They have agreed on a Constitution, and yet they have NOT agreed! The Sunni representatives of the current transitional government have said they will oppose it, and urge their constituencies to do the same. So why agree in the first place if they’re simply going to disagree?

There are three main groups involved here, the Kurds, the Shi’ites and the Sunnis (who comprise 20% of the populace, and formed Saddam’s ). It is clear the Sunnis don’t want to be marginalized or victimized as a result of years of repression and abuse, and if they organized their followers they could vote the Iraqi Constitution down in a referendum set for no later than October 15th.

I think that there has been so much authoritarianism over the past decades there, that each “bloc” just wants what THEY want, determined to get it despite the cost - never mind the others (the Kurds, Sunnis, Shi’ites, take your pick). By stalling and constantly disagreeing, threatening to derail the process and never compromising, they show the world that they are NOT ready for democracy and perhaps, they don’t WANT democracy (at least, democracy as “we” see it). Some people in particular, the rebel cleric Muqtada al-Sadr for example, seem perfectly willing to use violence, inciting followers to “resist”, if they don’t get their way. Given that Ayatollah Sistani brokered a peace that allowed al-Sadr to jump into politics doesn’t bode well either - if he doesn’t get his way in the future will he simply resort to thuggery again? Anyone reminded of Saddam here?

Like the western nations in the 18th century, the Islamic nations must move into democracy for themselves. Having the West force it upon them is a disaster waiting to happen, driving unemployed and discontented youths into the arms of increasingly extremist sweet-talking Imams and terrorist recruiters who only use this as proof of Western interference, attempts at regional domination or outright greed for oil (the rhetoric Iran uses). Being a democracy isn’t going to make them “like” us, India and the US are both democracies yet have had many disagreements.

As Callimachus of Donklephant pointed out today in his article, Islamic Democracy, there has been a rise of Islamic groups vying for democratic stamps of authority. Not because democracy is tied to Islam but because despite the authoritarian and repressive regimes, Islamic groups have been providing social welfare for many years in lieu of what the State does not provide (giving them an air of legitimacy and authority). As a result we in the West tend to think that all “democracy” in Arab/Muslim countries is forever tied to Islam. For example - we hear that Hezbollah provides money for families, social welfare and so on, yet invariably the image of Hezbollah is of militants marching in black with headscarfs and AK47s. Which image do you think will last longer?

But he also says that Arabs and Muslims will not stand for regimes voted in on democratic foundations only to outlaw democracy later, any longer, but I respectfully disagree with him. is a “democracy” in name, but in practice any candidates must be vetted and approved by the State. Yet Iranians seem happy with this, in fact I would go so far as to say empowered by this (at least it outwardly appears this way). Why?

From a layman’s viewpoint it seems to me that the more successful (read: more televised) terrorist groups thrive on being ever more violent or anti-Western and only serve to swell the Iraqi insurgency’s numbers. Yet as has been touted, many citizens of Iraq do NOT agree with this philosophy. Democracy in Iraq is going to take time to prove out, but we should not cut and run simply because Islamic-oriented groups dominate democracy in Iraq, or because more discontented youth from all over the Islamic world flock to the Iraqi insurgency.

The draft Constitution, if agreed upon and ratified by a referendum will serve as proof that, despite Western views that Muslims have difficulty with democracy, Islam is not incompatible with democracy. For Americans, or Westerners as a whole, who say that Allied forces are in Iraq for the wrong reason, perhaps a little patience is in order - wait to see if the Sunnis will honor their pledge to derail the Constitution and have a little faith in the everyday Iraqi. We should take comfort in the fact that after WW2 it took 3 years for the Germans to form a government. On the other hand we should not be blind to the situation, and realize that Iraq is NOT Germany, and religious issues here of all places have a higher priority - it is not going to be an easy transition.

Update (Tue Aug 30th): This link has a translation from an article in Iraqi newspaper Alhayat, showing the majority of Iraqi’s would vote to approve the Constitution.