After the No vote: European voices

Here, readers from EU member states react to the fallout from the Irish Republic's No vote and debate what decisions they think EU leaders should take on Europe's future.

Read Irish voters' reaction to the referendum result

CLAUDINE VAN GASSELT, FINANCIAL MANAGER, MOUGINS, FRANCE

I don't see why Irish voters should have the power to stop this treaty from being ratified.

After all, they are a very small minority, just three million voters out of 500 million, across 27 EU member states.

It was unfair and ungrateful of Ireland to vote No. Like here in France and the Netherlands previously, people voted No for all the wrong reasons.

I voted Yes in the French vote in 2005 and my husband, who is Dutch, also voted Yes in the Netherlands because we realised its importance for the future of the EU.

The Irish voters' voices should be heard and acknowledged but we must realise that the No voters in Ireland voted on local and domestic issues, such as rising oil prices, which is wrong when there are important wider European issues at stake.

So, we have to continue and I think EU leaders at this week's summit will encourage the nations who have yet to ratify the treaty to do so.

The process does not stop after the No vote in Ireland. The treaty should be simplified and presented to the Irish people again.

If they vote No in a second referendum then I think it is time to put in place a two-speed Europe, with Ireland to one side.

Ireland could end up being very isolated and I feel its image has certainly been damaged by all of this.

RELTON CORY, 55, BUSINESSMAN, COPENHAGEN, DENMARK

I think the Lisbon Treaty is dead and buried. I have empathy with the Irish voters over their position, as we here in Demark rejected the Maastricht Treaty in a previous referendum.

However, the whole situation over Lisbon is so muddled, whereas with Maastricht it was more clear-cut.

The only solution I see for Ireland is similar to Denmark's after its No vote, when it was offered a number of opt-outs, such as exemption from the euro currency and military obligations.

Lisbon just seems to be a patch-up of previous treaties and constitutions which were rejected here, in France and in the Netherlands.

It was already the EU's Plan B, so where do we go from here? There is no Plan C.

I think at this week's summit, EU leaders will simply play for time. They will probably now enter into a period of contemplation, which may take two to three years to figure out where they go next.

However, the longer that goes on, the bigger the danger of populations becoming more negative towards them.

That's where many of the problems lie - EU leaders seem so removed. I have no idea what Lisbon does for me personally.

If they choose to push on with the treaty regardless, that would just reinforce the perception that they are not democratic and are out of touch with what the European people want.

IOANNIS BRILAKIS, 30, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, THESSALONIKI, GREECE

Europe cannot progress further without being united.

It is weak as long as the current system of decision-making exists, where everyone has to agree on anything in order for it to go through. So, although some elements of the Lisbon Treaty concern me, I agree with it in general.

Right now the EU is powerless because of the way it is structured. It needs a system like the US in order to be able to compete in the global market with the likes of the US and India.

Every country has the right to do what it wants, so if you don't want to participate, that's fine. Let those who want to move forward do so and let the rest stay isolated.

The only way for the No voters to realise their mistake is to leave them behind so that they can eventually see what they are missing out on.

It is unfair and disrespectful for everyone else who ratified the treaty to stop just because a small part of the EU disagrees.

I see a two-speed Europe developing after Ireland's No vote.

I think EU leaders won't really do anything decisive at this week's summit, however.

The best thing for them would be to wait for a few months, and then allow for this two-speed Europe to take shape.

Those countries who choose to opt in will benefit militarily, for example, while those, such as Ireland - if it chooses to opt out altogether - will not.

I would love to see the EU pick up the tab for the military operations which Greece is involved in.

If other countries think they should not have to contribute towards that, they need to look at the larger picture. If something happens to one of their neighbours, it will eventually affect them.

HEINER MERZ, 45, LECTURER, STUTTGART, GERMANY

I supported the Irish people in their No vote last week.

I am opposed to the continued expansion of the EU and the continued effort to establish a federal Europe.

The EU was originally a good idea but it is too monstrous now.

I am annoyed at the ridiculous reaction of EU, and German, leaders to the No vote.

Their arrogance is offensive and they seem to be saying "that's their problem and we will press ahead regardless".

Their aim is to push this through and they don't care about the interests and democratic will of the people of Europe.

I am opposed to the idea of a federal, centralised Europe with an EU president, which is included in this treaty.

For me, the treaty is dead and should be scrapped altogether, but European leaders will not acknowledge this, which makes me very pessimistic about this summit.

I think they will persuade Ireland to put it to a vote again.

What they should do is concentrate on what made the EU effective in the first place - economic and trade ties between European countries.

Interviews by Stephen Fottrell