How much do Britain and Poland stand to lose if they refuse to compromise on the new European Union treaty? In Britain’s case, not much, unless you put a very high value on close relations with President Sarkozy of France and Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor. But Tony Blair has indeed put a high value on those relations, and seems unlikely, as his final act on the world stage, to bring the treaty crashing down.

Poland would lose more: possibly cash, from 2013 onwards, and whatever goodwill it hasn’t lost in the past three years as a member of the EU, except that there isn’t much left to lose. On the other hand, continuing the pattern of prickliness and unpredictability which has already cost it friends, it is more likely than Britain to bring the treaty to a halt.

This is a messy finale for Blair. The summit, which begins today, is supposed to end tomorrow night, but may well spill into the weekend, and British objections will be one reason.

Blair has made much in the past month, since Sarkozy’s election and since the climate change pact at the G8 summit, of his relations with France and Germany. But somehow, he and his ministers neglected to tell their counterparts how fervently Britain intended to stick to its “red lines”, proposals it would just not accept. Other countries were shocked this week when Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, told them Britain would not accept anything that handed new powers to Brussels, or created new rights, because that would force it to hold a referendum, which it would expect to lose.

British officials hope that Merkel, keen to repeat her G8 success of pulling off a deal, understands the difficult position of a Labour prime minister, given the opposition of the Tories and public wariness of Europe. But they’re not sure.

If Germany won’t bend, then Gordon Brown will have to decide whether those relationships are really worth all that Blair claims.

For Poland, the costs of obduracy may be more tangible. In the next budget round, which affects EU spending from 2013 onwards, it might not get such generous subsidies and aid. A budget offer could not be grotesquely unfair, and yet other countries that had wanted the treaty to go through, would be in no mood to do it favours.

To the EU’s warmest supporters, this constant bartering with undefined threats and rewards represents the essence of the union’s strength: a desire to find compromise. But to Britain and Poland, which both have good reason to gibe at the proposed treaty, it represents the worst: the threat of unknown, future punishment for the offence for defending their corners.

Times Recommends

• Britain doesn’t need a dose of shock therapy
• Why the sea eagle has no right to land here
• Let older women have a voice at the BBC