NEW: according to a diplomatic note of today's meeting of EU27 ambassadors, the main difference between France and others is not on the length of an extension to grant the UK. There is no counter French proposal. The difference is on timing (when to make the decision) and purpose
France didn't want a decision to extend to be made today, and wants to first know what the extension is for and what the UK decides to do (ratify deal, election etc.)
Most officials are confident that a decision can be made Monday/Tuesday via written procedure, avoiding an emergency EUCO (indeed, EU27 ambassadors agreed that should be the aim)
However, were a decision not be possible early next week then a EUCO would need to be called otherwise you end up with no deal, which everyone wants to avoid.
Four interesting points explaining the French position per a diplomat from another major EU27 government:
1) France is of the idea that extending to simply avoid no deal weakens the EU position in future trade talks
2) All extension options will be seen as political in the UK
1) France is of the idea that extending to simply avoid no deal weakens the EU position in future trade talks
2) All extension options will be seen as political in the UK
3) On purpose of extension: important to differentiate between an extension to ratify or an extension to allow for elections, or an extension that covers both scenarios, hence the request to wait
4) Keen for it to be clear that EU can't extend and delay forever
4) Keen for it to be clear that EU can't extend and delay forever
