1115.org

In the latest in an ever-growing number of corners turned and democratic victories, Iraqi voters once again inked up their fingers and headed to the polls—this time to ratify or strike down their first constitution. And while the outcome isn’t official as I write this, most news outlets are reporting that the measure appears to have survived strong Sunni opposition and is headed for passage.

Assuming that this prediction holds true, prepare yourself for yet another round of self-congratulatory back slapping from the pro-war types. Iraq has a constitution, just like us! Freedom is on the march! In your face, nonbelievers!

You might remember that we heard a similar line of comment back in early February, right after Iraq had its last election. But the corner we turned only placed us on the very same path we were on before—the violence continued unabated, with nearly 600 American soldiers and untold numbers of Iraqis killed since the paint wore off the index fingers of President Bush’s fanbase. While it would be comforting to think that the constitution will start paying dividends in reducing violence and moving Iraq back from the brink of an all-out civil war, too many signs are pointing to more of the same.

For one thing, even some of the peaceniks inside Bush’s own administration are having second thoughts about the power of democracy to quell a festering insurgency:

Over time, President Bush told troops at Fort Bragg, N.C., this spring, “the terrorists will lose their sponsors, lose their recruits, and lose their hopes for turning that region into a base for attacks on America and our allies around the world.”

But inside the administration, that belief provides less solace than it once did. Senior officials say the intelligence reports flowing over their desks in recent months argue that even if democratic institutions take hold, the insurgency may strengthen. And that possibility has created a quandary for an administration that desperately wants to equate democracy-building with winning the war, but so far has not been able to match the two.

and…

“There’s always the question of whether we give these guys more credibility by directly addressing their arguments,” one of Mr. Bush’s most senior aides said recently. “But the president was concerned that we hadn’t described Iraq to the American people for what it is - a struggle of ideologies that isn’t going to end with one election, or one constitution, or even a string of elections.”

The president was concerned about that? Really? That’s a quite the turnaround from his usual cheerleading about Iraq’s progress. When Washington finally starts sending out feelers that the war in Iraq will continue past any number of supposed milestones, then there’s real cause to worry that the pooch has been well and truly screwed.

But if the road toward peace, freedom and democracy is a long one, the ratification of this new constitution should be an important step, right? In theory, yes. But in practice, the Iraqi constitution doesn’t do much to calm down the disaffected Sunni muslims who make up the bulk of the insurgency. The reports coming out of Iraq describe a large Sunni voter turnout against the constitution, so its predicted passage certainly isn’t going to make them feel any more empowered or any less angry. It’s also helpful to remember that the vote itself only came about when the majority coalition of Kurds and Shiites comprimised to make the document more palatable to Sunnis in Iraq’s legislature:

A last-minute deal last week on the constitution — allowing it to be amended in the next year, rather than eight years as originally anticipated — is also designed to encourage Sunni Arabs to become more involved and reject the insurgency. The constitution was largely drafted to reflect the interests of the Kurdish and Shiite groups that dominate the assembly, including carving out distinct ethnically based territories with greater control over oil wealth.

Of course, there’s nothing that says that this agreement to amend the constitution will hold, and considering the tensions involved between the majority and minority groups in Iraq, it’s not difficult to imagine that the groups in power will somehow derail the amendment process. And even if things go exactly as planned—which they probably won’t—it’s hard to imagine what incentive insurgents will have to ratchet down their attacks, especially in the next year.

Some people will be happy to tell you how much of a step forward this new Iraqi constitution is. I would love to be able to agree with them, since a stable and democratic Iraq is in everyone’s best interests. But beyond the cheerleading and potential finger painting (which will surely be forthcoming), the post-constitution Iraq looks like it will be pretty much the same as the pre-constitution one. As that unnamed senior Bush aide said, this isn’t going to end with one election, or one constitution, or even a string of elections.

Don’t you wish someone would have brought this up in 2002?