By definition, a compromise is an agreement reached on the basis of give and take where no one is an outright winner or an out-and-out loser.

The EU is known for reaching last-minute compromises which try to square the circle of the diverging interests of the 27 EU countries. This weekend, egged on by the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, EU leaders did just that.

Emerging from their "three-shirts" marathon summit, the 27 EU Presidents and Prime Ministers looked relatively relieved and content. But the jury is still out on whether theirs was a good enough agreement.

It all started two years ago when the ambitious EU Constitution stumbled over two knock-out blows at the hands of the French and Dutch electorates. As a result, the Constitution could not enter into force. But that left as many as 18 other countries incensed at being cheated of a text they had accepted. That includes Malta, whose Parliament was the only one to ratify the EU Constitution unanimously - ironically this was the first time our Parliament had ever united on the European Union.

So a "reflection period" was promptly ordered to enable all and sundry to come up with alternatives. Suggestions abounded. Some wanted to start from scratch whereas others, understandably, wanted to use the defeated Constitution as a starting point.

Enter Ms Merkel, whose unassuming leadership appears to have made the difference. Craftily dodging Polish square roots from one side and French mini-treaties from the other, she managed to put all men around her table in their place.

The result this weekend was the announcement that the ill-fated EU Constitution is now officially defunct.

Instead, in comes a new treaty, known as the Reform Treaty, consisting of a set of amendments to two existing treaties (see table). The Reform Treaty will be a technical legal document patching up a good number of outstanding "constitutional" concerns coming mostly from countries such as the UK, Poland and. of course, France and the Netherlands.

In particular, it will change the existing EU Treaty by introducing many elements that were previously found in the first part of the Constitution and it will effectively replace the existing European Community (EC) Treaty with detailed provisions on the functioning of the Union, hence its new title of Treaty On The Functioning Of The European Union.

The deal can hardly be described as an outright victory for either the pro-integration or the Eurosceptic camp. But, then again, that may well have been the intention.

Pro-integrationists, like myself, will appreciate the fact that most of the substantive elements of the EU Constitution have effectively been retained. But they will resent the fact that the Reform Treaty is, once again, a legalese document which cannot be read on its own let alone be understood by the public. For that we have to wait until the newly amended consolidated versions of the EU Treaty and the Treaty On The Functioning Of The European Union are available.

Conversely, for Eurosceptics, the dumping of all references to a "Constitution" and of all EU symbolism on flags, anthems and the like will certainly be welcome because it keeps their abhorrent "European state" at bay. But as to the rest, they are likely to brand the changes as merely cosmetic given that the main substance of the Constitutional text will remain intact, albeit under another name.

And so it goes on. For observers of things European it seems that there can never be a dull moment.

But beyond the hype, what matters is whether these changes will settle, once and for all, the angst, that has characterised the European Union for the past three odd years and enable it instead to focus on issues that truly matter to ordinary citizens.

If that can be achieved, then Ms Merkel will truly have been a woman for all seasons.

Readers who would like to ask questions to be answered in this column can send an e-mail, identifying themselves, to contact@simonbusuttil.eu or through www.simonbusuttil.eu.