The French haven't been this exercised about Ireland since the Normans invaded in 1169. Nicolas Sarkozy, the president of France, will visit us next week to discuss our No vote on the treaty of Lisbon, and Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, a former French president, has been complaining loudly - and rightly - that his comment about the public being led to accept the treaty by stealth was taken out of context and used unfairly by the No campaign.

It's a shame that Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, who is busy with the launch of her third album, can't accompany her husband. She could have provided a most suitable soundtrack. “Quelqu'un m'a dit,” she crooned on the title song of her first album, “que tu m'aimais encore.” Which translates as “somebody told me that you still loved me”.

How appropriate. Having delivered a stinging rejection to the treaty, the Irish people then informed the rest of Europe that we still loved them. In a Eurobarometer poll, 82% of us said Ireland had benefitted from EU membership, 73% said it was a good thing and 65% had a positive image of the EU.

If the No vote left the EU in “gigantic incomprehension”, to quote France's foreign minister, this teasing declaration of our abiding affection can only have left them bewildered. No ardent beau courting a reluctant paramour could be as determined as Sarkozy. His credibility and authority as president of the European Council is at stake, as is the future of the treaty, now ratified by almost every other member state.

At last week's summit in Brussels, Sarkozy promised to “keep the [European] family together”, but once he arrives in Dublin he will be pressing for a second referendum. He will get it, not because of the bullying tactics France might employ, but because Brian Cowen, as the leader of a country that has just tipped into recession, knows Ireland cannot afford to be left behind.

Opponents of the treaty may dislike the idea of a two-tier Europe, but plans were well in train in the early 1990s to sideline Denmark if it did not agree to the Maastricht treaty. Recent reports indicate lawyers are already working on a similar plan to enable the other 26 EU members to carry on without us. If we adhere to our rejection of the treaty, we run a risk of being isolated and ignored in Europe.

Sarkozy and Cowen know the No vote was not a victory for the rabble-rousing, truth-twisting, misinformation-peddling jingoists of the No camp. Nor was it so much a rejection of Europe as a rejection of the way in which the treaty was presented and explained, and an indictment of the maladroit handling of the Yes campaign by the big political parties.

This is obvious from the reasons people voted No, as revealed in a Eurobarometer poll. Many of “hot issues” were red herrings. Just 2% of No voters were concerned about European legislation on gay marriage, abortion or euthanasia. A mere 1% wanted to avoid an influx of immigrants. Concerns about neutrality and our tax system were cited by 6% of No voters, despite Ireland's triple-lock on one and a veto on the other.

A further 6% were concerned about Ireland's loss of a permanent commissioner. This will probably be a moot point by the time of a second referendum, as there appears to be increasing support in Europe for the retention of 27 commissioners.

The key reasons for the No vote were that people did not know enough about the treaty (22%) and wanted to protect Irish identity (12%). More than half of those who did not vote said their inaction was due to a lack of understanding. In a second referendum, plenty of No voters would vote No again because of firm convictions about the way the EU is run. Other No voters, those swayed by Coir posters (“People died for your freedom - don't throw it away”) or who wanted to save Ireland from “godless Brussels”, are a lost cause.

Cowen needs to appeal to rational voters who voted No because they couldn't understand the treaty and rational abstainers who stayed away for the same reason. Next time he must ensure that every TD has chapter and verse on the ramifications of the treaty and is able to explain them clearly to the electorate.

The taoiseach could also consider an emotive appeal about our future as part of the grand European project. A Frenchman wrote to The Irish Times last week voicing admiration for the dynamism of Dublin, which he witnessed when he visited last year, and contrasting it to what he saw as a student in Trinity College 60 years ago. “I recalled the swarms of barefoot children and the women sitting listless on their doorsteps, with rugs on their shoulders in the way of shawls.” The transformation of Ireland made him proud of Europe, he wrote.

Domestic policy certainly helped to breed the Celtic tiger. But without the €40 billion or more sent our way from European coffers, and without the platform for diplomatic, economic and social co-operation provided by Europe, would we have come so far? No way. There are many benefits, both calculable and intangible, to being part of an organisation of 27 countries with 490m people dedicated to peace, co-operation and prosperity.

On Carla Bruni-Sarkozy's new album, she boasts of 30 previous lovers. It might be stretching an analogy too far to refer to EU counterparts as lovers, but we have 26 good friends in Europe and we can't risk turning our backs to them again. As Proinsias De Rossa said last week: “Europe can survive without Ireland, but if Ireland loses Europe, we lose everything”.

kathy.foley@sunday-times.ie

Times Recommends

• Navigating the new global archipelago
• Comment: McCain isn't Bush and voters know it
• Religion's history of self-inflicted pain