even stronger than in France or the Netherlands. Prime Minister Tony Blair said Monday it was too early to tell if Britain would go ahead with a referendum on the constitution as planned, calling for a “time for reflection.”

EU leaders, who signed the constitution in October, contend it would streamline operations and decision-making and improve democratic accountability. It also would create an EU president and foreign minister, raising Europe’s profile on the global stage by giving it the ability to speak with one voice.

The constitution itself makes clear all EU members must ratify the text for it to take effect as planned by Nov. 1, 2006. But it also says EU leaders will discuss what to do if, by October 2006, four-fifths of member states have ratified the treaty but even one has “encountered difficulties” getting it accepted.

A key problem will be pinpointing exactly what Europeans do not like about the charter, and what minimal changes they would be willing to live with.

In France, the rejection was widely seen as a referendum on the direction Europe is taking as it tries to compete with the more cutthroat economies of the United States, China and, increasingly, India.

Many French voters appeared to use the referendum to vent frustration over their fears of losing their voice, identity and control, along with their generous social welfare system – objections that seemed to have little to do with the constitution.

Although a revision and a revote would be expensive, there is a clear precedent with the Danish experience on 1992’s Maastricht Treaty for a common currency and defense.

Just like the French on Sunday, the Danes cited concerns over surrendering sovereignty to what was then a 12-nation bloc known as the European Community.

In the end, though, all the Danes really did was put the brakes on the process: A year later, voters approved a revised treaty with clauses allowing it to initially stay out of the currency and defense cooperation. Britain also opted out of the common currency.

Giuliano Amato, a former Italian premier who helped draft the constitution, suggested some key provisions, including the creation of an EU foreign minister, be adopted separately.

“A boulder fell on the future of European policies because, like it or not, a France which says ‘no’ sets off an earthquake,” he said in an interview with the newspaper Corriere della Sera. “But the building, cracked, remains standing – it doesn’t collapse.”