This week the Danes prepare to vote on the E.U.'s Amsterdam Treaty. Will they just say no to Europe?

By JAMES GEARY

he Amsterdam Treaty is not a document about which many people feel especially passionate. Except the Danes. The treaty, worked out last June, is a technical agreement that streamlines some European Union institutions and lays the groundwork for expansion to the east. But Denmark, one of only two member states (the other is Ireland) to put the matter to the people in a non-binding referendum, can still scupper Amsterdam's grand designs for a deeper, wider E.U. Because unanimity is required to get the treaty through, a Danish no this week could stop in its tracks the E.U.'s move towards ever closer union.

The Danes have been down this road before. In a June 1992 referendum, voters narrowly rejected the Maastricht Treaty, which called for the establishment of common foreign and security policies and inaugurated preparations for Economic and Monetary Union. A constitutional crisis was only averted by the negotiation of a clutch of Danish exemptions, including opt-outs from the pan-European defense provisions and the single currency. A year later, this new tailor-made treaty passed by a comfortable majority.

But the issues that brought out Danish recalcitrance then are still volatile now: fear of foreigners, an unwillingness to give up more sovereignty and a deep-seated suspicion of the Brussels bureaucracy. Says Drude Dahlerup, spokeswoman for the June Movement, which led the "No" campaign in 1992 and is doing so again, "The Amsterdam Treaty moves even more decisions from the individual countries to Brussels. More and more laws will be decided by civil servants and lobbyists--people not elected by the voters. It is our goal to reintroduce democracy and openness."

Others pushing for a no have less noble goals. The anti-immigration message of Denmark's nascent far-right political group, the Danish People's Party, is plastered on posters all over the country: "Vote Danish--Vote No." According to Kristian Thulesen Dahl, chairman of the party's parliamentary group, the Amsterdam Treaty will abolish frontiers and relegate Denmark to a mere province inside a united Europe. "By having border controls," he says, "we are able to halt thousands of people who have no legal right to enter Denmark. It's better to have a fence between neighbors." For many Danes, this brand of nationalism rings true. "Denmark has done perfectly well over the past 1,000 years without being controlled from outside," says William Hempel of Copenhagen. "Why should we let foreigners take over?" Ekstra Bladet, Denmark's biggest-selling tabloid newspaper, captured the no camp's mood when it proclaimed that "the erosion of Denmark as a nation-state must stop."

What would happen if the Danes said no? Few pundits or government officials are willing to contemplate that possibility. In 1992, the Maastricht Treaty had clear and definable provisions from which the Danes were able to pick and choose. The Amsterdam Treaty is more of an indivisible whole; it would be difficult to negotiate opt-outs. In a worst-case scenario, expansion plans could be put on hold and Denmark might even be forced to withdraw from the E.U. But few believe it will ever come to that. "This time the Union is much more in the driver's seat," says Peter Ludlow, director of the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels. "Before, the Danes were able to lay down their own conditions. That's not true anymore. [In the event of a no vote,] the likelihood is much greater that the Union will just say, 'Fine, we're going ahead anyway.'"

Danish Prime Minister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen is determined not to be left behind. And he is quick to dispel speculation that the country might drop out of the E.U. altogether if voters say no. "It would not be responsible to say we would pull out completely in case of a no," Rasmussen has said. "Our political influence and economic attractiveness would decline dramatically." Moreover, Rasmussen believes the "No" campaigners grossly underestimate the impact of a Danish rejection: "Many skeptical voters believe that...a no vote is [a vote] for the status quo. But that is a misunderstanding. It would put us in an extremely difficult position."

Businesses would feel the crunch first. Many Danish firms see enlargement as an open door to tempting new markets in the east. If that door slammed shut, the country's robust economic growth could falter. "We strongly hope for a yes," says Peter Assam, CEO of Unicon Beton, a Copenhagen-based concrete manufacturer with subsidiaries in Poland. "That will pave Poland's way into the E.U. With Poland in the E.U., we expect even stronger growth."

Going into the final few days of the campaign, opinion surveys show 45% in favor of the Amsterdam Treaty and 35% against, with 20% still undecided. While the yes vote is a comfortable 10% ahead, skeptics note that percentages were roughly the same just days before the first Maastricht vote. "If the 1992 no was a shock," says the June Movement's Dahlerup, "then a new no will be an electro-shock." The only trouble is, with the successful launch of the euro under its belt and growth finally starting to pick up, shock therapy is the last thing the E.U. needs.

--Reported by James L. Graff /Brussels and Ulla Plon / Copenhagen