German Chancellor Angela Merkel could hardly be more gung ho to revive the European Union constitution. The lengthy document has been buried in a shallow grave since summer 2005 when—after it was flatly rejected by the French and Dutch—the Continent was forced to pause and reflect on EU integration.

“The reflection pause is over,” announced Merkel last week, in a speech before the European Parliament (emphasis ours). “By June, we must reach a decision on what to do with the constitution.” For the 18 nations that have ratified the constitution and are itching for progress, Merkel’s enthusiasm is refreshing. But for a handful of other nations, the thought of reviving the constitution is stressful and unwelcome. Pro-European integration politicians at No. 10 Downing Street are especially unsettled.

In 2005, the British government sighed with relief when French and Dutch voters rejected the constitution. Leading up to that time, it was expected that if the issue went to referendum in England, the British people would vote strongly against signing the constitution. So when Paris and Amsterdam rejected it first, this saved Britain from having to conduct a referendum of its own and then receive blame for the failure of the constitution.

Merkel’s drive to revive the constitution is placing more pressure on the weakening government of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and renewing and intensifying the tension between Britain and the EU on the issue.

Blair faces a largely euroskeptic British public on one side and an EU president determined to solve the constitutional crisis on the other. He is being pressured to take a side. Downing Street’s days of coddling both sides of the Channel are drawing to a close; this debate is bringing the reality of Britain’s relationship with Europe to the fore. Does the British government reject the sentiment of its people and, in what would be political suicide, sell its soul to Europe? Or does it reject the invite from the mainland and choose to remain a sovereign isle?

Saying yes to the constitution is really only a theoretical option for the British government. For Britain to ratify the constitution it must first convince its people of the need to vote yes in a referendum. Such a task would be incredibly difficult. Mr. Blair’s government has already failed in such efforts over the past few years.

The other option for Blair is to pressure Merkel and the EU Parliament—including the 18 countries that have already ratified the constitution—to gut the current constitution and remodel it to meet British demands. Reuters reported last week that Britain could avoid going to referendum on the constitution if the document did not contain “elements of a constitutional nature” nor give Brussels “new powers.”

Is this likely? A constitution with no “elements of a constitutional nature”? A document produced by Brussels that would not give Brussels new powers? Do Blair and his government really think Merkel and the EU would make such drastic and foundational alterations?

When Chancellor Merkel said last week that the EU constitution must be resurrected, Prime Minister Blair’s office responded by suggesting that Brussels re-write the document in a way that could avoid the need to stage to referendum in Britain. “We think the best European Constitution is a simple constitution,” said a Blair spokesman. “The result of a simple constitution would be that we would not have to hold a referendum.”

It’s a bold request. How are Merkel and other European integrationists expected to respond? As Reuters sees it, the request sets Britain on a “collision course with Merkel.” London’s Telegraph agreed that this put Britain on “a collision course with Germany.” Britain is gradually isolating itself from the EU project. Eighteen countries have ratified the constitution, and now Chancellor Merkel is pushing to solve the issues that are preventing the others from doing the same. As the matter heats up in Europe’s political circles, it is becoming evident that Britain, owing to its position and influence within the EU, will be the ball and chain weighing down Angela Merkel from reaching her ambitions.

Watch for tension between Britain and the EU leadership to intensify.

Recent reports indicate that the Dutch are warming up to the idea of signing the constitution, although some comparatively minor concessions may need to be made. In France, the two leading candidates in this year’s national elections—Ségolène Royal of the Socialist Party and Nicolas Sarkozy from the center-right Union for a Popular Movement—both propose signing the constitution if specific concessions are granted. While euroskeptic sentiment pervades a few European nations (like France and the Netherlands), and will likely slow Merkel in achieving her goal of solving the EU constitutional crisis, no other large and influential nation within the EU opposes the constitution as staunchly and with as much vehemence as Britain.

Why?

Great Britain has had a longstanding relationship with the Continent. The nation is situated so close to the mainland that on a clear day the glistening white cliffs of Dover can be seen from the shores of northern France. Travel between Britain and Europe is simple and enjoyed regularly by large numbers of people. British and European societies overlap in a number of areas, such as their mutual love for soccer. In many people’s minds, Britain is a part of Europe, a European country. London is the seat of European finance. The history of trade and commerce between the two runs deep. In so many ways, Britain has a close and friendly relationship with Europe.

So why do an overwhelming majority of the British not want to become cogs in the Brussels machine? Why is it that a large portion of the British are skeptical about EU integration and unwilling for Britain to sign the constitution—which would mean signing over much of its sovereignty to Brussels?

The answers to these fundamental questions are more fascinating than you may imagine. The answers lie in the history of the Europeans and the history of Britain. The British are a vastly different people to the Europeans. Ever since the Protestant Reformation, Britain and the Continent has each been dominated and defined by a separate religion. The relationship between these peoples is dotted with intrigue, political turmoil, jealousy and deep-seated resentment. Britain is a tiny nation compared to the vast continent of Europe, yet Britain came to possess a globe-encompassing empire that grew immensely rich through its control over global commerce and trade. The Industrial Revolution began in Britain, even though Europe till that point was equally advanced.

Britain has been independent from Europe for more than 1,500 years. The English Channel—a watery protector of British independence—has saved the nation from invasion and military conquest multiple times. Roman galleys, a Spanish Navy, French and German warships—all have been crushed in the Channel’s unpredictable waters. Britain is a small island camped next door to a geographical superpower; yet Britain has remained independent, and been a superpower in its own right in every sense of the word. Why?

You can learn the answer to this intriguing question. As you do, you will also learn why Britain will never be a part of the great European force currently forming. We do not know exactly how Britain will leave the European Union. It is possible the British government will become fed up with the EU’s unwillingness to compromise with its demands, and resign itself to life outside of the united Continent. It is more likely, however, that Europe will tire of British procrastination and will cast the nation out.

Whatever the case, Britain will not be a member of the final composition of the united states of Europe that we see forming today. Our free book The United States and Britain in Prophecy will prove this point and will enthrall you with its detailed explanation of the fascinating relationship between Britain and Europe.