Just had a look at this Reuters report this afternoon, which also seems to believe it is Qualified Majority voting; I agree with you, SSK, that it is unfortunately more likely to require unanimity.
http://investing.reuters.co.uk/news/...1-ArticlePage2
The Commission wants unanimous support, but if Britain opposes it, for example, it could still go through as such decisions require support only from a "qualified majority" of member states under the EU's complex weighted voting system.
(Under this,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_Majority_Voting, all countries have a set amount of votes based roughly on their populations; the four biggest countries, including the UK, have 29 votes. Three key issues have to be satisfied. Firstly, out of a total number of 345 votes, 255 (or 74%) must approve; 91 votes are needed to block it, so the UK would need several other countries to do so). Additionally, however, the countries in favour must include a majority of the member states AND over 62% of the total population of the EU, so if QMV does apply, we're laughing.)
If the latter is the case, then we are much closer to a deal; Reuters also suggests that US Congressional approval is required, which runs counter to comments posted elsehwere, which suggested that since there was no change to US law, no Congress vote would be required. However, even if a vote is needed, I would be less concerned about this than about the EU vote.
If there is unanimity, then the Brits could mess it up; if there is not such a requirement, it doesn't matter if they vote it down. I would be surprised if any other countries came out against it. The economic benefits to virtually every EU economy (including, let it be said, the UK's) are huge.
Even if unanimity is required, I would still not want to put money on Britain rejecting it, although I still think it is by far the most likely outcome. The UK needs to understand that if it rejects Open Skies, it could suffer in other areas of co-operation and since it would be the only country to do so, is it necessarily in its best interests to stand alone in obstructing a deal which every other country wants? Also, if it does stand alone, any remote chance it has of getting what concessions it seeks from the US will be out the window and indeed, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the US could revoke Bermuda II.