to claim "victory."
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2005/08/26/iraqi_constitution/print.htmlOnly after a decade of post-revolutionary confederation did the leaders of the former American colonies convene to write a constitution for the new United States. Despite their regional, political and economic differences, the founders were united in their determination to codify independence and liberty after freeing themselves from the British monarchy (as well as in their cultural homogeneity) -- yet the writing of the Constitution was attended by vituperative debate. Suspicions and fears forestalled complete ratification for more than two years.
The Iraqi factions, divided by their bitter religious and ethnic history, feel no similarly unifying purpose, as evidenced in the draft document they have produced. Their most powerful impulse is to split apart -- and in the case of the Shiite Islamists, to impose their own version of theocratic law. Nevertheless, the Americans overseeing the development of Iraqi democracy insisted that the new constitution be written in a few months, amid the worst possible circumstances; Iraqis are scheduled to vote Oct. 15 on the proposed constitution.
This timetable accommodates the needs of the Bush White House and its loyal Republican supporters, who would like to declare a triumph for democracy in Iraq and start to reduce the number of U.S. troops there. Those needs intensify with every new poll that shows the president's credibility falling and the public mood souring. As the antiwar movement gains attention and midterm elections approach, claiming any kind of "victory" becomes imperative -- even if it falls far short of the promised triumph for liberty.