The announcement that an agreement was reached between leaders of the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds should be greeted with muted applause. The sides agreed, it seems, to punt on the major issues, setting up a commission in the new parliament that can propose revisions in the constitution. On the part of the Shiites and Kurds, this is a step beyond just saying no when the Sunnis demand changes. And there can be little doubt that concession was difficult to get. As some of the Sunni leaders have found the changes sufficient to gain their support for the document, some applause is appropriate.
One danger that the agreement adds to the many dangers already present in the development of an Iraqi polity is that this new commission will be ineffective. It is easy for the three sides to set a commission up, but to be effective, each of the sides must be willing to give up something in order to give the new government legitimacy among all three Iraqi groups. Getting such compromise has been like pulling teeth. Will this change? One hopes.
Yet, can what amounts to a change in procedure, produced four days before tomorrow's vote, offset months of propaganda by the legal opposition, the insurgents, and their allies against the constitution? Almost assuredly not, particularly as the arguments the constitution touch deep seated attitudes that the proposed changes cannot. And there is no guarantee that the Sunni leaders who made the agreement are regarded as legitimate spokesmen for the Sunni community at large.
Perhaps worse, it is not at all clear that United States, the Kurds, or the Shiites are prepared for the defeat of the constitution. The United States, at the least, might have issued statements talking about the value of even a negative vote. As I wrote before, the defeat of the constitution might be the best outcome, albeit a dangerous one. A victory regarded as illegitimate by any one community in Iraq might be worse.
