A constitution.(IRAQ)(constitution-writing and ratification)(Column)

TWICE this year the Bush administration has forged ahead with the Iraqi political process over the worries of critics. The first time was the January 30 election, when liberals said a vote could only be a prelude to a civil war. Now the administration has gone ahead with the constitution-writing and -ratification process, even though liberals and even some conservatives warned that it could only be a prelude to a civil war. But in an ethnically divided country, suffering a nasty spate of violence partly motivated by sectarianism, almost anything could be the prelude to a civil war. The administration has been correct to keep the process moving forward, hoping that it creates a momentum that draws in disaffected Sunnis and isolates the insurgency.

This may be a long process, but the apparent passage of the new constitution was a step in the right direction. Were there allegations of vote fraud? Yes, but we get those in Ohio. Was it procedurally imperfect? Yes, as a side deal was cut days before the vote. But by Iraqi or Middle Eastern or Third World standards, the process was pristine. The side deal was potentially significant, winning the endorsement of the largest Sunni political party for the constitution, in exchange for a mechanism to revise the constitution after its passage. Sunnis still voted overwhelmingly no, but they voted and are set to vote again in the December elections for a permanent government. This could be the beginning of a rough consensus on, if nothing else, the proposition that Iraq's disagreements are best settled at the ballot box and in backrooms rather than with roadside bombs and the sabotage of oil pipelines.

Of course, the insurgency still burns strong, and there is a hard core in Iraq that obviously has no ...